Key Points
- A new federal regulation lets the U.S. Department of Education (ED) disqualify government and nonprofit employers from the Public Service Loan Forgiveness Program (PSLF) based on a finding of “substantial illegal purpose.”
- Workers in public-service jobs could lose future progress toward loan forgiveness if their employer is deemed ineligible.
- At least three lawsuits — filed by states, unions, and nonprofit coalitions — seek to block the rule before it takes effect in 2026.
For nearly two decades, the Public Service Loan Forgiveness Program has offered a straightforward promise: make 120 qualifying payments while working full-time for a government agency or a 501(c)(3) nonprofit, and any remaining federal student loan balance will be forgiven. The idea helped schools, hospitals, local governments, and nonprofits recruit workers who might otherwise avoid lower-paying public-service roles.
That certainty shifted when the Education Department finalized a regulation allowing the Secretary to declare an employer ineligible if it “has a substantial illegal purpose.” Though the Department says the rule targets organizations that knowingly engage in conduct that violates federal or state law, the standard is broad, unclear, and open to interpretation.
The rule is currently scheduled to take effect July 1, 2026. Borrowers don't have anything they can do to prepare - except to watch and wait...
Would you like to save this?
We'll email this article to you, so you can come back to it later!
How Workers Could Lose Loan Forgiveness Eligibility
The introduction of employer-based disqualification raises risks that were not associated with PSLF in the past. Here are the main ways the rule could interrupt or eliminate a borrower’s path to forgiveness.
1. Loss of qualifying-employer status
If a nonprofit or government agency is found to have a “substantial illegal purpose,” the Secretary could strip its eligibility. That means all current employees would immediately lose access to PSLF unless they move to another qualifying employer.
2. Payments may stop counting
Workers who believed they were eight or nine years into their 10-year track could learn that their payments no longer qualify going forward. The change could add years of repayment and increase total interest paid.
3. Uncertainty for employers with sensitive missions
Organizations engaged in immigration services, youth health programs, or certain civil rights work have raised concerns about how the rule could be interpreted - politically. The lack of clear thresholds for what counts as “substantial” heightens the anxiety.
4. Borrowers may hesitate to accept public service roles
Recruitment could weaken in jobs that are already difficult to staff — child-welfare agencies, public schools, legal aid offices, rural clinics, and municipal agencies that rely on the PSLF incentive to attract workers with advanced degrees.
5. Borrowers must now monitor employer risk
PSLF has always required documentation of employment. What’s new is that previously eligible employers could be blocked from eligibility. Borrowers need to pay attention if there is a change in their employer's status.
Lawsuits Challenging The Rule
Major lawsuits are already underway:
- A coalition of states led by attorneys general in New York and Massachusetts argues the Department exceeded its authority and introduced an arbitrary standard that could strip workers of a benefit promised by Congress.
- A coalition of cities and partner groups say the rule places nonprofits under an undefined and unpredictable test that could punish lawful public service work.
The plaintiffs are seeking injunctions that could delay or block implementation before 2026. For now, the rule remains on the books.
What Public Service Workers Can Do Now
Nothing... there's nothing that an individual worker can do now (nor should any worker change their plans yet).
The rule does NOT allow workers to challenge employer determinations - only the employers can appeal.
Furthermore, nothing can change retroactively - so workers at public service employers should just continue unless there is a determination against your employer. The Department of Education said that less than 10 employers should be impacted annually.
But the fact is, the rule introduces a layer of unpredictability that borrowers have never experienced with PSLF. Households that built budgets around eventual loan cancellation may have to revisit long-term plans, especially if an employer is involved in any legal or regulatory dispute.
Borrowers nearing forgiveness have the most at stake: losing qualifying-employer status late in the process could shift repayment timelines or require getting a new job.
Don't Miss These Other Stories:
Editor: Colin Graves
Robert Farrington is the founder of The College Investor and is widely recognized as one of the nation’s leading voices on student loan debt and saving for college. He holds an MBA from UC San Diego Rady School of Management and has spent over 15 years researching, writing, and advising on student loans, 529 plans, financial aid programs, and saving and investing for young professionals.
Robert has been featured in the The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, The Washington Post, NBC News, and Forbes, where he has been a regular personal finance contributor for over a decade. His work combines both professional expertise and personal experience – he successfully navigated his own student loan repayment journey and has helped thousands of readers do the same.
He is committed to making the intersection of personal finance and education transparent and accessible. You can learn more about Robert on the About Page or on his personal site RobertFarrington.com.