logo
Major Update For 9 Million Borrowers About Huge Student Loan Forgiveness Threat From PSLF And IDR Delays

Major Update For 9 Million Borrowers About Huge Student Loan Forgiveness Threat From PSLF And IDR Delays

Forbes21-05-2025

A growing backlog in PSLF and IDR processing is delaying student loan forgiveness and putting public ... More servants' eligibility at risk
As millions of public service workers anxiously await promised student loan forgiveness, a new threat has emerged: due to massive processing delays in federal forgiveness programs, many borrowers may lose eligibility even after making 120 qualifying payments. When forgiveness is granted, the Public Service Loan Forgiveness program requires borrowers to be still employed by a qualifying public service employer. Now, lengthy delays in processing Income-Driven Repayment and PSLF buyback applications mean that borrowers who have already completed a decade of service or are close to it could be denied forgiveness, not because their payments won't count, but because they might retire, change jobs, or get laid off before the government finalizes their discharge. This is another headwind for the over 9 million public service workers with federal student loans eligible to pursue PSLF, the 1.3 million of those who are actively pursuing it, and the 50,000 borrowers currently waiting for their PSLF buyback applications to be processed.
New data reveal a historic backlog in student loan forgiveness processing. In a recent court-mandated status report, the Education Department admitted that as of April 30, it had approved only around 79,000 IDR plan applications, while nearly 2 million applications remain unprocessed. This 96% backlog has effectively paralyzed the IDR enrollment system and, by extension, PSLF forgiveness for many borrowers. Even if all 120 qualifying payments have been made, forgiveness cannot occur until these applications are reviewed and approved. The logjam has created a severe student loan forgiveness delay for anyone relying on IDR or PSLF programs to cancel their debt after years of payments.
PSLF borrowers are acutely impacted. Under newly expanded rules, PSLF applicants can retroactively buy back specific past periods, for example, months spent in deferment or forbearance, to count toward their 120-payment requirement. But progress has been glacial: 49,318 PSLF buyback requests were pending as of the end of April, and fewer than 1,500 were processed that month. Less than 3% of pending PSLF buyback applications have been resolved, highlighting the severity of the backlog. According to a court filing, these pending cases likely represent about 49,000 public service workers who have met all PSLF requirements and should have their loans canceled under federal law yet remain in limbo. In other words, tens of thousands of teachers, nurses, government employees, and non-profit workers are technically eligible for immediate debt forgiveness, but bureaucratic delays are postponing their relief indefinitely.
One major culprit behind the delays is the legal battle over President Biden's new IDR plan, the SAVE plan. Last year, a group of state attorneys general sued to block SAVE, and in February 2025, the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals issued an injunction halting the plan's implementation. In response, the Education Department abruptly shut down all online IDR applications and halted processing pending requests for weeks, plunging millions of borrowers into uncertainty. During this freeze, no borrower could change into a new IDR plan, even if they needed one to keep their payments affordable or to qualify for PSLF. Access was partially restored by late March after a lawsuit, but officials did not resume processing IDR enrollments until mid-May. The result is a mountain of stalled IDR plan changes that must be cleared.
Compounding the issue, roughly 8 million borrowers enrolled in the SAVE plan were placed into a special litigation forbearance status due to the injunction. These borrowers have had their repayment plans paused against their will. Months spent in this limbo typically do not count toward PSLF or IDR forgiveness since no payments are being made. Borrowers had received mixed messages about whether this forbearance time would be credited. The Education Department has now confirmed that time spent in the SAVE plan litigation forbearance can be reclaimed through the PSLF buyback program.
However, that is only a partial consolation: to buy back those months, borrowers must make extra lump-sum payments for each month of forbearance and wait for those payments to be processed and credited. Given the significant backlog, it could be many months or even years before affected borrowers see their PSLF counts updated.
The PSLF employment requirement is now the core threat to these borrowers' long-awaited forgiveness. Under program rules, a borrower must work full-time for a qualifying public service employer while making the 120 payments, when they apply for forgiveness, and when the forgiveness is officially granted. There is no partial forgiveness in PSLF; it's all or nothing.
Usually, this requirement isn't a problem: borrowers apply once they hit 120 payments and receive forgiveness within a few months, all while still on the job. However, the wait could be much longer, with processing grinding to a halt. The risk is that if a borrower retires, switches to a private-sector job, or is laid off before the government finalizes their forgiveness, they could be disqualified from PSLF at the finish line.
This delay could impact retirement plans for many public-sector and non-profit workers. It could also stifle mobility as workers facing burnout or better opportunities may feel trapped in their jobs until their debt is cleared.
These situations are within the worker's control; however, there's also the unpredictable risk of job loss. Recent budget strains and organizational changes have led to layoffs at federal and state agencies. The Education Department underwent mass layoffs and staffing cuts in early 2025, contributing to the processing slowdown. A public service borrower can do everything right. However, it will still be derailed by an involuntary layoff, a real possibility in today's economic climate, and the stated intention of President Trump's administration to cull the federal workforce. "At least 121,000 federal workers have been laid off or targeted for layoffs in the three months since President Donald Trump's second term began," according to a CNN analysis. "It's a vast number that doesn't count those placed on administrative leave or who took voluntary buyouts," the report noted. Unfortunately, PSLF does not provide a safety net for such cases. You're ineligible if a qualified employer does not employ you at the moment of forgiveness.
For now, PSLF seekers should remain in qualifying employment until their student loan forgiveness discharge is completely processed, no matter how long it takes. That may mean postponing retirement or declining a private-sector opportunity for longer. If you have reached 120 payments and submitted your PSLF application, continue working for your public service employer until you see a $0 loan balance. Some services may allow a brief payment forbearance during the wait (so you don't have to make additional payments after 120), but be cautious: any break in qualifying employment before forgiveness is finalized could nullify your approval. If you keep paying past 120 out of caution, the government has said it will refund any overpayments once your loan is forgiven. In short, don't leave your public service job until the finish line is officially crossed.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Presidential health cover-ups are as American as apple pie
Presidential health cover-ups are as American as apple pie

