Search News


Browse Archives

News

How the Financial Aid Flows

August 24, 2006

Share This Story

FREE Daily News Alerts

Advertisement

Federal student aid -- with its various needs tests -- generally goes to low income students. But federal tax breaks for college costs, largely adopted during the Clinton administration, are having a significant impact on the amount of federal assistance going to wealthier students.

The average tax benefit received by families with incomes of $92,000 or more was greater in fact than the average benefit for those with incomes less than $32,000. This analysis comes from "Student Financing of Undergraduate Education: 2003-4," released Wednesday by the National Center for Education Statistics. While the report is an annual look at tuition and financial aid, the study released Wednesday had the most thorough analysis to date of the impact of federal tax breaks as a student aid tool.

When the tax breaks were created, and in the years since, some critics have predicted that they would end up helping students who least need the help, and the new data are likely to reinforce that impression. Defenders of the tax credits have countered that many middle class families need support and that Congress and the administration are unwilling to make large increases in Pell Grants or other programs that are more focused on low-income students.

Data in the new report show that tax breaks make up a relatively small share of student aid for low income students, but the majority of aid for wealthier students.

Average Federal Aid for Full-Time Undergraduates, 2003-4

Income Level Tax Benefit Total Benefit (Grants,
Veterans' Benefits,
and Tax Breaks)
Less than $32,000 $600 $3,300
$32,000-$59,999 $900 $1,500
$60,000-$91,999 $1,100 $1,200
$92,000 and up $700 $800

The report notes that the impact of tax breaks on wealthier families isn't shocking. To get certain tax breaks, you need to have sufficiently large tax bills and the size of tax breaks is linked to tuition costs. To the extent wealthier families (1) have the higher tax bills to start with and (2) are more likely to attend more expensive institutions, the impact makes sense.

More generally, the data released in the report show the widely varying economics of higher education -- including both costs and sources of support -- by sector. Tuition, for example, is a relatively small share of total costs for students attending community colleges, but represents the most significant expense by far at private, nonprofit institutions. And relatively small proportions of students borrow at community colleges, but large proportions borrow in other sectors.

Financial Characteristics of Full-Time Undergraduates, 2003-4

Sector Avg. Tuition and Fees Avg. Total
Cost
% of Students With Grants Avg. Size of Grant % of Students With Loans Avg. Size of Loan
Public 2-year colleges $2,000 $10,500 53% $3,400 23% $4,100
Public 4-year colleges $5,400 $15,200 59% $4,600 51% $5,800
Private, nonprofit, 4-year colleges $18,400 $28,300 81% $9,400 66% $7,200
Private, for-profit colleges $10,600 $20,300 70% $4,200 80% $7,900

The report also includes a wealth of other data that, while a few years old, tends to be more detailed than more recent data. There are numerous tables on enrollment patterns, average tuition costs and demographics.

See all postings »
Advertisement
Advertisement

Matching Jobs

Comments on How the Financial Aid Flows

  • Wealthy?
  • Posted by GoFigure on August 24, 2006 at 9:45am EDT
  • Interesting spin on wealthy. I believe the $92k cited falls below the average annual income for a university faculty member. I suppose they must possess more than a wealth of knowledge.

  • One other consideration
  • Posted by Drtaxsacto on August 24, 2006 at 10:20am EDT
  • The NCES data also, at least in the summary chart, does not separate grants by type. A good deal of the grant money in the private non-profits comes from institutionally funded grants which come from money raised by the institution.

  • Posted by Sandr Huntington on August 24, 2006 at 11:10am EDT
  • This article justifies higher tax breaks for those over $92,000 on the basis that they pay higher taxes to begin with and that they send their children to more expensiv colleges. It seems sort of glaring to omit the fact that students from families in those income brackets receive little on no financial aid form ANY outside sources. It seems logical to me that if they are paying more of the cost out of pocket, they would receive more tax breaks.

  • Tax breaks not good
  • Posted by RS on August 24, 2006 at 2:55pm EDT
  • Sandr's comment says a lot about the values of our society and misses the long-term view of human capital development. The research is clear - people without degrees are more likely to be unemployed, be on welfare, use drugs, smoke cigarettes, be in prison, etc. - the things that cost society money in increased taxes. Research also clearly shows that the price of higher education is a barrier to entry. So, by shifting resources away from low-income students to high-income students (who are likely to be successful in life anyway due to inheritance and cultural capital), society is actually incurring longer long-term costs in the form of higher taxes. As a society, I would rather devote $8000/year in taxes for a kid to go to college for four years than $30,000/year for a person in prison or millions in health care costs for a smoker with cancer. I agree with Sandr that making higher-income people pay more may not be "fair," but personally I would rather pay lower taxes than worry about how "unfair" life is for the millionaire next door.

  • Posted by Tom Babel on August 24, 2006 at 3:25pm EDT
  • There are a number of stories in any analysis and this is just one. The key table for me is figure 13 which illustrates an extension of financial assistance to middle income families. (The labeling of income at "$92,00 and up" is misleading...tax benefits are generally eliminated before income reaches $130,000) That extension is accomplished through back-end tax benefits rather than up-front grant aid. This extension is exactly what Congress intended.

