Search here...
Home Blog

Final PSLF Eligibility Restrictions Move Forward For Comment

globalinvestmentstrategy.com
-
0
Final PSLF Eligibility Restrictions Move Forward For Comment


Key Points

  • The Department of Education has released proposed rules that could bar certain nonprofits and public employers from PSLF eligibility starting in 2026.
  • The rules give the Secretary of Education wide discretion to determine which employers are excluded based on a “substantial illegal purpose.”
  • A 30-day public comment period opens Monday, with potential legal challenges expected if the rule is finalized.

A new rule from the Department of Education could reshape the Public Service Loan Forgiveness program (PSLF) by redefining which employers qualify.

The new rule, published today in the Federal Register (PDF File), would allow the Secretary of Education to block PSLF eligibility for organizations determined to have a “substantial illegal purpose.” The definition covers a wide range of activities, from providing medical care to transgender minors to allegedly violating immigration laws or engaging in (or even prohibiting to stop) certain protests.

The rule, slated to take effect July 1, 2026, would not strip existing PSLF participants of past qualifying payments. However, future payments would stop counting if an employer is disqualified under the new criteria.

Would you like to save this?

We’ll email this article to you, so you can come back to it later!

What Is The Criteria For Disqualification 

Under the proposal, all 501(c)(3) nonprofits are typically eligible PSLF employers under federal law. The new language adds an additional standard, empowering the Secretary to disqualify an employer based on the preponderance of the evidence (ranging from court rulings to administrative findings) that it engages in a “substantial illegal purpose.”

The term “substantial illegal purpose” is defined to include:

  • Aiding or abetting violations of Federal immigration laws
  • Supporting terrorism, including by facilitating funding to, or the operations of, cartels designated as Foreign Terrorist Organizations, or by engaging in violence for the purpose of obstructing or influencing Federal Government policy
  • Engaging in the chemical and surgical castration or mutilation of children in violation of Federal or State law
  • Engaging in the trafficking of children to states for purposes of emancipation from their lawful parents in violation of Federal or State law
  • Engaging in a pattern of aiding and abetting illegal discrimination
  • Engaging in a pattern of violating State laws as defined in paragraph (34) of this subsection.

Violations of state law are focused on protests, and include a final, non-default judgment by a State court of:

  • Trespassing
  • Disorderly Conduct
  • Public Nuisance
  • Vandalism
  • Obstruction of Highways.

Employers would receive notice and an opportunity to respond, but the process for challenging a determination remains undefined. Borrowers impacted by the change of an employer’s status would have no appeal rights if their employer is disqualified.

Concerns Over Scope

One of the big concerns of the rule is scope. Even the final rule acknowledges “Employer qualification will be linked to the EIN used for reporting to the IRS so employees in one area or agency may be affected by the activities of employees in other organizations under the same EIN.“

They give the example of the County of Los Angeles, which “…has a single EIN covering various departments including the Los Angeles County Public Defender, Los Angeles County Department of Children and Family Services, Harbor-UCLA Medical Center, and the County of Los Angeles Fire Department.”

The concern is that if one group or agency is found to be disqualified under the new rules, all employees across the entire covered EIN would be disqualified – even if they have no connection to the disqualifying issue. In the Los Angeles example, finding that the UCLA medical center provides gender affirming care could disqualify a firefighter that has no connection to that issue.

Furthermore, the rule appears contrary to the existing rules that all 501(c)(3) organizations are eligible for PSLF unless their nonprofit status is revoked through existing IRS processes. The existing law clearly says “An organization under section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 that is exempt from taxation under section 501(a) of the Internal Revenue Code;“.

As such, it’s likely going to be subject to legal challenges for both exceeding the scope of the rulemaking process and for other potential violations of civil rights and higher education laws.

What Comes Next For Borrowers And Employers

The proposed rule is not yet in effect. The Department of Education will take public comments for 30 days starting Monday, August 18, 2025. After it reviews the comments, the Department of Education will likely release the final rule by October 31, 2025, so that it can take effect on July 1, 2026 as planned. That’s also assuming that it doesn’t get blocked by legal challenges along the way.