The Hill

time24 minutes ago

  • The Hill

Presidential health cover-ups are as American as apple pie

That rumbling noise coming out of Washington is the sound of other shoes dropping in the saga of the Amazing Shrinking Biden Presidency with the release of 'Original Sin' — the latest in what will likely be a series of behind-the-scenes tell-alls about the former president's cognitive and physical decline in office and the high-level efforts to cover it up. Adding fuel to the fire are interviews with former aides, party operatives and financial donors who now find it politically safe to say that in meeting Biden they were shocked — shocked! — by his sad condition. Even his ever-cautious Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg, who regularly dismissed questions about Biden's mental capacity, now concedes that 'maybe' it wasn't a good idea for him to run for reelection. But the sad fact is that presidential medical cover-ups are almost as old as the republic. Many of American leaders have suffered potentially crippling health problems that could have incapacitated them in a crisis. To one extent or another, they were kept from the public. Abraham Lincoln fell into black moods that today would be diagnosed as depression. Ulysses S. Grant struggled with alcoholism. Under the pretext of a fishing trip, Grover Cleveland was secretly operated on for cancer of the jaw while cruising on a friend's yacht. Warren G. Harding entered the White House with the serious heart condition that killed him mid-term. Dwight Eisenhower also had cardiac problems and suffered several heart attacks in office and a stroke, which his aides downplayed despite his slurred speech. Polio confined Franklin D. Roosevelt to a wheelchair that journalists were barred from photographing with him in it. Despite serious deterioration of his health, Roosevelt ran for and was elected to an unprecedented fourth term, then suffered an apparent stroke in 1945 before attending the crucial Yalta Conference to set plans for the end of World War II. Another stroke killed him later that year. John F. Kennedy suffered debilitating Addison's Disease and also received strong painkillers for an old back injury. Ronald Reagan's advancing Alzheimer's is widely seen as contributing to the Iran-Contra scandal. Most analogous to the Biden cover-up is the stroke that paralyzed and incapacitated Woodrow Wilson. He was treated more or less in secret and seen only by an aide, his doctors and wife. To continue the charade, Edith Wilson acted as the de facto president for more than a year, issuing policy statements and executive decisions in his name and forging his signature on bills passed by Congress. Lawmakers, his Cabinet and the public were kept in the dark. Nikki Haley addressed a core concern in this as a Republican primary hopeful early last year, calling for mandatory 'mental competency tests' for politicians older than 75. 'This is especially important for senior officials making decisions that can impact public safety and well-being,' she said. The plan was dismissed as an attack on a doddering Biden, but it's a good idea. If conducted in an independent manner, such tests would go far to address public concerns that inevitably will follow revelations of Biden's closely guarded deteriorating condition. But it shouldn't stop there. Given the record of the potentially crippling health problems American presidents have suffered, full medical reports should be required as well. Many but not all candidates now release the findings of physical checkups conducted by their own physicians, and the reports are invariably sunny. Biden's 2024 checkup noted only some acid reflux and a problem with sleep apnea, making no mention of the prostate cancer he recently disclosed. One way to do this would be to condition the receipt of federal campaign matching funds on presidential and vice presidential candidates submitting their comprehensive medical information to an independent, apolitical group that would share conditions that raise alarm with the public. Candidates for the presidency should expect to surrender some personal privacy. Given the high stakes, their potentially debilitating health problems should be disclosed sooner, rather than when it's too late. Winston Wood was Washington news editor of the Wall Street Journal and explained U.S. foreign policy to audiences overseas on Voice of America.

