Search News


Browse Archives

News

The Credit Crunch Takes a Toll

January 23, 2008

Share This Story

FREE Daily News Alerts

Advertisement

For months, college officials have been nervously eyeing the tumult of the subprime mortgage crisis, the aftermath of the student loan scandal, signs of a coming recession, and other financial indicators, and wondering if, or when, the gathering winds would hit higher education. Tuesday, the first big wave did -- blasting only the for-profit sector, for now, but worrying others.

Several leading companies that provide higher education announced that they had been told by Sallie Mae and other lenders that they would severely restrict or cut back entirely on student loans to their students. In separate announcements:

  • Corinthian Colleges said that Sallie Mae, which provides 90 percent of the private loans taken out by its students, would no longer make loans to students with poor credit scores (who represent about 75 percent of Corinthian students who receive private loans, the company acknowledged). Corinthian also said that College Loan Corp. had told the company that it would stop making all private and federal loans to the for-profit higher education sector, and that another lender, Student Loan Express, would no longer make private loans, but will continue to make federal loans to for-profit colleges.
  • Career Education Corp. made a similar announcement, saying that Sallie Mae had decided to end a two-year agreement to provide the college company's students with "recourse loans," also known as "opportunity loans" -- loans provided by some lenders to students with lower credit scores who might not otherwise qualify for loans. Career Education said it would search for alternatives to such loans but might end them altogether.
  • ITT Educational Services issued an upbeat statement (headline: "ITT Educational Services, Inc. Announces Availability of Additional Student Loan Options") saying that three lenders -- Bank of America, Chase Education Finance and Citibank's Student Loan Corporation -- had agreed to provide federal and private loans to its students through 2008-9. ITT's statement neglected to mention, however, that those lenders would be replacing Sallie Mae, which is pulling the plug on some of its loans to ITT, too.

Sallie Mae is expected to announce its fourth quarter and year-end results in a news conference today, and is likely to say at that time exactly how far back it is cutting its student loan business. The company had said in a filing this month that it would be "more selective" in making federal and private loans, but until the for-profit companies began making their announcements Tuesday, it was not clear exactly what that meant.

Tuesday's various announcements confirmed the sense of most observers that the impact of the credit crunch and the larger economic instability in the country would be felt most directly in the student loan market place. The crisis in the subprime mortgage industry -- which has been a major drag on the U.S. economy over all -- has an analog of sorts in the student loan market, and several lenders, including First Marblehead and Sallie Mae, have found themselves unable to find investors willing to buy their portfolios of riskier loans.

That fact, combined with cuts that Congress made in federal subsidies to lenders last fall that diminished the profitability of federal loans, has combined to put some lenders on much shakier ground, and they are responding by cutting back on their riskier loans -- often those to students from lower income backgrounds who attend higher-cost institutions, and those with poor credit scores.

"The whole student loan 'scandal' has stopped the lenders from cross-subsidizing loans to some extent," said Harris Miller, president of the Career College Association, which represents for-profit and career-oriented colleges. "Who suffers in all that? Not the middle class students, by and large; they will get loans somehow. Mommy and daddy will co-sign. The people who aren't going to do well are the kids, and often adults, who have poor credit scores, who need gap funding beyond what's available through Pell Grants, Stafford loans, state grants."

Miller said he hoped that members of Congress, college officials and others might come together to "do something before what's a problem now becomes a crisis" -- "before kids and adults find their access to education cut off." He said the lenders' recent announcements are signs that Congress may have gone too far in cutting the subsidies to loan providers last summer, and that the context has changed since then, with the economy "going in the tank" and the subprime mortgage crisis having exploded, making the financial markets generally skittish.

Many student aid experts, though, argue that lenders had gone too far in making costly private loans to students who should not have received them, because they did not have the financial wherewithal to manage significant levels of debt at high interest rates. Given the skepticism with which some officials in traditional higher education view the for-profit sector, the view that the credit crunch is a major crisis for colleges may not take hold unless and until some nonprofit colleges are at risk -- and that may not be far off, some fear.

The next sector that could see its students face limits on what they can borrow are some small, private colleges that educate significant numbers of low-income and first-generation students. Officials at the National Association of Independent Colleges and Universities said they have been hearing fretting from administrators at some member colleges, and that they are trying to gauge the potential impact of the credit crunch on their institutions.

In addition to diminished availability of private loans for some needy students, the institutions could also be pinched if providers of credit insurance for municipal and other bonds significantly ratchet up their premiums to make up for the fact that their own credit ratings have been damaged by the credit crunch, said Matthew Hamill, senior vice president for advocacy and issue analysis at the National Association of College and University Business Officers.

Similarly, all colleges could see their financial situations affected if, as is beginning to be the case, the skittishness in the credit markets drags down the stock markets (and colleges' endowments with them), and ultimately public colleges will see a downturn in state support if the economic goes into a full recession.

Tuesday brought the first major ripples of the credit crunch into higher education; college leaders can only hope it doesn't grow into a tsunami.

