Blogs
A new measure proposed by Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) calls for employers to help fund higher education through so-called income share agreements.
Under these agreements, as discussed in The Investing in Student Success Act, the employer would fund someone’s education in exchange for a percentage of the employee’s income for a set period of time after graduation.
It all stems from an idea put forth by the economist Milton Friedman about 60 years ago – at a time when jobs were plentiful, industrial expansion was in full swing, and the world was a happy place. The idea was for investors to give students money for school in exchange for a percentage of their income for a set period of time after graduation.
Such income share agreements have long been used by employers who send their employees to graduate school in exchange for repayment through a defined period of post-degree employment. Friends of mine who work for some of the largest corporations in the nation count it as a perk of the job, and get their MBA on the company’s dime.
But for undergraduate work? I don’t see it happening for a few reasons.
An undergraduate takes at least four years to complete, with many college students taking longer to get their diploma. During that time the student goes from major to major, trying various courses of study before settling on a single (or dual) major.
Finding an employer to take a risk on an 18 year-old with no clue as to what they want to do for the rest of his or her professional life would likely be difficult if not impossible in all but a few situations. Those who do engage in such education funding would likely be large companies that demand a specific skill set.
Think science, engineering and accounting. Forget about the English and political science majors – I don’t see a major employer going out of pocket for those kids.
Smaller employers wouldn’t likely have the deep pockets to fund the best and brightest, nor would they risk their money on students who don’t pursue a course of study that results in anything but an immediately marketable skill.
Anyone else will be left to fend for themselves.
Kids with lower grades in high school or on standardized tests, those who choose to pursue careers in arts or humanities, and students with an eye towards working with a small company or (heaven forbid!) going into business on their own will find themselves at the mercy of the student loan lenders.
Those lenders, understanding that the overall risk of default is higher when you’re dealing solely with those who do not have a job lined up four years ahead of schedule, will increase the rates they charge for student loans.
That will serve to increase the payments on student loans for those who have them.
This seems to be exactly what Washington is looking to accomplish. It’s presumed that investors would vary the percentage of income they are asking for depending on the school and major chosen. Students would thereby be given a signal that a particular school or course of study is deemed more worthy by an employer, and would alert those students about the fields in demand.
What school would continue to offer English as a major, knowing that deep pocketed employers would never cover the cost of the program?
How would lesser schools and community colleges, places where those not at the top of the class go for an education (and, potentially, transfers to better schools down the road), remain in business?
On its face, The Investing in Student Success Act is a clever idea. But dig just a little bit and you’ll see it for what it is. Nothing more than a way to increase the chasm between the haves and the have nots.
For more about The Investing In Student Success Act of 2014, check out these articles:
- Because You’re Worth It: Afraid of student-loan debt? Sell stock in yourself instead.
- Republican Rubio offers bill on new education financing vehicles
- A vision for reforming student loans
(305) 891-4055 - 25 Years of Experience, Over 8,000 Cases Filed - Free Initial Consultation - 1221 Brickell Ave., Miami, Florida - Chapter 13 and 7 Bankruptcy - Miami Bankruptcy Lawyer - www.bublicklaw.com
Tenancy By Entireties Exemption in Florida
The Bankruptcy Code provides in section 522(b)(3)(B) in general for the exemption of property held as a tenant by the entirety or joint tenant to the extent that it is exempt from process under state law. Tenancy by the entireties is certain property held between a husband and a wife.
Property held in a tenancy by the entireties is generally exempt from the claim of individual creditors under Florida common law but is not exempt to the extent of joint debts of both spouses or to the extent of a fraudulent conveyance into the property. Havoco of America, Ltd. v. Hill, 197 F.3d 1135 (11th Cir. 1999).
Under Florida law, property held by a husband and wife as tenants by the entireties belongs to neither individual spouse, but to a separate entity referred to as the "unity" or "the marriage." Florida law recognizes that entireties estates can exist in both real and personal property. Property held as tenancy by the entireties generally possesses six characteristics: 1. unity of joint ownership and control (unity of possession), 2. unity of interest, 3. the interests must have originated in the same instrument (unity of title), 4. the interests must have commenced simultaneously (unity of time) 5. survivorship, and 6. the parties must be married at the time they took joint title (unity of marriage).
Florida law provides that real property held by a husband and wife in joint names is held in a tenancy by the entireties absent some express indication to the contrary. Beal Bank, SSB v. Almand and Associates, 780 So. 2d 45 (Fla. 2001). Florida law also provides a presumption that a bank account titled in the names of both spouses is held as a tenancy by the entireties as long as the unities of possession, interest, title, and time are met. Various court decisions extend the presumption in favor of a tenancy by the entireties to personal property in various manners. Some courts extend the presumption to all personal property.
