Key Points
- The Trump Administration is looking to end Federal ownership of student loans and revert to a private/commercial student loan lending model.
- Privatizing federal student loans may cut federal losses, but could limit access for many.
- The current Direct Loan program replaced the FFEL Program in 2010.
The Trump administration is once again weighing whether to sell off parts of the federal government’s $1.6 trillion student loan portfolio to private investors — a move that could reshape the nation’s higher education finance system and affect more than 45 million borrowers.
According to reports, senior officials at the Education Department and Treasury Department have been exploring how to offload “high-performing” federal loans to the private market. The discussions, which have allegedly involved finance industry executives and potential buyers, reflect the administration’s broader goal of shrinking the government’s role in student lending and reviving private-sector competition.
This comes after reports last year that Trump wanted the Small Business Administration to take over the student loan portfolio.
The administration is looking at whether privatization could help reduce administrative costs and improve portfolio performance. However, the move could borrower protections, including income-driven repayment options, loan forgiveness programs, and the government’s unique ability to offer flexible hardship relief.
This isn’t the first time the idea has surfaced. The Department of Education chapter in the Project 2025 document proposes reviving the old Federal Family Education Loan (FFEL) program to “privatize all lending programs, including subsidized, unsubsidized, and PLUS loans (both Grad and Parent).”
So what exactly would it mean if federal student loans were sold to private lenders and could it really happen this time? Let’s unpack the latest proposals, political motivations, and potential consequences for borrowers.
Would you like to save this?
We'll email this article to you, so you can come back to it later!
History Of The FFEL Program (Private-Federal Partnership)
Before its discontinuation on June 30, 2010, the FFEL program enabled private lenders — including banks, credit unions and other financial institutions — to make federal student loans guaranteed by the federal government. These guarantees covered defaults, with guarantee agencies stepping in to purchase defaulted loans on behalf of the U.S. Department of Education. Additionally, lenders received special allowance payments to ensure a market rate of return.
At its peak, the FFEL program disbursed $63.8 billion in new federal loans during the 2008–2009 academic year. By 2010, outstanding FFEL loans totaled $516.7 billion, spread across 25.1 million borrowers. Since the program’s discontinuation, the portfolio has steadily declined as borrowers repay, discharge, or default on loans.
Today, $165.4 billion in FFEL loans to 7.3 million borrowers remain outstanding, of which $65.8 billion to 2.4 million borrowers is still held by commercial lenders.
In comparison, the rest of the federal student loan portfolio now consists of $1.47 trillion in Direct Loans owed by 38.2 million borrowers, alongside nearly $100 billion in FFEL loans owned or managed by the government.
The Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010 shifted all new federal education loans to the William D. Ford Federal Direct Loan Program starting on July 1, 2010.
Related: Student Loan Statistics
Federal Student Loans Are Operated At A Loss
It's important to note that the U.S. Government loses money on student loans. Just this week, the latest report shows that 2026 will continue to be a loss (though, the best loss rate ever).
Currently, only Parent PLUS loans generate a net profit for the federal government based on program costs as calculated under the Federal Credit Reform Act of 1990. Even these loans operate at a loss when assessed under Fair Value Accounting standards.
As a whole, the federal student loan portfolio loses money. Several factors contribute to the overall losses:
- Below-market interest rates on federal loans.
- Loans are made without regard to a borrower’s future ability to repay the debt.
- Subsidies embedded in income-driven repayment plans, which can reduce loan obligations by as much as 63%.
- Financial impacts of the pandemic-era payment pause and interest waiver.
Claims that privatization would save money primarily stem from eliminating federal student loan forgiveness and discharge programs and from eliminating outlays from specific loan programs, not from operational efficiencies.
And a key aspect of the privatization proposal is: the only way the President could potentially move the portfolio without Congress is if the move doesn't cost taxpayers money. And it's unlikely that banks and private lenders would buy these money-losing assets without guarantees and...money.
Benefits Of Privatization
Privatizing federal student loans could offer several advantages:
Disadvantages Of Privatization
However, privatizing student loans is not without its downsides:
Practical Considerations
Congress is unlikely to approve legislation to privatize federal student loans, as such a move would not reduce the federal budget deficit. Furthermore, backlash from borrowers and advocacy groups concerned about college access, affordability and borrower protections could hinder privatization efforts.
The process itself would be administratively burdensome and could mirror the complexities seen during the restart of federal loan repayment after the pandemic.
Trending Article Right Now
Who's To Blame For The Student Loan Crisis?
- A look into the four main drivers of the student loan crisis, including the government, colleges, and borrowers.
- Ideas on how to reform and improve the existing student loan system.
How Could Privatizing The Existing Student Loan Program Work?
Privatizing student loans could involve selling the existing Direct Loan and federally-held FFEL portfolios to private lenders, while reinstating the FFEL program for new loans. However, this approach would not amount to full privatization, as loans would still operate under their existing federal terms and conditions (i.e. the loan agreement).
Most private lenders lack the appetite to take on federal loans, even with guarantees and subsidies.
When it comes to guarantees and subsidies, the government would have to be heavily involved still - covering losses for lenders for defaults, providing incentives for existing loan forgiveness programs that are mandated by Congress, and more.
Private lenders may also lack both the financial capacity and administrative capacity to acquire the loan portfolio. The FFEL portfolio, which was never more than a third the size of the current Direct Loan portfolio, was funded through a combination of incremental bond issues and securitizations through the capital markets.
If a private lender were to acquire the Direct Loan portfolio (or parts of it), it's likely they would contract with the existing loan servicers to provide borrower administration, as lenders themselves wouldn't be able to ramp up a servicing organization to handle the loan portfolio. As such, borrowers would still likely work with companies like MOHELA and Aidvantage for their student loans.
Alternatives To Privatization
If privatization proves impractical, other approaches could be considered:
This means that higher-risk borrowers might be prevented from enrolling at higher-cost colleges, since they would be unable to obtain loans to pay the cost. Instead, they might have to enroll at in-state public colleges and colleges with “no loans” financial aid policies, which tend to be less expensive.
Final Thoughts
While privatization may offer some benefits, its disadvantages and logistical challenges make it an unlikely and potentially costly solution.
Instead, targeted reforms to improve efficiency, reduce risks, and balance access with sustainability may be more practical alternatives for addressing the federal student loan system’s shortcomings.
Don't Miss These Other Stories:
Editor: Robert Farrington
Mark Kantrowitz is an expert on student financial aid, scholarships, 529 plans, and student loans. He has been quoted in more than 10,000 newspaper and magazine articles about college admissions and financial aid. Mark has written for the New York Times, Wall Street Journal, Washington Post, Reuters, USA Today, MarketWatch, Money Magazine, Forbes, Newsweek, and Time. You can find his work on Student Aid Policy here.
Mark is the author of five bestselling books about scholarships and financial aid and holds seven patents. Mark serves on the editorial board of the Journal of Student Financial Aid, the editorial advisory board of Bottom Line/Personal, and is a member of the board of trustees of the Center for Excellence in Education. He previously served as a member of the board of directors of the National Scholarship Providers Association. Mark has two Bachelor’s degrees in mathematics and philosophy from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) and a Master’s degree in computer science from Carnegie Mellon University (CMU).