  • Posted by Middle Class Parent on August 24, 2006 at 3:25pm EDT
  • As a parent who falls in the $92,000+ combined income, my child's only option for paying for college is loans. Our EFC is approximately 25% of our income, and I had to choose between funding my child's college education or my retirement. The small tax break we receive is a mere pittance compared the grants and other freebies given to low-income students. As usual for the middle class, we pay, and pay, and pay, and the money we pay goes to those who don't pay. If I was unwilling to take out parent loans for my child, he would not be able to go to any college. So we'll pay for his education, with interest. Our family has worked hard to achieve the success we have, and we started off as a "low-income" family. So spare me the stories of what happens to "low-income" students. They're getting all the breaks, and I'm paying for them.

  • "Middle Class" anger
  • Posted by MDL on August 25, 2006 at 1:25pm EDT
  • How sad it was for me to read the response by the so-called "Middle-Class" Parent. My level of nausea especially arose to read "I had to choose between funding my child’s college education or my retirement" and "As usual for the middle class, we pay, and pay, and pay, and the money we pay goes to those who don’t pay", and especially, "They’re getting all the breaks, and I’m paying for them". MCP may not like to read and hear about why need-based aid exists in the way that it does, but it does exist to provide access to those who cannot afford college any other way, and by the way, they are taking loans too, because those grants you so graciously are paying for MCP don't cover their costs.

    MCP, just a suggestion, instead of directing your anger at the unfortunate poor who lack even the chance to choose between retirement or tuition, how about directing your anger at those who really deserve it, i.e. the politicians who have decided not to keep grants rising at a level which actually covers costs for both the poor and middle class, as those grants were initially designed to do.

    I'm sure you aren't suggesting that you'd rather be poor and getting all the advantages of poverty, like the freebies you spoke of...

  • Access vs Choice
  • Posted by Mark Kantrowitz , Publisher at FinAid.org on August 25, 2006 at 4:00pm EDT
  • Interestingly, average cost of attendance increases monotonically with family income. While some may argue that the higher education tax benefits for wealthier families are justified by the higher costs paid, this is perhaps confusing cause and effect. In other words, the education tax benefits are providing wealthier families with greater flexibility in their choice of a college. This allows them to choose to attend more expensive institutions than they might otherwise have attended.

    The primary objection to education tax benefits has to do with inadequate need-based financial aid. These benefits are unavailable to lower income students because they are not refundable. So they do nothing to help improve access to higher education. Equally qualified lower income students enroll and graduate from college at less than one-fifth the rate of upper income students. Need-based student aid is inadequate, and continues to lose ground. For example, the maximum Pell Grant has remained flat at $4,050 for four years in a row, and will likely continue unchanged for a fifth year.

    It is also difficult to see what public policy objective is being accomplished by the education tax benefits (with the exception of the tax incentives for college savings plans). These benefits are not based on financial need, nor are they based on academic merit.

    Mark

  • Uh..
  • Posted by Kevin , Undergraduate on August 25, 2006 at 7:00pm EDT
  • Uh, MDL, where do you think the money for those grant programs comes from? (Taxes on the middle class would be a good place to start.) Its bad enough we have to pay for the increasing rate of college for ourselves without worrying about having to pay for those who can't be responsible for themselves.

  • HOORAY...Middle Class Parent
  • Posted by Faye on August 28, 2006 at 7:15pm EDT
  • Kudos to the "Middle Class Parent". They hit it right on the nose. Today's middle class student will be tomorrow's poverty stricken class, graduating in 2010 with the most debt ever in student loans. Where is the billions in financial aid that everyone is talking about??? My husband and I, both self-employed, had a 75% reduction in salary...we were told that we still don't qualify for ANY financial aid, not even a subsidized Stafford Loan. A family of four has to make less than $30000 annually to qualify for ANY aid. It just isn't fair and balanced. Look at the stats.
    Frustrated Middle-Class Parent

  • have been poor, now middle class
  • Posted by John Burghorn on August 28, 2006 at 9:45pm EDT
  • My wife and I have been poor most of our lives. She choose the military in the 70's and I flunked out of college in the 60's and was drafted. Both of us attended college; neither of us graduated. We have worked pretty hard and also have chosen to live pretty simply; well under our income which has meant we have saved for retirement. We also had our only child later than most so we tended to be more established. We have gone through loss of employment several times due to corporate re-structering. We do not qualify for any aid other than the scholorships which our child has qualified. We have invested in our child with our time and she has responded by using the gifts God has given her wisely.

    We pay a lot in taxes even if we get some sort of tax cut (this is our first year so we have yet to see. It is discouraging to see people blaming others. We are gratefull we do not qualify for aid and that others are able to receive help.

    The military has typically been a way out for many people. I spent 10 years from 1965 to 1975 at a time when we got very little pay and it was dangerous and the country didn't support us. The training I received is what has led to the occupation I now have.

    Let's develop some of the same qualities that made our nation great in the past!