Older people in crosshairs as government restarts Social Security garnishment on student loans
'I worked ridiculous hours. I worked weekends and nights. But I could never pay it off,' says Farro, a retired child welfare worker in Santa Ynez, California.
Advertisement
Like millions of debtors with federal student loans, Farro had her payments and interest paused by the government five years ago when the pandemic thrust many into financial hardship. That grace period ended in 2023 and, earlier this month, the Department of Education said it would restart 'involuntary collections' by garnishing paychecks, tax refunds and Social Security retirement and disability benefits. Farro previously had her Social Security garnished and expects it to restart.
Get Starting Point
A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday.
Enter Email
Sign Up
Farro's loans date back 40 years. She was a single mother when she got a bachelor's degree in developmental psychology and when she discovered she couldn't earn enough to pay off her loans, she went back to school and got a master's degree. Her salary never caught up. Things only got worse.
Advertisement
Around 2008, when she consolidated her loans, she was paying $1,000 a month, but years of missed payments and piled-on interest meant she was barely putting a dent in a bill that had ballooned to $250,000. When she sought help to resolve her debt, she says the loan company had just one suggestion.
'They said, 'Move to a cheaper state,'' says Farro, who rents a 400-square-foot casita from a friend. 'I realized I was living in a different reality than they were.'
Student loan debt among older people has grown at a staggering rate, in part due to rising tuitions that have forced more people to borrow greater sums. People 60 and older hold an estimated $125 billion in student loans, according to the National Consumer Law Center, a six-fold increase from 20 years ago.
That has led Social Security beneficiaries who have had their payments garnished to balloon by 3,000% — from approximately 6,200 beneficiaries to 192,300 — between 2001 and 2019, according to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.
This year, an estimated 452,000 people aged 62 and older had student loans in default and are likely to experience the Department of Education's renewed forced collections, according to the January report from CFPB.
Debbie McIntyre, a 62-year-old adult education teacher in Georgetown, Kentucky, is among them. She dreams of retiring and writing more historical fiction, and of boarding a plane for the first time since high school. But her husband has been out of work on disability for two decades and they've used credit cards to get by on his meager benefits and her paycheck. Their rent will be hiked $300 when their lease renews. McIntyre doesn't know what to do if her paycheck is garnished.
Advertisement
She floats the idea of bankruptcy, but that won't automatically clear her loans, which are held to a different standard than other debt. She figures if she picks up extra jobs babysitting or tutoring, she could put $50 toward her loans here and there. But she sees no real solution.
'I don't know what more I can do,' says McIntyre, who is too afraid to check what her loan balance is. 'I'll never get out of this hole.'
Braxton Brewington of the Debt Collective debtors union says it's striking how many older people dial into the organization's calls and attend its protests. Many of them, he says, should have had their debts cancelled but fell victim to a system 'riddled with flaws and illegalities and flukes.' Many whose educations have left them in late-life debt have, in fact, paid back the principal on their loans, sometimes several times over, but still owe more due to interest and fees.
For those who are subject to garnishment, Brewington says, the results can be devastating.
'We hear from people who skip meals. We know people who dilute their medication or cut their pills in half. People take drastic measures like pulling all their savings out or dissolving their 401ks,' he says. 'We know folks that have been driven into homelessness.'
Collections on defaulted loans may have restarted no matter who was president, though the Biden administration had sought to limit the amount of income that could be garnished. Federal law protects just $750 of Social Security benefits from garnishment, an amount that would put a debtor far below the poverty line.
Advertisement
'We're basically providing people with federal benefits with one hand and taking them away with another,' says Sarah Sattelmeyer of the New America think tank.
Linda Hilton, a 76-year-old retired office worker from Apache Junction, Arizona, went through garnishment before COVID and says she will survive it again. But flights to see her children, occasional meals at a restaurant and other pleasures of retired life may disappear.
'It's going to mean restrictions,' says Hilton. 'There won't be any travel. There won't be any frills.'
Some debtors have already received notice about collections. Many more are living in fear. President Donald Trump has signed an executive order calling for the Department of Education's dismantling and, for those seeking answers about their loans, mass layoffs have complicated getting calls answered.
While Education Secretary Linda McMahon says restarting collections is a necessary step for debtors 'both for the sake of their own financial health and our nation's economic outlook,' even some of Trump's most fervent supporters are questioning a move that will make their lives harder.
Randall Countryman, 55, of Bonita, California, says a Biden administration proposal to forgive some student debt didn't strike him as fair, but he's not sure Trump's approach is either. He supported Trump but wishes the government made case-by-case decisions on debtors. Countryman thinks Americans don't realize how many older people are affected by policies on student loans, often thought to be the turf of the young, and how difficult it can be for them to repay.
'What's a young person's problem today,' he says, 'is an old person's problem tomorrow.'
