Should We Defuse the 'Tax Bomb' Facing Lawyers Who Are Enrolled in Income-Based Student Loan Repayment Plans?

G. Crespi
{"title":"Should We Defuse the 'Tax Bomb' Facing Lawyers Who Are Enrolled in Income-Based Student Loan Repayment Plans?","authors":"G. Crespi","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.2615561","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Starting in 2033 first thousands and then later tens of thousands of mid-career lawyers who have previously incurred large student loan debts, and who unfortunately have been able to earn only relatively modest annual incomes in the 20 or 25 years following their law school graduation, will be subject each year to large cancellation of indebtedness-based federal and sometimes also state income tax obligations. These obligations will result because a large portion of the substantial student loan debts that have been incurred by many law school graduates will eventually be forgiven under one or another variant of the increasingly popular federal Income-Based Repayment Plan (“IBR Plan”) in which those persons have enrolled after their graduation, and those forgiven debts will then be treated under the Internal Revenue Code as taxable income. These tax bills will often be in the neighborhood of $50,000 to $100,000 or even larger for those lawyers that have enrolled in the recently implemented Pay As You Earn Plan (“PAYE Plan”) version of the IBR Plan, and in the neighborhood of $15,000 to $25,000 for those lawyers who have enrolled in the earlier-established “old IBR” version of the IBR Plan. Many of these lawyers will have failed to adequately provide for this large tax obligation and will find that it will impair or even devastate their retirement plans.The phrase “tax bomb” is an apt one to describe this large tax obligation that will be imposed on income that is attributed to but not actually received by a relatively small group of taxpayers. This article explains how this tax bomb was created and how the various statutes and regulations that define its scope and size have evolved over time from the original 2009 implementation of the IBR Plan up through the Department of Education’s proposed new Revised Pay as You Earn Plan (“REPAYE Plan”) rules that will be in force as of December of 2015. It then offers detailed illustrative calculations regarding its magnitude for both PAYE Plan and old IBR Plan law graduate enrollees, both for typical individual enrollees and in the aggregate. Based on the limited available Department of Education statistics I have estimated that the number of law graduates who will enroll in one or another of these Plans in 2015 and each year after that will be approximately equal in size to 50% of that year’s law school graduating class. Under the further assumption that Plan law graduate enrollees will experience average annual growth in their “real” incomes in the decades after their Plan enrollment of 2%/year, my estimate is that the aggregate impact of the tax bomb on lawyers alone will start at about $115 million in 2033 as it first impacts only about 1,650 lawyers in that year, but then the impact will grow rapidly to over $700 million per year by 2037 as it begins to affect tens of thousands of lawyers annually, and the size of the tax burden imposed will level off at about $1.2 billion/year indefinitely by 2040. Its impact will be even larger than this, perhaps significantly so, if the comparable and generally much smaller individual tax obligations that will be imposed on some medical school graduates Plan enrollees, and on some other graduate and professional school Plan enrollees, and on some of the many Plan enrollees who have borrowed only smaller sums for their undergraduate studies, are also considered. Finally, the article discusses whether measures should be taken to mitigate or even eliminate this tax bomb before these obligations begin coming due in 2033. I have concluded that no such measures are justified except for a minor amendment to the Internal Revenue Code allowing persons to pay their tax liabilities on forgiven student loan debt over a period of several years. However, I also discuss several other alternative measures that might be taken to reduce the tax bomb’s consequences, including the amendment of the Internal Revenue Code to abolish these consequences altogether.","PeriodicalId":345887,"journal":{"name":"Southern Methodist University Dedman School of Law Legal Studies Research Paper Series","volume":"29 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-05-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Southern Methodist University Dedman School of Law Legal Studies Research Paper Series","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2615561","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Starting in 2033 first thousands and then later tens of thousands of mid-career lawyers who have previously incurred large student loan debts, and who unfortunately have been able to earn only relatively modest annual incomes in the 20 or 25 years following their law school graduation, will be subject each year to large cancellation of indebtedness-based federal and sometimes also state income tax obligations. These obligations will result because a large portion of the substantial