The Court in In re Kossow, Case No. 03-27115-BKC-PGH (S.D. Fla. 2007)(Hyman, J.) allowed the tenancy by the entireties exemption of certain household furnishings acquired during the marriage as there was no evidence to rebut the presumption. The Court also allowed the tenancy by the entireties exemption of other household furnished acquired prior to the marriage as it found that it was subsequently assigned to the marriage. The Court further found the joint federal income tax refund as exempt tenancy by the entireties property.
The case of In re Schwarz, III, Case No. 06-13348-BKC-JKO (S.D. Fla. 2006)(Olson, J.) illustrates that a debtor may be able to exempt property held as tenants by the the entireties even though he is required to claim another state's exemptions and not able to utilize the Florida homestead exemption.(305) 891-4055 - Jordan E. Bublick is a Miami Bankruptcy Lawyer with over 25 years of experience in filing Chapter 13 and Chapter 7 Bankrkuptcy Cases and Mortgage Modifications
(305) 891-4055 - 25 Years of Experience, Over 8,000 Cases Filed - Free Initial Consultation - 1221 Brickell Ave., Miami, Florida - Chapter 13 and 7 Bankruptcy - Miami Bankruptcy Lawyer - www.bublicklaw.com
Tenancy By Entireties Exemption in Florida
The Bankruptcy Code provides in section 522(b)(3)(B) in general for the exemption of property held as a tenant by the entirety or joint tenant to the extent that it is exempt from process under state law. Tenancy by the entireties is certain property held between a husband and a wife.
.jpg)
Property held in a tenancy by the entireties is generally exempt from the claim of individual creditors under Florida common law but is not exempt to the extent of joint debts of both spouses or to the extent of a fraudulent conveyance into the property. Havoco of America, Ltd. v. Hill, 197 F.3d 1135 (11th Cir. 1999).
Under Florida law, property held by a husband and wife as tenants by the entireties belongs to neither individual spouse, but to a separate entity referred to as the "unity" or "the marriage." Florida law recognizes that entireties estates can exist in both real and personal property. Property held as tenancy by the entireties generally possesses six characteristics: 1. unity of joint ownership and control (unity of possession), 2. unity of interest, 3. the interests must have originated in the same instrument (unity of title), 4. the interests must have commenced simultaneously (unity of time) 5. survivorship, and 6. the parties must be married at the time they took joint title (unity of marriage).
Florida law provides that real property held by a husband and wife in joint names is held in a tenancy by the entireties absent some express indication to the contrary. Beal Bank, SSB v. Almand and Associates, 780 So. 2d 45 (Fla. 2001). Florida law also provides a presumption that a bank account titled in the names of both spouses is held as a tenancy by the entireties as long as the unities of possession, interest, title, and time are met. Various court decisions extend the presumption in favor of a tenancy by the entireties to personal property in various manners. Some courts extend the presumption to all personal property.
The Court in In re Kossow, Case No. 03-27115-BKC-PGH (S.D. Fla. 2007)(Hyman, J.) allowed the tenancy by the entireties exemption of certain household furnishings acquired during the marriage as there was no evidence to rebut the presumption. The Court also allowed the tenancy by the entireties exemption of other household furnished acquired prior to the marriage as it found that it was subsequently assigned to the marriage. The Court further found the joint federal income tax refund as exempt tenancy by the entireties property.
The case of In re Schwarz, III, Case No. 06-13348-BKC-JKO (S.D. Fla. 2006)(Olson, J.) illustrates that a debtor may be able to exempt property held as tenants by the the entireties even though he is required to claim another state's exemptions and not able to utilize the Florida homestead exemption.Jordan E. Bublick is a Miami Bankruptcy Lawyer with over 25 years of experience in filing Chapter 13 and Chapter 7 Bankruptcy Cases and Mortgage Modifications (305) 891-4055
A former commercial real estate agent and businessman who pled guilty in 2012 to various federal charges was recently sentenced in court. Michael Wayne Harding, 59, of Keswick, Virginia pled guilty to one count each of bankruptcy fraud and wire fraud after waving his right to an indictment. Harding will complete 30 months in federal […]
A former commercial real estate agent and businessman who pled guilty in 2012 to various federal charges was recently sentenced in court. Michael Wayne Harding, 59, of Keswick, Virginia pled guilty to one count each of bankruptcy fraud and wire fraud after waving his right to an indictment. Harding will complete 30 months in federal... Read more »
The post Virginia Man Sentenced 30 Months in Prison for Wire and Bankruptcy Fraud Charges appeared first on AllmandLaw.