The ‘major questions' Supreme Court hurdle that could stand in the way of Trump's tariffs
The ‘major questions' Supreme Court hurdle that could stand in the way of Trump's tariffs

Yahoo

time2 hours ago

  • Yahoo

The ‘major questions' Supreme Court hurdle that could stand in the way of Trump's tariffs

Are President Trump's global tariffs of "vast economic and political significance?" The answer could make or break the administration's chance to keep the president's 'Liberation Day' tariffs in force as legal challengers try to undo them — especially if the dispute eventually reaches the Supreme Court. The nation's highest court has made it clear in recent years that it is willing to apply a test known as the "major questions doctrine" to reign in the executive branch from usurping power vested in Congress. That doctrine, solidified with the help of Trump's hand-picked conservative judges, limits the authority of federal agencies to take action on issues of "vast economic and political significance" except where Congress has explicitly authorized the action. It got a formal nod from the high court in two cases that were decided against President Biden during his time in office. And now it could become a hurdle for the current president if the current lower court fight over Trump's duties reaches the Supreme Court, as expected. Last week the US Court of International Trade in New York City struck down many of Trump's tariffs, but the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in Washington, D.C., on Thursday allowed Trump's duties to temporarily stay in place while legal arguments continue. Judges considering the "major questions doctrine" will have to decide if any president can unilaterally levy import duties to address conditions that the president characterizes as a US emergency — as Trump has cited as justification for many of his duties. Read more: What Trump's tariffs mean for the economy and your wallet The administration is arguing that the major questions doctrine is irrelevant to matters of national security concern where a president has extreme flexibility to exert power. It has also argued that it limits actions taken by federal agencies and not actions of the president. Trump specifically cited the International Emergency Economic Powers Act of 1977 (IEEPA) as authority for many of his tariffs. That law states that during a national emergency, the president can regulate economic transactions, including imports, in order to respond to an 'unusual and extraordinary threat' from abroad. Congress passed the IEEPA to restrict presidents from overstepping a 1917 World War I-era law known as the Trading with the Enemy Act (TWEA). The act, which regulates US transactions with enemy powers, allowed the president to exercise broad economic power during wartime and during national emergencies. The president cited IEEPA in an executive order issued Feb. 1 when he imposed tariffs on China, Mexico, and Canada by declaring that an influx of illegal immigration and drugs into the country posed a national emergency. Trump also cited the law on April 2, so-called "Liberation Day," when he announced "reciprocal" tariffs on many countries around the world. Read more: The latest news and updates on Trump's tariffs University of California Davis constitutional law professor Aaron Tang called the tariffs a textbook case for application of the major questions doctrine. 'IEEPA has never [been] used before to impose tariffs,' Tang said. 'So if the doctrine means anything, and if it applies neutrally, no matter who the president is, it will apply here.' It's possible, though unlikely, that a court could avoid the major questions doctrine in deciding the challenger's claims, Tang said. But to rule in Trump's favor, he said, judges would have to grapple with it to explain why it doesn't apply, or is satisfied, given that the US economy is at stake. 'The tariffs are way more economically significant than any of the Biden administration policies,' he said. In 2022, the Supreme Court used the major questions doctrine to find that Biden's EPA lacked clear congressional authorization to regulate certain greenhouse gas emissions, in a 6-3 ruling dominated by the court's conservative majority. A year later, the court held that Biden's Secretary of Education lacked clear authority under the HEROES Act to forgive $400 billion in student loan debt. Like the EPA case, the court said Biden's debt relief regulation was so major that it would need explicit authorization from Congress. 'President Biden and his administration took these really bold actions,' Tang said. 'The Trump administration, just like the Biden administration, has said, 'I'm just going to do it all by myself.'' Trump's challengers, he added, have a 'very strong argument' that the duties are not authorized by Congress. Alexis Keenan is a legal reporter for Yahoo Finance. Follow Alexis on X @alexiskweed. Click here for political news related to business and money policies that will shape tomorrow's stock prices

Schwarzenegger tells environmentalists dismayed by Trump to 'stop whining' and get to work
Schwarzenegger tells environmentalists dismayed by Trump to 'stop whining' and get to work

Yahoo

time2 hours ago

  • Yahoo

Schwarzenegger tells environmentalists dismayed by Trump to 'stop whining' and get to work

VIENNA (AP) — Arnold Schwarzenegger has a message for environmentalists who despair at the the approach of President Donald Trump's administration: 'Stop whining and get to work.' The new U.S. administration has taken an ax to Biden-era environmental ambitions, rolled back landmark regulations, withdrawn climate project funding and instead bolstered support for oil and gas production in the name of an 'American energy dominance' agenda. Schwarzenegger, the former Republican governor of California, has devoted time to environmental causes since leaving political office in 2011. He said Tuesday he keeps hearing from environmentalists and policy experts lately who ask, 'What is the point of fighting for a clean environment when the government of the United States says climate change is a hoax and coal and oil is the future?' Schwarzenegger told the Austrian World Summit in Vienna, an event he helps organize, that he responds: 'Stop whining and get to work.' He pointed to examples of local and regional governments and companies taking action, including his own administration in California, and argued 70% of pollution is reduced at the local or state level. 'Be the mayor that makes buses electric; be the CEO who ends fossil fuel dependence; be the school that puts (up) solar roofs," he said. 'You can't just sit around and make excuses because one guy in a very nice White House on Pennsylvania Avenue doesn't agree with you,' he said, adding that attacking the president is 'not my style' and he doesn't criticize any president when outside the U.S. 'I know that the people are sick and tired of the whining and the complaining and the doom and gloom,' Schwarzenegger said. 'The only way we win the people's hearts and minds is by showing them action that makes their lives better.'

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store