student loan debts that have been incurred by many law school graduates will eventually be forgiven under one or another variant of the increasingly popular federal Income-Based Repayment Plan (“IBR Plan”) in which those persons have enrolled after their graduation, and those forgiven debts will then be treated under the Internal Revenue Code as taxable income. These tax bills will often be in the neighborhood of $50,000 to $100,000 or even larger for those lawyers that have enrolled in the recently implemented Pay As You Earn Plan (“PAYE Plan”) version of the IBR Plan, and in the neighborhood of $15,000 to $25,000 for those lawyers who have enrolled in the earlier-established “old IBR” version of the IBR Plan. Many of these lawyers will have failed to adequately provide for this large tax obligation and will find that it will impair or even devastate their retirement plans.The phrase “tax bomb” is an apt one to describe this large tax obligation that will be imposed on income that is attributed to but not actually received by a relatively small group of taxpayers. This article explains how this tax bomb was created and how the various statutes and regulations that define its scope and size have evolved over time from the original 2009 implementation of the IBR Plan up through the Department of Education’s proposed new Revised Pay as You Earn Plan (“REPAYE Plan”) rules that will be in force as of December of 2015. It then offers detailed illustrative calculations regarding its magnitude for both PAYE Plan and old IBR Plan law graduate enrollees, both for typical individual enrollees and in the aggregate. Based on the limited available Department of Education statistics I have estimated that the number of law graduates who will enroll in one or another of these Plans in 2015 and each year after that will be approximately equal in size to 50% of that year’s law school graduating class. Under the further assumption that Plan law graduate enrollees will experience average annual growth in their “real” incomes in the decades after their Plan enrollment of 2%/year, my estimate is that the aggregate impact of the tax bomb on lawyers alone will start at about $115 million in 2033 as it first impacts only about 1,650 lawyers in that year, but then the impact will grow rapidly to over $700 million per year by 2037 as it begins to affect tens of thousands of lawyers annually, and the size of the tax burden imposed will level off at about $1.2 billion/year indefinitely by 2040. Its impact will be even larger than this, perhaps significantly so, if the comparable and generally much smaller individual tax obligations that will be imposed on some medical school graduates Plan enrollees, and on some other graduate and professional school Plan enrollees, and on some of the many Plan enrollees who have borrowed only smaller sums for their undergraduate studies, are also considered. Finally, the article discusses whether measures should be taken to mitigate or even eliminate this tax bomb before these obligations begin coming due in 2033. I have concluded that no such measures are justified except for a minor amendment to the Internal Revenue Code allowing persons to pay their tax liabilities on forgiven student loan debt over a period of several years. However, I also discuss several other alternative measures that might be taken to reduce the tax bomb’s consequences, including the amendment of the Internal Revenue Code to abolish these consequences altogether.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
我们是否应该化解那些参加以收入为基础的学生贷款偿还计划的律师面临的“税收炸弹”?
从2033年开始,成千上万名职业生涯处于中期的律师,他们之前背负了巨额的学生贷款债务,不幸的是,他们在法学院毕业后的20或25年里只能获得相对适度的年收入,他们每年都将面临巨额债务减免,联邦政府有时还会减免州所得税。这些义务将会产生,因为许多法学院毕业生所产生的大量学生贷款债务的很大一部分最终将在越来越受欢迎的联邦基于收入的还款计划(“IBR计划”)的一种或另一种变体下被免除,这些人在毕业后注册,这些被免除的债务将根据《国内税收法》被视为应纳税收入。对于那些参加了最近实施的IBR计划的即赚即付计划(“PAYE计划”)版本的律师来说,这些税款通常在5万到10万美元之间,甚至更多,对于那些参加了早期建立的IBR计划的“旧IBR”版本的律师来说,这些税款通常在1.5万到2.5万美元之间。这些律师中的许多人将无法为这笔巨额的纳税义务提供足够的资金,并将发现这将损害甚至摧毁他们的退休计划。“税收炸弹”(tax bomb)这个词用来形容这种巨额的税收义务再合适不过了。这种税收义务将被强加给归属于但实际上并没有被一小部分纳税人获得的收入。本文解释了税收炸弹是如何产生的,以及定义其范围和规模的各种法规和法规是如何随着时间的推移而演变的,从最初的2009年IBR计划实施到教育部提出的新修订的按收入支付计划(“REPAYE计划”)规则,该规则将于2015年12月生效。然后,它提供了详细的说明性计算,关于PAYE计划和旧IBR计划的法律毕业生的规模,包括典型的个人和总体。根据教育部有限的可用统计数据,我估计2015年和之后每年参加这些计划的法律毕业生的数量将大约等于当年法学院毕业班的50%。根据进一步假设计划法律研究生新生将经历在他们的“真正的”收入年均增长率计划招收2% /年之后的几十年里,我的估计是,税收炸弹的总影响律师单独将开始在2033年约1.15亿美元,因为它首先影响当年只有1650名律师,但后来影响将快速增长,到2037年每年超过7亿美元,因为它开始影响每年数以万计的律师,到2040年,税收负担的规模将无限期地稳定在每年12亿美元左右。如果还考虑到一些医学院毕业生、一些其他研究生和专业学校计划的参与者,以及一些为本科学习借入较小金额的许多计划的参与者所承担的可比较的、通常要小得多的个人纳税义务,那么它的影响将比这更大,也许是显著的。最后,本文讨论了是否应该在2033年这些义务开始到期之前采取措施减轻甚至消除这一税收炸弹。我的结论是,除了对《国内税收法》进行轻微修订,允许人们在几年的时间内支付已免除的学生贷款债务的纳税义务外,没有任何此类措施是合理的。然而,我也讨论了其他几种可能采取的替代措施,以减少税收炸弹的后果,包括修改国内税收法,以完全废除这些后果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Multiple Contracts or One Contract? The ‘Reverse Divisibility’ and ‘Subsequent Modification’ Arguments for Expanding the Scope of Justified Non-Performance After Breach The Obama Administration's New 'REPAYE' Plan for Student Loan Borrowers: Not Much Help for Law School Graduates Should We Defuse the 'Tax Bomb' Facing Lawyers Who Are Enrolled in Income-Based Student Loan Repayment Plans? Taxing the Cloud Pleading Securities Fraud Claims - Only Part of the Story
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1