Lawsuit claims JP Morgan, Citi, and Nelnet defrauded students and US government

Posted by Student on 2009/10/19 @ 1350 Comments (0) (show tags and categories)

Student Loan Bubble typically focuses on the fundamental questions of student debt in the United States, but as this topic gets more attention, it is inevitable that those companies involved in this industry will also receive more attention.

An ongoing theme of Student Loan Bubble is the structural similarity to the US housing bubble, such as high-risk loans to individuals with no collateral or credit history, decade-long repayment schedules, and variable interest rates. Given the spectacular collapse of the US housing industry and the level of fraud that was later uncovered, it should not be surprising that some are asking the same questions of the student loan industry.

Between bringing a lawsuit against lending companies and established guilt, a lot of evidence must be presented before the connection is made. Student Loan Bubble is curious to watch this case as it unfolds.

Excerpt from: http://www.businessinsider.com/jpmorgan-citi-charg…

The 285 page suit [...] says Nelnet illegally induced students to apply for federal student loans, paying telemarketers to aggressively push the government product, and used false advertising to get more applications, like promising that students would save thousands of dollars in interest payments by consilidating their loans with Nelnet. They then presented false claims to the Department of Education to receive federal funding.

According to the suit, JPMorgan and Citi alledgely “ratified and/or authorized the wrongful acts of Nelnet and have benefitted from such conduct.”

Without specifying a total amount, the suit asks for triple the U.S. claim payments and other damages, plus civil penalties. It asks for $5,500 to $11,000 for each claim Nelnet presented to the Department of Education between 2004 and 2007 (the number is unclear).

The government could have intervened in the suit, but declined, according to court filings.

Student Loan Debt and Low Income Families

Posted by Student on 2009/10/12 @ 2140 Comments (0) (show tags and categories)

The Wall Street Journal recently reviewed the ways low income families are impacted by the US credit crunch. In addition to consumer purchases, The WSJ points to student loan debt as a major factor — sometimes the largest — in the composition of individual debt portfolios.

Excerpt from: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125511860883676713…

“We saw an extension of credit to a much deeper socioeconomic level, and they got access to the same credit instruments as middle-class and mainstream Americans,” says Ronald Mann, a Columbia University law professor. Now, “it will be harder for families at the bottom of the income ladder to get credit cards,” he says.

The financial crisis has forced lenders to be especially cautious with the riskiest borrowers, a category that low-income families often fall into because their debt tends to be higher relative to income and assets. The ratio of credit-card debt to income is 50% higher for the lowest two-fifths of Americans by income than for the top two-fifths, Federal Reserve data show.

Although the tone of the article tends to focus on young people and their consumer behaviors, there is also a glimpse at a much more troubling problem.

Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, testifying before Congress in July, said: “We now know that millions of Americans were…unable to evaluate the risks associated with borrowing to support the purchase of a home, a car or an education.”

Student Loan Bubble is curious to hear more about Geithner’s perspective on the inability of Americans to evaluate risk, and if this can be remedied by better information, better financial education, different regulation, or perhaps something else entirely.

Education is an excellent vehicle for elevating one’s socioeconomic status, but The WSJ has identified a major issue for those in greatest need of elevation: disproportionate debt levels, coupled with the previously unheard of suggestion that education might be a risky investment.

The Lifetime Earnings Myth Part II: College Grads only earn $732576 more than High School Grads

Posted by Student on 2009/03/13 @ 1736 Comments (2) (show tags and categories)

If you are fortunate enough to be in college right now, or if you ever went to college, then you are probably aware of the statistic that proclaims, “college graduates earn $1,000,000 more than high school graduates.” On this basis, you may have rationalized student debt as being a necessary liability for achieving this higher lifetime earning potential. It’s easy to see where this mythical million comes from: according to the oft-quoted statistic, by the time college grads retire they will be earning about $25,000 more per year than high school grads. Multiply that figure by 40 years of productive labor, and you get $1,000,000.

Student Loan Bubble recently discussed one major problem with this figure: new college graduates will only earn $7000 more per year than their high school peers, while shouldering significantly more debt than high school-educated workers. Additionally, high school grads will have at least four years worth of income before college grads even enter the workforce. The take home message from the first Student Loan Bubble article is that recent grads are facing a very real risk that they won’t be able to manage their student loan debt with such a meager income increase, at least during the first few years.

The first article provoked some interesting feedback such as the question, “what happens later in life?” In this article, Student Loan Bubble presents two graphs of lifetime earnings, which were calculated based on median income data from the US Census. The census provides data in 10-year aggregates, so Student Loan Bubble assumed a yearly pay raise that would make yearly earnings consistent with the census aggregates. After determining yearly income, Student Loan Bubble determined the cumulative income between the ages of 21 and 64.

The first graph presents yearly median incomes of High School and College graduates. You can click for a higher resolution version. Notice that the gap is not major while workers are young, and that by age 35, everyone has nearly achieved their maximum earning potential. It is difficult to perceive, but high school workers actually notice a slight pay decline between age 55 and 64.

student-loan-bubble-median-yearly

Next, Student Loan Bubble presents cumulative earnings, and these results might surprise you. By the time workers are 64, college grads will have earned $1,991,574 while high school grads will have earned $1,258,998. These are median figures, which means that 50% of workers will earn less than these amounts. The difference in median lifetime earning is $732,576, which is less than 75% of the fabled $1,000,000.

student-loan-bubble-median-cumulative

Consider, too, that it not unusual to pay $120,000 to attend a private university for 4 years, and the earning difference drops to approximately $600,000. Once interest expenses are included in this figure, and accounting for the very real risk of penalties for late payments, the earning difference will be reduced even further. It should be reiterated again that these are all median data, which are a robust measure that is not affected by high-earning outliers.