Borrowers working for potentially affected employers are encouraged to:

  • Submit PSLF employment certification forms before the new rules take effect.
  • Continue to maintain PSLF eligibility, as past payments cannot be revoked.
  • Submit a public comment with concerns around the potential new rule.

With more than one million borrowers benefiting from PSLF to date, the PSLF program is working. But these changes work to serve as a chilling effect for certain employers and groups that may or may not align with a political party’s interests.

More Stories:

@media (min-width: 300px){[data-css=”tve-u-198ae50d8b8″].tcb-post-list #post-48727 [data-css=”tve-u-198ae50d8bf”]{background-image: url(“https://thecollegeinvestor.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/25090803116393-150×150.jpg”) !important;}}

Can President Trump Reverse Student Loan Forgiveness?

Can President Trump Reverse Student Loan Forgiveness?
@media (min-width: 300px){[data-css=”tve-u-198ae50d8b8″].tcb-post-list #post-54865 [data-css=”tve-u-198ae50d8bf”]{background-image: url(“https://thecollegeinvestor.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/PSLF_Buyback_Program_1280x720-150×150.png”) !important;}}

PSLF Buyback Delays: Timeline & Updates

PSLF Buyback Delays: Timeline & Updates

Editor: Colin Graves

The post Final PSLF Eligibility Restrictions Move Forward For Comment appeared first on The College Investor.

The Investment Strategy That’s Reshaping Private Equity

globalinvestmentstrategy.com
-
0


Opinions expressed by Entrepreneur contributors are their own.

In private equity, the smartest general partners (GPs) are realizing that co-investments aren’t just a fundraising sweetener; they’re a strategic lever. Done right, they strengthen the portfolio, deepen LP relationships and reduce overall risk exposure. Yet many GPs still treat co-investing as an afterthought rather than a core element of fund strategy.

In today’s climate, where LPs are more selective, underwriting standards are higher and trust is harder to earn, co-investments can be the edge that separates high-performing GPs from the pack. Here’s how the most sophisticated firms are using co-investing not just to raise capital, but to build resilient portfolios and tighter LP alignment.

Related: The Collaboration Between Limited Partners and Growth Partners: Investors’ Perspective

Why co-investments matter more than ever

The co-investment market has matured rapidly over the past decade. According to Preqin’s Global Private Equity Report, nearly 70% of LPs now expect co-investment opportunities from their fund managers. This demand is no longer limited to mega-institutional family offices. Sovereign wealth funds and even smaller foundations are seeking ways to increase exposure to direct deals while lowering blended fee structures.

Meanwhile, a 2023 report from PitchBook emphasized that co-investment volume is rising even in volatile markets, fueled by LPs looking for more control, lower fees and deeper access to quality deals.

For GPs, this presents both a challenge and an opportunity. The challenge: Co-investments can strain internal resources and slow deal execution if not managed well. The opportunity: When built into the fund’s operations and strategy from day one, co-investments enhance portfolio flexibility, attract strategic LPs and reduce concentration risk, all without diluting fund governance.

Co-investing as a tool for portfolio construction

Smart GPs treat co-investment capacity as part of their capital stack, not a separate, ad hoc offering. This mindset allows them to:

  • Pursue larger deals than the fund alone could support, without increasing fund-level concentration.
  • Add diversification by allocating fund capital to core positions and inviting co-investors into adjacent or higher-risk assets.
  • Act quickly on opportunistic deals by pre-qualifying LPs who can co-invest with short notice.

Let’s say your $100M fund is targeting 10 core platform deals of $10M each. You come across a $25M acquisition that fits the thesis but exceeds your single-asset exposure cap. With co-investment capital lined up, you can still lead the deal, funding $10M from the fund and $15M from co-investors. This approach maintains portfolio balance while giving LPs direct access to a larger asset.

More importantly, it builds your reputation as a GP who brings access, not just capital.

For a case study of this dynamic in action, this piece from Hamilton Lane illustrates how co-investments have become an essential tool in modern private market strategy.

Related: The Risks And Rewards Of Direct Investment For LPs

Reducing risk while increasing ownership

One underappreciated benefit of co-investing is how it allows GPs to retain control of high-conviction assets without overexposing the core fund. In many cases, the most attractive deals are also the most capital-intensive. Without co-investment partners, a GP must choose between taking a smaller slice or over-allocating from the fund.