Countryman started working on a degree while in prison, then continued it at the University of Phoenix when he was released. He started growing nervous as he racked up loan debt and never finished his degree. He's worked a host of different jobs, but finding work has often been complicated by his criminal record.
Advertisement
He lives off his wife's Social Security check and the kindness of his mother-in-law. He doesn't know how they'd get by if the government demands repayment.
'I kind of wish I never went to school in the first place,' he says.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
4 Social Security Changes Washington Could Make to Prevent Benefit Cuts
Consistent deficits have set the Social Security Trust Fund on pace to be depleted in 2034, in which case an across-the-board 23% benefit cut would be necessary in 2035. Increasing Social Security's revenue by applying the payroll tax to more income and raising the payroll tax rate would eliminate a significant portion of the funding deficit. Cutting Social Security's costs by raising full retirement age and reducing benefits for high earners would eliminate the remaining portion of the funding deficit. The $23,760 Social Security bonus most retirees completely overlook › Social Security is a important source of income for millions of Americans, but the program has a serious financial problem. Costs have increased faster than revenues in recent years because the aging population is growing more quickly than the working population. As a result, the trust fund, the financial account that pays benefits, is on track to be depleted within a decade. Specifically, the Congressional Budget Office estimates the trust fund will be exhausted in 2034. That would eliminate one source of revenue (i.e., interest earned on trust fund reserves), and the remaining tax revenues would only cover 77% of scheduled payments. That means a 23% benefit cut would be necessary in 2035. Fortunately, the lawmakers in Washington have several years to find a better solution. Here are four Social Security changes that could prevent deep, across-the-board benefit cuts. Social Security is primarily funded by a dedicated payroll tax, which takes 6.2% of wages from workers and employers. But some income is exempt from the payroll tax. Specifically, the maximum taxable earnings limit is $176,100 in 2025. Income above that threshold is not taxed by Social Security. Importantly, the Social Security program is projected to run a $23 trillion deficit over the next 75 years as it's strained by shifting demographics. But the deficit could be slashed by applying the payroll tax to more income. For instance, including income above $400,000 would eliminate 60% of the 75-year funding shortfall, says the University of Maryland. Under current law, the Social Security payroll tax rate is 6.2% for workers and their employers. But gradually raising that figure would eliminate a portion of the long-term deficit. For example, increasing thetax rate by 0.05% annually over a six-year period would eliminate 15% of the 75-year funding shortfall, according to the University of Maryland. Now that I've discussed two possible changes, let's step back and look at the big picture. There are basically three ways to resolve Social Security's financial problems: (1) increase revenue, (2) reduce costs, or (3) some combination of the first two options. The changes discussed so far would increase revenue, but the next two changes would cut benefits. However, they are more subtle cuts than the 23% across-the-board reduction that would follow trust fund depletion. Workers are eligible for retirement benefits at age 62, but they are not entitled to their full benefit -- also called the primary insurance amount (PIA) -- until full retirement age (FRA). Anyone that claims before full retirement age receives a smaller payout, meaning they get less than 100% of their PIA. FRA is currently defined as 67 years old for workers born in 1960 or later, but raising the figure would reduce the long-term deficit. For instance, increasing FRA to 68 years old by 2033, meaning it would apply to workers born in 1965 or later, would eliminate 15% of the 75-year funding shortfall, according to the University of Maryland. Social Security benefits are determined as percentages of two bend points. Specifically, income from the 35 highest-paid years of work is adjusted for inflation and converted to a monthly figure called the average indexed monthly earnings (AIME) amount. The AIME is then run through a formula that uses two bend points to determine the PIA for each worker. Modifying the second (highest) bend point would eliminate a portion of the long-term deficit by reducing benefits for high earners. For instance, the University of Maryland estimates that reducing benefits for individuals with income in the top 20% could reduce the 75-year funding deficit by 11%. Here's the big picture: The four changes I've discussed would eliminate 101% of Social Security's $23 trillion funding shortfall, which would prevent across-the-board benefit cuts in 2035. If you're like most Americans, you're a few years (or more) behind on your retirement savings. But a handful of little-known could help ensure a boost in your retirement income. One easy trick could pay you as much as $23,760 more... each year! Once you learn how to maximize your Social Security benefits, we think you could retire confidently with the peace of mind we're all after. Join Stock Advisor to learn more about these Motley Fool has a disclosure policy. 4 Social Security Changes Washington Could Make to Prevent Benefit Cuts was originally published by The Motley Fool Sign in to access your portfolio
Yahoo
4 hours ago
- Yahoo
Zohran Mamdani still won't say Israel has a right to exist as Jewish state — and faces quick backlash from Andrew Cuomo during debate