It is plainly evident from these graphs that college graduates can expect to earn more with their degree, but the exact amount of this earning difference deserves to be scrutinized. The next step is to examine the upper and lower quartiles to see how the relationship looks. Student Loan Bubble predicts that the earnings gap for the 25th percentile will be somewhat lower than the median difference, and that the 75th percentile will show a much larger income difference.

It is the conclusion of Student Loan Bubble that the $1,000,000 lifetime earning difference truly is a myth that is not supported by the median income data. In the case that this myth has been used to justify excessive student debt liabilities, it is possible that some students will be seriously disappointed by their lifetime earning potential.

Supplement: A CSV file is available to download here, for anyone who wishes to give these data a closer look.
student-loan-bubble-lifetime-median-income.csv

The housing bubble, explained through fascinating animation

Posted by Student on 2009/03/01 @ 0900 Comments (0) (show tags and categories)

The housing bubble, and the consequent credit crisis, is a very complex system that is elegantly and lucidly explained in the following video, created by Jonathan Jarvis.

There is at least one element missing from the video, which is mentioned but not expanded upon: Credit Default Swaps (CDS), which explain how insurance companies are also included in the flowchart. The Collateralized Debt Obligations (CDOs) are partially insured by CDSes, which is a guarantee that if the CDO stops earning money, the insurance company will pay the difference. Because the CDO market was actually the business of reselling housing mortgages (and we all know how that went) the CDS contracts are now in effect. Now, insurance companies must pay out sums of money that are a large portion of the total mortgage defaults.

Nevertheless, this video is fantastic, and it is a useful tool for learning more about the student loan bubble. In the same way that bankers created CDOs out of mortgages, student loan debt has also been packaged and resold to other bankers and investors. Unlike mortgages, students are not able to default on their loan repayments.

Excerpt from: http://vimeo.com/3261363

The goal of giving form to a complex situation like the credit crisis is to quickly supply the essence of the situation to those unfamiliar and uninitiated. This project was completed as part of my thesis work in the Media Design Program, a graduate studio at the Art Center College of Design in Pasadena, California.

Sallie Mae: the privatization of student loan profits

Posted by Student on 2009/02/15 @ 0630 Comments (0) (show tags and categories)

A 2006 report by Leslie Stahl of 60 minutes investigates Sallie Mae, the program set up by Congress in 1972 that was later privatized, becoming an extremely profitable, publicly traded company. Sallie Mae is the anthropomorphic name for SLM Corporation, who are in the business of providing private and federally subsidized loans to student borrowers. In 1997, SLM began the process of ending its federal charter, which was concluded in 2004. During this process, SLM acquired a host of other businesses, including collections agencies, while maintaining strong ties to the federal government and strengthening ties to higher education. As of 2009, SLM manages more student loans than any other company.

For its lending and collection businesses, SLM Corporation enjoys unprecedented legal advantages that are not shared by any other class of financing, including many unique techniques for retrieving repayment from students who have defaulted. As a result, the repayment rate for student loans is currently 95%, which is significantly higher than in the past, and is higher than other industries. Stahl interviews several experts to figure out how SLM Corporation came to be, and uncovers a fascinating story of amazing profits and questionable expenses.

RTFA: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/05/05/60minute…

“It may be called ‘private’ by the people in the system. But it’s not private at all,” says Michael Dannenberg, who analyzes student loan policy at the New America Foundation, a non-partisan think tank.

“What do you call it?” Stahl asks.

“Frankly, it’s a socialist-like system,” he says. “It’s not as if this private entity is assuming any risks. No, no, no. The law makes sure that this so-called private entity has virtually no risk.”

On top of that, Sallie Mae also owns some of the biggest collection agencies in the country. Once a student borrower goes into default, the government pays Sallie Mae all the principle and compounded interest that have accrued.

The loan then passes into the collection phase. If Sallie Mae is the collector, it gets to keep up to 25 percent of whatever is recovered. In 2005, nearly a fifth of its revenue came from its collection business.

“Sallie Mae makes money if you pay back on time. And Sallie Mae makes money if you don’t pay back on time,” says Elizabeth Warren, a professor of bankruptcy law at Harvard Law School.

Warren says it’s a mistake to allow Sallie Mae to be both a lender and a collector.

“It shouldn’t be the case that Sallie Mae gets to play every hand at the poker table while the government is the one that keeps anteing up the money,” Warren tells Stahl. “But let’s be clear. That by itself isn’t enough. We have to decide collectively as a country: do we want to encourage the young people who are trying to get college diplomas? And if the answer to that is yes, the way to encourage them is not to double and triple the amount that they owe when they get into financial troubles.”

By law, private lenders must offer payment options, but that usually means the loans just balloon. So even though 95 percent do pay up over time, many are burdened with heavy debt. In a statement, Sallie Mae told 60 Minutes it makes far more money from those who pay on time, than from those who default

Older Posts »