See all postings »
Advertisement
Advertisement

Matching Jobs

Comments on The Credit Crunch Takes a Toll

  • It's About Time
  • Posted by Jim on January 23, 2008 at 8:00am EST
  • After seeing the Federal Government FINALLY cut back on subsidies to the lenders and knowing there will be legislation to allow Bankruptcy of student loans made by PRIVATE lenders. These are both good sighs for the future of some borrowers and alumni alike.

    Knowing the desperate situation of some borrowers, and the tactics utilized by some lenders to not only establish new loans in the hopes of producing a higher profit, but also the extortionist ways some go after the last dime of some. We as a nation need to realine our moral and ethical priorities and come up with a better way of financing college for the poor and ensuring the private sector has hands off or are the ones flipping the bill.

    I know that by the fed pulling away from ensuring the private sector is protected when they lend moneys for student loans, by degree will be worth something in the future. With fewer loans being made, there will be a decrease in the employment pool and increasing value for those degrees that have been awarded.

  • Posted by Jim on January 23, 2008 at 8:00am EST
  • This should serve as a wake up call to the higher education industry. The old economic axiom of "there is no free lunch" comes into play here.

    What were we thinking, when we are lending money to people who have poor credit scores, are poor themselves with no means to pay back the loan, except their anticipated futures? Gee, the loan is guaranteed, who got the guarantee, the banks got the guarantee, all the students get is a bill to pay them back.

    What our nations leaders did was create a system the some people got rich on while others (the poor) got a whole lot poorer.

    Nothing is free in society. There is always the cost to pay, we have not seen the final curtain on the great loan scandal of 2007. The taxpayers will be forced to anti up.

    This whole argument goes back to the idea that a college education is for everyone and it is a 'dream.' The argument should become everyone should aspire to have a college education and if they work hard, study hard and demonstrate the abilities that are necessary to receive an education then they should be successful. No one gets anything for doing nothing.

    Many students are coming to college today, academically under prepared, financially unprepared and socially unprepared. It is not wonder that the 6 year graduation (not even 4 year) is less then 60% nationally.

    Remember: there is no free lunch, in the end someone always pays.

  • Posted by Jeff A. on January 23, 2008 at 9:30am EST
  • The unfortunate thing is adult students who are looking to learn skills in a short period of time, so they can provide a better living for their families, are being short-changed by the federal aid programs. We are giving federal loan access to pay the entire cost of attending any college in the country to any dependent student whose parents have at least so-so credit, regardless of their family income. We are giving the same federal loan access to graduate students as well.

    But what about the adult student with marginal credit who wants to change their career to better provide for their family? Their ability to choose a private education is diminishing each day. Many lenders could afford to step up and help these students until the recent subsidy cuts. Now that this assistance is gone, we need Congress to step up and provide a PLUS Undegraduate loan.

  • What about the Obvious?
  • Posted by Patrick Seth Williams , GTA at UW-Milwaukee on January 23, 2008 at 9:45am EST
  • We're also missing an obvious point here. College education has been preached as something that is necessary and desired, but the problem is that it is not free. So just as every other commodity under a capitalistic system, you create a desire for the commodity and then make ways for people to satisfy that desire. If college education is so much a necessity for our society, why don't we stop treating it as a commodity and treat it as we treat elementary and secondary education. Or, to rephrase, why isn't college education free? (Here's an interview on the subject linked on Bousquet's blog: http://howtheuniversityworks.com/wordpress/archives/54)

  • The income contingent loan
  • Posted by Conor King , Institutional Strategist at Victoria University, Australia on January 23, 2008 at 5:55pm EST
  • The risks of lending to students in a straight market are well known. The US has its various mechanisms to help offset that.

    In Australia, since 1989, students have access to an income contingent loan. Initially available for publicly supported places it now extends to private universities and colleges (with a maximum loan amount).

    Students repay via the income tax system if and when they earn above the relevant thresholds. Yes clearly not all is repaid and the longer the repayment period the greater the loss to the Government. But it means a loan is available to everyone and repayment depends on your future capacity to repay.

    The concept has been taken up now by many other countries to support either student fees or student living costs.

  • News Flash.....Lending is a Business
  • Posted by Student Loan Justice Exposed on January 24, 2008 at 10:20am EST
  • Well here come the Student Loan Justice clan with the name calling. I truly enjoy when the fact that they consider a company attempting to collect on a loan "extortion".

    Let me explain the process of a loan to them all. Someone needs money for something, perhaps a new car, a house, or a college degree. The person goes to a bank or a lender and applies. Based on their credit, they are either approved or denied. Loan is made and repayment includes interest to account for the fact that you are using their money for an extended period of time. Repayment terms are set, and if not followed, then penalties apply because with non-payment comes cost to the lender in the form of paying people to attempt to get back the money that was agreed to be paid back. That doesn't exactly fit the definition of extortion.

    Now on to bankruptcy. I will leave off the simplified explanation as we all know what it is. When there is something such as a house or car involved, there is collateral which can be used to recoup the loss the lender will take if the loan doesn't get paid back. In the case of a student loan, there is little that can be done if bankruptcy is allowed. It is set up perfectly for those with bad intentions. They are young, have little need for good credit until they are at least 30 and looking to marry and buy their first home, and are therefore the perfect scenario to file bankruptcy, start fresh, and pass the bill on to the rest of us.

