NASFAA Raises Concerns Over ED’s Proposed PSLF Regulations
By Maria Carrasco, NASFAA Staff Reporter
NASFAA, along with dozens of other higher education organizations, outlined its concerns with the Department of Education’s (ED) proposed regulations to the Public Service Loan Forgiveness (PSLF) program, warning that some of the currently drafted provisions could deeply harm borrowers.
In the letter, led by the American Council on Education, the organizations state they are in strong opposition to ED’s proposed regulations, which would grant ED’s Secretary broad authority to determine when an employer has engaged in activities with a “substantial illegal purpose,” among other provisions. This provision could lead to an organization losing its status as a PSLF qualifying employer, and could ultimately harm millions of borrowers, thousands of whom are near to receiving their loans forgiven.
The organizations argued that Congress purposely created the PSLF program to “ensure a brighter future with less financial burden for public servants,” and made it clear what types of jobs would qualify for PSLF.
“The PSLF program was created to benefit individuals who chose public service jobs and these are the very people that will be severely harmed if these proposed regulations were to go into effect,” the letter reads. “These borrowers entered their professions making a conscious choice to forego higher salaries in order to serve the public across a range of critical needs with the expectation that the law would be observed and they would be eligible for loan relief if they met the requirements.”
Furthermore, the organizations argued that it would not be easy for a borrower to switch employers if their job loses PSLF eligibility. Additionally, the proposed regulations would prevent borrowers from even requesting a reconsideration of the ED’s decision to revoke their employer’s PSLF eligibility.
“It is our hope that you will reconsider this proposal and approach any changes to the PSLF program with the goal of improving the program to ensure borrowers receive the benefits they are entitled to and that the law guarantees,” the ACE letter reads.
NASFAA also recently submitted its own comments to ED on the proposed PSLF regulations, outlining other provisions that it does and does not support, as well as several recommendations.
For example, NASFAA recommended that the department create additional borrower protections, such as a legacy provision for borrowers already working at employers later deemed ineligible for the PSLF program. NASFAA also urged shortening the proposed 10-year ban on employer reentry into the PSLF program to five years.
Publication Date: 9/23/2025
David S | 9/23/2025 1:59:47 PM
The law that created PSLF was specific about what types of entities counted as qualified employers; a 501c3, not a church, not a labor union (an obvious left-right tradeoff), couldn't be involved in political campaigns. I'm no lawyer, but as far as I can tell, it did not give the executive branch the authority to cherry-pick what guiding philosophies or objectives or values that place of employment held. Because that's exactly what this is going to be; what they are calling "illegal" is just what they don't like. Given the blatant attacks from the White House on various marginalized groups, I think it's pretty obvious what a lot of these “substantial illegal purpose[s]" will be.
And of course the elimination of Grad PLUS will already lead to fewer PSLF-eligible loans. The goal here is to scrap PSLF, even if it has to be done a step or two at a time.
You must be logged in to comment on this page.