IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/tpr/edfpol/v19y2024i4p716-733.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Assessing the Relative Progressivity of the Biden Administration's Federal Student Loan Forgiveness Proposal

Author

Listed:
  • Jacob Goss

    (Department of Economics University of Wisconsin Madison, WI 53706)

  • Daniel Mangrum

    (Research and Statistics Group Federal Reserve Bank of New York New York, NY 10045)

  • Joelle Scally

    (Research and Statistics Group Federal Reserve Bank of New York New York, NY 10045)

Abstract

We quantify the total stock of balances eligible for the Biden administration's 2022 student loan forgiveness proposal and examine which groups would have benefited most. Up to $442 billion in loans were eligible. Those who would have benefited most were younger, had lower credit scores, and lived in lower- and middle-income neighborhoods. We also find that Black and Hispanic borrowers would have disproportionately benefited from the proposal. We then compare the distribution of beneficiaries for the proposed policy to several alternative hypothetical forgiveness proposals and three existing tax credits. The additional forgiveness for Pell Grant recipients increased the progressivity of the policy at a cost of $129 billion. Reducing the income eligibility criterion in half from the proposal would have reduced the cost by nearly $100 billion and made the policy more progressive. Compared with existing tax credits, the announced forgiveness policy is less progressive than the Earned Income Tax Credit but more progressive than the 2019 Child Tax Credit and higher education tax credits. We conclude with a discussion of how each policy lever affects the progressivity of loan cancellation to help inform future policy.

Suggested Citation

  • Jacob Goss & Daniel Mangrum & Joelle Scally, 2024. "Assessing the Relative Progressivity of the Biden Administration's Federal Student Loan Forgiveness Proposal," Education Finance and Policy, MIT Press, vol. 19(4), pages 716-733, Fall.
  • Handle: RePEc:tpr:edfpol:v:19:y:2024:i:4:p:716-733
    DOI: 10.1162/edfp_a_00429
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1162/edfp_a_00429
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1162/edfp_a_00429?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Manasi Deshpande & Yue Li, 2019. "Who Is Screened Out? Application Costs and the Targeting of Disability Programs," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 11(4), pages 213-248, November.
    2. Kopczuk, Wojciech & Pop-Eleches, Cristian, 2007. "Electronic filing, tax preparers and participation in the Earned Income Tax Credit," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 91(7-8), pages 1351-1367, August.
    3. Rossin-Slater, Maya, 2013. "WIC in your neighborhood: New evidence on the impacts of geographic access to clinics," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 51-69.
    4. Saurabh Bhargava & Dayanand Manoli, 2015. "Psychological Frictions and the Incomplete Take-Up of Social Benefits: Evidence from an IRS Field Experiment," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 105(11), pages 3489-3529, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Emily Moschini & Tom Phelan, 2024. "The Evolution of Student Debt 2019–2022: Evidence from the Survey of Consumer Finances," Economic Commentary, Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland, vol. 2024(10), pages 1-6, June.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Wu, Derek & Meyer, Bruce D., 2023. "Certification and Recertification in Welfare Programs: What Happens When Automation Goes Wrong?," IZA Discussion Papers 16294, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    2. Laura Castell & Marc Gurgand & Clément Imbert & Todor Tochev, 2024. "Take-up of Social Benefits: Experimental Evidence from France," PSE Working Papers halshs-04720989, HAL.
    3. Tatiana Homonoff & Jason Somerville, 2021. "Program Recertification Costs: Evidence from SNAP," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 13(4), pages 271-298, November.
    4. Ha Trong Nguyen & Huong Thu Le & Luke B Connelly, 2021. "Who's declining the “free lunch”? New evidence from the uptake of public child dental benefits," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 30(2), pages 270-288, February.
    5. Manasi Deshpande & Yue Li, 2019. "Who Is Screened Out? Application Costs and the Targeting of Disability Programs," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 11(4), pages 213-248, November.
    6. Narayan, Ayushi, 2020. "Does simplifying the college financial aid process matter?," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 75(C).
    7. Tincani, Michela M. & Kosse, Fabian & Miglino, Enrico, 2022. "The Effect of Preferential Admissions on the College Participation of Disadvantaged Students: The Role of Pre-College Choices," Rationality and Competition Discussion Paper Series 342, CRC TRR 190 Rationality and Competition.
    8. R. Lardeux, 2018. "Who Understands The French Income Tax? Bunching Where Tax Liabilities Start," Documents de Travail de l'Insee - INSEE Working Papers g2018-04, Institut National de la Statistique et des Etudes Economiques.
    9. Robert W. Hahn & Robert D. Metcalfe, 2021. "Efficiency and Equity Impacts of Energy Subsidies," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 111(5), pages 1658-1688, May.
    10. Keith Marzilli Ericson & Timothy J. Layton & Adrianna McIntyre & Adam Sacarny, 2023. "Reducing Administrative Barriers Increases Take-up of Subsidized Health Insurance Coverage: Evidence from a Field Experiment," NBER Working Papers 30885, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    11. Michela Maria Tincani & Fabian Kosse & Enrico Miglino, 2022. "The Effect of Preferential Admissions on the College Participation of Disadvantaged Students: The Role of Pre-College Choices," CESifo Working Paper Series 10020, CESifo.
    12. Philip Armour & Melanie A. Zaber, 2020. "Does Student Loan Forgiveness Drive Disability Application?," NBER Working Papers 26787, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    13. Heather Klemick & Ann Wolverton & Bryan Parthum & Kristin Epstein & Sandra Kutzing & Sarah Armstrong, 2024. "Factors Influencing Customer Participation in a Program to Replace Lead Pipes for Drinking Water," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 87(3), pages 791-832, March.
    14. Rosenqvist, Olof & Selin, Håkan, 2023. "Explaining benefit take-up behavior – the role of incentives and habits," Working Paper Series 2023:24, IFAU - Institute for Evaluation of Labour Market and Education Policy.
    15. Kleven, Henrik, 2024. "The EITC and the extensive margin: A reappraisal," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 236(C).
    16. Boning, William C. & Guyton, John & Hodge, Ronald & Slemrod, Joel, 2020. "Heard it through the grapevine: The direct and network effects of a tax enforcement field experiment on firms," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 190(C).
    17. Guan, Hongyu & Yang, Tianli & Zhang, Yunyun & Shi, Yaojiang, 2023. "Time's ticking! Effects of deadline on the utilization of health services: Evidence from a cluster-randomized controlled trial," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 338(C).
    18. Matthew R. Denes & Sabrina T. Howell & Filippo Mezzanotti & Xinxin Wang & Ting Xu, 2020. "Investor Tax Credits and Entrepreneurship: Evidence from U.S. States," NBER Working Papers 27751, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    19. Lucie Martin & Liam Delaney & Orla Doyle, 2022. "Everyday Administrative Burdens and Inequality," Working Papers 202202, Geary Institute, University College Dublin.
    20. Jason B. Cook & Chloe N. East, 2023. "The Effect of Means-Tested Transfers on Work: Evidence from Quasi-Randomly Assigned SNAP Caseworkers," NBER Working Papers 31307, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • H22 - Public Economics - - Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue - - - Incidence
    • H31 - Public Economics - - Fiscal Policies and Behavior of Economic Agents - - - Household
    • H52 - Public Economics - - National Government Expenditures and Related Policies - - - Government Expenditures and Education
    • I22 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - Educational Finance; Financial Aid

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:tpr:edfpol:v:19:y:2024:i:4:p:716-733. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: The MIT Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://direct.mit.edu/journals .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.