By bringing in co-investors, GPs can secure majority or lead positions while staying within prudent limits. This improves control over governance, exit timing and value creation plans, all critical levers in reducing downside risk.

Additionally, co-investing can be a powerful tool in navigating market cycles. During downturns, GPs can selectively syndicate capital-heavy deals to preserve dry powder, while still deploying into discounted opportunities. The BVCA’s 2023 Private Equity Guide offers insights into how firms are adjusting their co-investment behavior during a recession.

The operational backbone of a co-investment strategy

Of course, offering co-investments isn’t just about having the deal flow. The GPs who excel at this have built internal systems to handle:

  • Legal structuring: Quick SPV setups, allocation mechanics and clear governance roles
  • LP segmentation: Understanding which investors have the appetite, capacity and decision-making speed to co-invest
  • Data sharing: Secure, real-time access to diligence materials and post-investment reporting
  • Compliance and fairness: Ensuring transparent allocation that doesn’t disadvantage the core fund

This operational backbone is often the difference between firms that “can” offer co-investments and those that do so consistently, cleanly and at scale.

For GPs looking to mature their fund ops, platforms like Carta and Juniper Square simplify co-investment administration, LP communications and investor onboarding.

More advanced GPs are also using tools like Passthrough to streamline subscription documents or Anduin for automated investor workflows.

Co-investment fosters lasting trust

From an LP point of view, we see co-investing as a way to display confidence and alignment. It gives them more say, more return and often a larger role at the table. When done fairly, it turns your investors into what they are — full partners. In a world that is becoming more relationship-based in terms of fundraising, GPs who put in consistent, thoughtful co-investments are at an advantage.

  • Retain top LPs in future funds.
  • Convert one-time investors into anchor commitments.
  • Win allocations in competitive fundraising cycles.

According to HarbourVest’s 2023 LP Survey, nearly 80% of LPs reported higher satisfaction and trust in managers who offered co-investment access, especially when the deals performed well and were communicated transparently.

Related: Why Direct Investments By LPs Are On the Rise

A word of caution: Don’t over-promise

With all its advantages, co-investing is not a silver bullet. When used excessively or poorly, it may bring execution risk, create inefficiencies and bring LPs into conflict. The most common shortcomings are:

  • Providing too much in co-investments, devaluing their quality

  • Granting favors with allocations

  • Procrastinating closings from side deal logistics

  • Failing to coordinate internal bandwidth to handle the complexity

The best firms are selective. They set expectations with LPs early, often in the PPM or DDQ, and focus on quality over quantity. One excellent co-investment that delivers a win can be more powerful than five rushed ones that don’t perform.

Co-investments are no longer optional; they’re a defining feature of modern private equity. But the edge doesn’t come from offering them. It comes from integrating them into your portfolio construction, risk management and LP strategy.

The smartest GPs know this. They use co-investing not just to fill out a cap table, but to build durable LP relationships, de-risk big bets and unlock operational agility. As fundraising becomes more competitive and LPs demand more from their managers, those who treat co-investing as a core fund ops capability, not a last-minute offer, will stand out.

In private equity, the smartest general partners (GPs) are realizing that co-investments aren’t just a fundraising sweetener; they’re a strategic lever. Done right, they strengthen the portfolio, deepen LP relationships and reduce overall risk exposure. Yet many GPs still treat co-investing as an afterthought rather than a core element of fund strategy.

In today’s climate, where LPs are more selective, underwriting standards are higher and trust is harder to earn, co-investments can be the edge that separates high-performing GPs from the pack. Here’s how the most sophisticated firms are using co-investing not just to raise capital, but to build resilient portfolios and tighter LP alignment.

Related: The Collaboration Between Limited Partners and Growth Partners: Investors’ Perspective

The rest of this article is locked.

Join Entrepreneur+ today for access.

Blue states’ push to tax the wealthy could reshape real estate markets

globalinvestmentstrategy.com
-
0


Property markets in the crosshairs

While higher taxes on the rich have long prompted warnings of a “millionaire exodus,” academic research suggests most high earners remain in place, anchored by careers, businesses, or family ties. Still, the very top tier of wealth—particularly mobile billionaires or owners of seasonal estates—may be more responsive to targeted levies.