    As for people with poor credit scores not being able to pay loans. You are arguing against yourself here Jim. Government subsidized loans are not credit based but are also limited to $3500 for a freshman in college, so the thought here being that the college degree they earn using this loan will help them pay back the loan. As for private student loans, they are credit based and in most cases require a co-signer to ensure that repayment is made. Your implication that lenders are just dying for people to default is absolutely false.

    I have no idea what the motives of Student Loan Justice are beyond the obvious desire to rid themselves of debt they agreed to pay back. They used the money to get a degree which they seemingly have not put to very good use. I will tell you what my single motive is:
    To get Alan Collinge and the rest of his followers to pay back their loans like they agreed to do when they signed on the dotted line.
    http://www.studentloanjusticeexposed.com/

  • Sallie Mae's free lunch is ending
  • Posted by Mark on January 24, 2008 at 10:25am EST
  • Why did the U.S. government offer a guarantee to Sallie Mae in the first place? Sallie Mae is entirely the result of statutes ( i.e. Higher Education Act of 1965). It's genisis was a government loan of $5,ooo,ooo for it's initial formation. (yes, Sallie Mae did not even use it's own investment capital to get established).The terms of Sallie Mae's government loan have never been disclosed to the public.But,I am sure that the terms of it's loans were very favorable.Sallie Mae originally started out as a quisi-government, non-profit entity, but severed it's relationship with the Feds with the 1997 reauthorization of the HEA.

    Sallie Mae does not lend money to "subprime" borrowers with marginal credit for any altruistic ideals. They do so to line it's own pockets.The loans are guaranteed by the taxpayer in the event of default. Sallie Mae gets paid by the loan guarantor if the borrower defaults, and reaps huge additional financial rewards in the collection process. These "collection costs" can (and do) bloat the debt to 3 or 4 times the amount borrowed.This has allowed Sallie Mae's revenue stream to soar 109% since 1997 .Sallie Mae stated in SEC documents, that this increase in revenue was almost entirely the result of these increased "collection fees" tacked unto defaulted student loans.

    It is about time that Sallie Mae (et. al.) has to play on a level playing with other "subprime" lenders. If this makes it harder for low-income prospective students' to get student loans in the first place, so be it.

    By not taking student loans to fund his education, the graduate can start entering the workforce debt free. They will not be paralyzed by an often insurmountable debt, right out of the starting gate. This debt never goes away, and can destroy lives. Believe me ... I know first hand.

  • Serving Viable Students in Need of Funding
  • Posted by Josh Grinstead , Director of Business Development at TFC Credit Corporation on January 25, 2008 at 4:35am EST
  • As the rules get tighter, it is important to recognize that in this situation the students do lose as well – not just the so-called ‘evil’ for-profits or lenders. This innovative proprietary education sector that will be hardest hit provides incredibly viable, market-driven education and skilled, employable labor to the workforce. They also provide opportunity for students left behind by the traditional education system and economics. It is no small issue to acknowledge such as this student group will no longer have the capability to manage the tuition gap unless the institutions can find viable financial options for young persons growing their credit and/or adults returning to their education and rebuilding their credit. These important groups won’t get funding to invest in their education in the current market unless the education industry can find solutions to cover the gap. Education companies can use internal funding putting their own financial viability at risk, or return to banking lenders only to garner slightly less restrictive loan options at best than those currently offered. Both of these options will still leave a viable and promising student and consumer group un-reached and an at-risk demographic undereducated and under-skilled. There are niche providers who can fill this void and provide experienced service to schools with interest rates and financial terms that won’t burden these students with long-term debt. Students and schools should seek these alternative financial service providers that specialize in student financing before the industry and its student market suffer beyond repair.

  • Simple Solution
  • Posted by Andrew on January 27, 2008 at 5:30pm EST
  • Why don't school administrators REDUCE TUITION? How are tuition rates set anyway? Why don't schools reduce cost to attract business like businesses in every other sector of the economy?

    Seems like we have a simple case of tacit collusion and monopolistic behavior by colleges going on.

  • Let's Talk Tuition
  • Posted by Tammara on February 13, 2008 at 5:55pm EST
  • I agree wholeheartedly with Andrew. US universities - PLEASE lower your tuition costs. My eldest son is in his first year at NYU - at a cost of $39k for tuition alone, $52k with housing. After Stafford and Perkins loans, a small scholarship and the exhaustion of his college savings, his father and I are left $27k in debt. And we are only in year ONE! My son got into his number one choice school, his dream school, and I'm incredibly proud of him. But I have to admit that my first thought when he was running around the house hooting and hollering after being accepted was OH MY GOD, how are we going to actually pay for this?? We qualified for Plus loans, because we have good credit. After 24 years of marriage, we are more in debt than we've ever been. By the end of his junior year, we will owe more on those monthly student loan payments than our house payment. And the biggest horror? We have two more children.