A filing fee needs to be paid to the Clerk of the Bankruptcy Court when a bankruptcy case is filed. The Judicial Conference of the United States Court announced that effective June 1, 2014, the filing fees for filing a bankruptcy will go up slightly. The new filing fee for a chapter 13 case rise from $281.00 to $310.00 and the filing fee for a chapter 7 case will rise from $306.00 to $335.00.
(305) 891-4055 - Jordan E. Bublick is a Miami Bankruptcy Lawyer with over 25 years of experience in filing Chapter 13 and Chapter 7 Bankrkuptcy Cases.
A filing fee needs to be paid to the Clerk of the Bankruptcy Court when a bankruptcy case is filed. The Judicial Conference of the United States Court announced that effective June 1, 2014, the filing fees for filing a bankruptcy will go up slightly. The new filing fee for a chapter 13 case rise from $281.00 to $310.00 and the filing fee for a chapter 7 case will rise from $306.00 to $335.00.
Jordan E. Bublick is a Miami Bankruptcy Lawyer with over 25 years of experience in filing Chapter 13 and Chapter 7 Bankruptcy Cases and Mortgage Modifications (305) 891-4055
Bringing you the most up-to-date news, tips and blogs throughout the web. Here’s your Bankruptcy Update for April 15th, 2014 Apollo’s Momentive Performance Files for Bankruptcy Brass Instrument Maker S.E. Shires Files for Bankruptcy Mt. Gox founder won’t appear in U.S. for questions about bankruptcy case
Women’s clothing retailer Coldwater Creek has filed for bankruptcy. The business, originally known as a catalog business 30 years ago, recently filed Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection in Delaware. Coldwater had over 300 store locations in operation but cited declining sales and the downturn of the economy. At one point, the company had revenue peaking at […]
If you’re behind on your private student loans, being sued may be the best thing to happen to you.
The client called in a panic, looking for a lawyer to defend a student loan lawsuit that she’d received the previous evening. $78,000 due as a result of a failed attempt to get through graduate school, the amount was laughable for someone barely making ends meet in Los Angeles.
She needed help, and fast. Her anxiety and fear was palpable.
By the end of our consultation, the client was grinning ear to ear.
A Student Loan Lawsuit Is Not A Judgment
Most people who are being sued don’t understand that when a lender – student loan or otherwise – sues you, that’s merely the beginning of the process. The lender wins only if you do nothing, in which case they take a default judgment against you.
Defend the case, however, and you force the student loan folks to prove every single shred of their case before they have a chance of winning. That includes answering the following questions:
- Does the entity suing you actually own the loan?
- Is the loan legally collectible, or has it been rendered unenforceable due to the expiration of the statute of limitations?
- Is the amount claimed to be due correct?
A Student Loan Lawsuit Makes It Easier To Negotiate
If you owe money for a student loan debt, you’re getting calls and letters from debt collectors. Most of the time, those debt collectors are hired by the servicer of the loan as opposed to the entity that owns the debt.
Even in the rare situation involving a debt collector hired directly by the owner of the loan, the debt collector doesn’t have much authority with respect to negotiating a settlement or payment plan.
Once a lawsuit is filed, however, a lawyer is involved. The lawyer’s got a more direct line to the student loan lender, and a greater ability to work out an agreement with respect to paying off the loan.
The Worst Case Scenario May Be Better Than You Realize
If you don’t defend the lawsuit – or if you defend the case and lose – you’ll be subject to a judgment. The student loan creditor can take a portion of your wages by way of enforcement of the judgment.
That’s bad, right? Not necessarily.
Under California wage garnishment law, for example, a judgment creditor can take the lesser of your earnings above 40 times the state minimum wage, or 25% of your after-tax wages. That means if you don’t earn much, you may end up paying very little to your student loan. The judgment accrues interest at 10% per year, but is valid for only 10 years. Once the judgment expires, you’re no longer liable for the remaining balance.
Compare that with the crushing monthly payment the lender is demanding from you. If the garnishment amount is lower than the amount being demanded, then the judgment may not be such a bad thing after all.
Be sure to review your state’s wage garnishment laws before you make the decision to let the student loan lawsuit go to judgment.
No Fear!
If you get served with a student loan lawsuit, it’s not the end of the world. Whether you find a student loan lawyer with white knowledge or fight the case on your own, remember that you’ve got options.
The key is to take action quickly, and understand the process from all angles.
Updated daily, this blog will keep you informed on the latest bankruptcy news! 
Learn more about how Bankruptcy works and what you need to know.