Massachusetts’ experience illustrates the complexity. Voters approved a 4 percent surtax on annual incomes above $1 million in 2022, which has generated nearly $3 billion in the latest fiscal year, exceeding projections. Yet it is too early to know whether the state’s millionaire headcount is shrinking or whether strong markets, like Boston’s biotech sector, will outweigh any tax deterrent.

Other states are experimenting with different approaches. Rhode Island has enacted a “Taylor Swift tax” on vacation homes worth $1 million or more, set to take effect next summer. Connecticut legislators have floated higher income tax rates for top earners, while Washington has increased its capital gains tax. Maryland has approved steeper rates for residents earning over $500,000 a year. And in New York City, a leading mayoral candidate has proposed an additional levy on incomes over $1 million.

Winners, losers, and market shifts

An analysis of the potential real estate consequences across these states suggests uneven outcomes:

  • Massachusetts – Urban hubs such as Boston and Cambridge are expected to remain resilient, but Nantucket and Martha’s Vineyard could face slower luxury sales.

  • Rhode Island – Coastal second-home markets like Watch Hill may soften; properties just under the $1 million threshold could see more activity.

  • Connecticut – High-end towns in Fairfield County may see gradual outflows of ultra-wealthy homeowners, but mid-tier commuter properties could benefit from increased turnover.

  • Washington State – Seattle’s tech-driven demand may hold firm, though luxury waterfront properties and certain vacation areas could slow.

  • Maryland – The D.C. suburbs remain anchored by government and professional employment, with only marginal impact expected at the high end.

  • New York (NYC-linked) – If additional city taxes advance, Manhattan’s ultra-luxury market and Hamptons estates could face downward pressure, while outer-borough and rental-oriented properties remain stable.

Risk rankings for luxury real estate

Based on scope of tax change, exposure of vacation homes, dependency on ultra-luxury buyers, and wealth mobility sensitivity, the states rank as follows for vulnerability in high-end property markets:

Here come the stablecoins – Bank Automation News

globalinvestmentstrategy.com
-
0


Stablecoins are the talk of Wall Street thanks to a wave of recent favorable crypto regulatory activity, especially the landmark bill GENIUS Act, which became law after President Donald Trump signed it in July. These events come after years of concerted lobbying by the crypto industry to get recognition in Washington, D.C., as a legitimate […]



We Are Millionaires – Here’s a Snapshot of Our Lives

globalinvestmentstrategy.com
-
0
We Are Millionaires – Here’s a Snapshot of Our Lives



My mission is to share my unique Rich Habits research in order to add value to your life and help you realize increased wealth, superior health, abundant success, fulfillment & happiness. If you find value in these articles, please share them with your inner circle and encourage them to Sign Up for my Rich Habits Daily Tips/Articles. No one succeeds on their own. Thank You!
TOM@RICHHABITS.NET

In my five year Rich Habits Study, I got to know my millionaires very well. They had a lot in common. Below is a snapshot of a typical millionaire from my study:

