<p>I read about a new bill that will change FAFSA. It will also include an asset thresh hold for EFCs of zero; if the parents have $150,000 in assets, then they will automatically be ineligible for any federal need-based aid.</p>
<p>I do not know any more, but this bill is in the Senate, apparently.</p>
<p>I had heard about that but hadn’t heard what the HR # is. Have to go and look. I was assuming the asset cap will be for all EFCs and will still be for unprotected assets. </p>
<p>Good thing when you read about people with assets in the millions wanting to be eligible for simplified needs.</p>
<p>Oh, it’s a very interesting piece of legislation on many levels. Check it out. I have alluded to these proposed changes recently, but I have hesitated to write about them. I feel that it is too early in the process to bring them up here, because comments may well be taken as “this is how it’s going to be.” In fact, this is in discussion stages only at this point. I consider it the great “squeeze” … as in completely squeezing out any but the very lowest EFC families from anything but unsubsidized loans. The FAFSA would be easy for a reason … that reason being that if you make much above poverty level wages (or if you can’t hide everything you make by claiming paper business losses on your FAFSA), you are out of luck for federal aid purposes. I also envision schools that offer decent amounts of institutional aid increasingly relying on Profile and/or their own forms to gather additional info in the future. BUT … it is early in the game.</p>
<p>If you understand the aid process & care about the future of financial aid, you may want to do some research and voice your opinion to your legislators.</p>
<p>You’re the best, K-mom! I smile so often when I read your posts (and I remember how you have helped me over time). Yes, for those who care about the bootstraps that some young and not-so-young people truly need, it is a good idea to do some research and speak up.</p>
<p>Now, if only we could get the FAFSA to include those categories the Profile has: “never married, living together, never married, living separately.” Those at least are obvious, more obvious than “single.” IMHO</p>
<p>and is now in the Senate.</p>