Leading mayoral candidate Andrew Cuomo erupted when lefty state Assemblyman Zohran Mamdani again refused to say Israel has a right to exist as a 'Jewish state' near the end of a chaotic debate Wednesday night. The heated moment came as moderators turned to the issue of Israel and its war in Gaza, which has become a central issue in the June 24 Democratic primary. 'I believe Israel has a right to exist,' Mamdani said, to which the moderator replied, 'As a Jewish state?' 'As a state with equal rights,' he replied. Cuomo, as well as longshot candidate Whitney Tilson, quickly seized on the remark, with the ex-gov emphasizing that Mamdani had declined to say the nation should exist as a Jewish state. 'And his answer was no, he won't visit Israel,' Cuomo said in reference to an earlier response from Mamdani — which came after candidates were asked where they would go on their first international visit if elected. 'Unlike you, I answer questions very directly,' Mamdani snapped at Cuomo, 'and I want to be very clear I believe every state should be a state of equal rights.' Cuomo has gone to great lengths to gain the backing of Jewish voters while Mamdani — who trails the ex-gov by single digits, according to recent polling — has been nagged by ongoing questions about his support in the Jewish community. This isn't the first time the DSA-brand candidate refused to say Israel should exist as a Jewish state. He offered a similar line when talking with Jewish Insider's editor in chief Josh Kraushaar at an event sponsored by the UJA-Federation. 'I believe Israel has a right to exist, and it has a right to exist also with equal rights for all,' he said while also doubling down on his support for Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement against Israel. The slew of candidates also addressed antisemitism and the Trump administration war with Columbia University that escalated again Wednesday when his Department of Education called on the Ivy League to lose its accreditation over its 'indifference' to the harassment of Jewish students. '[Department of Education Sec. Linda] McMahon is not an educator, and Trump has no interest in funding our education,' Jessica Ramos said. 'He is trying to make our education less accessible to students.' Mamdani called it a 'gross overreach' while former state Assembly member Michael Blake called it 'unacceptable.' Still, candidates mostly acknowledged that antisemitism has spiked in the Big Apple since Hamas' Oct. 7, 2023 attack on Israel and the subsequent conflict in Gaza. 'This is a frightening time for Jews,' City Comptroller Brad Lander, who is Jewish, said.
Yahoo
9 hours ago
- Yahoo
Education Secretary Won't Say If She Knows What The Tulsa Race Massacre Is
Education Secretary Linda McMahon deflected when asked if she knew what the Tulsa Race Massacre was during a Wednesday congressional hearing, telling lawmakers that she intends to 'look into it more.' McMahon's response comes as Rep. Summer Lee (D-Pa.) pressed her about history lessons that would be considered 'illegal DEI' by the Trump administration. (DEI stands for diversity, equity and inclusion and has been used by Republicans as shorthand for initiatives addressing race and gender, among other topics.) The comments are also the latest to suggest that McMahon — a former pro wrestling executive who's had little education policy experience — could use a lesson or two herself. 'Would it be 'illegal DEI' for a lesson plan on the Tulsa Race Massacre?' Lee asked McMahon during the Wednesday panel. 'I'd have to get back to you on that,' McMahon said. 'Do you know what the Tulsa Race Massacre is?' Lee asked. 'I'd like to look into it more and get back to you on it,' McMahon replied. McMahon was similarly evasive when asked if lessons involving civil rights trailblazer Ruby Bridges would be deemed 'illegal DEI.' 'How about the book 'Through My Eyes,' by Ruby Bridges, for instance?' Lee asked. 'I haven't read that,' McMahon responded. 'Have you learned about Ruby Bridges?' Lee said. 'If you have specific examples, you'd like to –' McMahon countered. 'That was a specific example... I named a specific book,' Lee emphasized. McMahon's exchange with Lee stood out both for her refusal to acknowledge whether she knew about major historical events as well as her reluctance to answer if the White House would target lessons about them. A January executive order from the Trump administration called for agencies to find ways to claw back resources from schools that advance 'gender ideology or discriminatory equity ideology' in their curriculum. And in April, the White House required K-12 schools to certify that they were not engaging in 'illegal DEI practices' in order to receive federal funding, an act that's been blocked by a federal judge. The Department of Education did not immediately respond to a HuffPost request for comment. Both of Lee's questions referred to significant events in U.S. history: The Tulsa Race Massacre took place in 1921 and was 'one of America's deadliest acts of domestic terrorism,' Taryn Finley previously wrote for HuffPost. During the attack, an armed white mob decimated a neighborhood in Tulsa known as Black Wall Street, killing as many as 300 people. And in 1960, Bridges was the first Black child to desegregate an all-white elementary school in New Orleans. Iconic images from that time captured Bridges, at age 6, flanked by U.S. Marshals and white crowds jeering as she entered the building. Lee emphasized that such lessons are critical for students as the Trump administration has sought to hold federal funding captive if schools advance programs that it disagrees with. 'Their lack of knowledge, denial of history, and open racism doesn't mean students across America should be deprived of learning opportunities or access to a quality education,' she told HuffPost in a statement. 'Clearly they're still needed.'