  • We’re really rich. We are worth at least $3.2 million. 16% of us are worth more than $5 million. We make at least $160,000 a year. Half of us make close to $500,000 a year.
  • We’re not young. 80% of us are 50 years of age or older.
  • It took us a long time to accumulate our wealth. On average, it took 32 years to get rich as a Saver-Investor, 22 years as a Big Company Climber, 21 Years as a Virtuoso and 12 years as an Entrepreneur.
  • We like our jobs. 86% of us like what we do for a living. 61% of us pursued some dream or some thing we were passionate about. Those of us who did pursue some dream became millionaires in about 12 years and, as a group, have an average net worth of $7.4 million.
  • The richest among us had success mentors who taught us what to do and what not to do. Finding a Success Mentor, it turns out, is the fast track to success and wealth.
  • We read every day to learn. 88% of us read every day to increase our knowledge for our job. 85% of us read a minimum of two books a month. 63% of us listen to audio books or podcasts while we’re commuting to work, exercising or working in our backyards. We don’t read for entertainment. We consider entertainment reading a time-wasting habit that should be done in moderation.
  • Most of us are self-made. 31% of us were raised in a poor home. 45% of us were raised in a middle-class home. Only 24% of us inherited a good amount of money from our parents, which contributed significantly to our being wealthy.
  • We have many good habits and few bad habits. 73% of us got our success habits from our parents. The rest of us got our success habits from mentors or the school of hard knocks.
  • We’re competitive. 63% of us played sports in high school and continued playing competitive sports as adults.
  • We’re in good health. We exercise almost every day. 76% of us exercise at least 30 minutes a day, 4 days a week. Mostly, we like to jog, run or bike. We watch what we eat every day. We don’t eat much junk food. We don’t go to fast food restaurants very often. We don’t eat candy very often. We don’t get drunk very often. We don’t do drugs. We floss every day. We sleep at least 7 hours a night. We don’t smoke.
  • We like to mentor others. We like to help others succeed in life.
  • We’re charitable with our time and money. 72% of us volunteer 5 hours or more a month at local non-profits. We also give money to these same charities. Many of us help to run local, community-based charities. That’s one of the ways we get to know other successful people within our community. Many of them are our friends and we do business with them.
  • We all have financial advisors. We bounce everything off our CPA. We also have attorneys. Many of us are Home Depot Investors – we like to pick our investments ourselves and then bounce them off our financial advisors.
  • We’re happy.
  • Same house, same wife and same car. 64% of us own modest homes. We’ve owned our home for at least 20 years. Very few of us get divorced. We drive old cars. Most of the time we buy good used cars. We hardly ever lease a car.
  • We plan our day. 81% of us keep a to-do list. Many of us also keep a to-don’t list – things we shouldn’t be wasting our time on.
  • We vote. 83% of us vote at every election.
  • We don’t spend a lot of money on vacations. 96% of us spend less than $6,000 a year on vacations. 41% of us spend less than $3,000 a year.
  • We wake up early every day. 44% of us wake up at least 3 hours before our work day actually begins.
  • Except for the saver-Investors, we’re the boss at work. 91% of the Big Company climbers, Virtuosos and Entrepreneurs are decision makers. We’re one of these: Teachers, small business owners, CEO, senior executives, CPAs, attorneys, doctors, financial advisors or salespeople.
  • We’re frugal. At least the Saver-Investors and Virtuosos among us.
  • We went to college. 68% of us went to college. 56% of us worked our way through college. 25% of us went to graduate school.
  • We’re not afraid to take risks. 63% of us took a risk in order to become rich. 27% of us failed at least once in business.
  • We work a lot. 73% of us work an average of 58 hours a week.
  • We love to pursue goals. 80% of us are focused on one major goal at any given time.
  • We don’t get mad or angry. We’ve mastered our emotions. That’s why we have so many strong relationships – people want to associate with us and do business with us.
  • We hang out with other successful people, people who pursuing success or people who are upbeat and optimistic and have something on the ball. We don’t hang out with negative people or people who complain all the time. We avoid Negative, Toxic people like the plague.
  • We hardly ever gamble. 84% of us never gamble.
  • We believe in the American Dream. Our parents instilled that in us. We are living the American Dream. We believe we are the architects of our lives. We take responsibility for creating the life we have.
  • We obey the laws. 99% of us have never been arrested.
  • Many of us built teams to help us succeed. 84% of us, other than the Saver-Investors, have a team of individuals we rely on every day.
  • We are savers. 94% of us who are Saver-Investors or Virtuosos have been saving 20% of our income from the first day we started working. All of us have retirement savings.
  • We have more than one source of income. 65% of us have 3 streams of income. 45% of us have 4 streams. 29% of us have 5 streams.
  • We don’t watch TV. 67% of us watch less than an hour of TV each day.
  • We’re optimists. We have a positive mental outlook on life. This is one of the reasons we became self-made millionaires.
  • We don’t lie, we’re honest. People trust us and therefore want to do business with us.
  • We weren’t exceptionally smart in school. 77% of us were either C students or B students in school. But we got smart after school. We self-educated ourselves. We never stopped learning our entire adult lives.

Capital One Savor Cash Rewards Credit Card Review (Formerly SavorOne) (2025.8 Update: $200+$100 Offer)

globalinvestmentstrategy.com
-
0
Capital One Savor Cash Rewards Credit Card Review (Formerly SavorOne) (2025.8 Update: $200+$100 Offer)