解决学生债务还是加剧危机?收入分成协议和公平借贷风险

IF 1.2 Q1 LAW
Stephen Hayes, A. Milton
{"title":"解决学生债务还是加剧危机?收入分成协议和公平借贷风险","authors":"Stephen Hayes, A. Milton","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3661698","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Income Share Agreements (ISAs) have been touted as a solution to the recent staggering increases in student debt. That debt crisis is a civil rights crisis. On average, Black Americans have more student debt, which they face against a backdrop of stark disparities in wealth, income, and related metrics. Although the U.S. is desperately in need of solutions for the student debt crisis — and the accompanying racial and ethnic disparities — features of existing ISAs threaten to exacerbate, not mitigate, inequalities. <br><br>ISAs are essentially educational loans that students agree to pay back using a percentage of their future income. ISAs come in a variety of forms — including differences in terms and conditions, the parties offering them, and the quality and types of educational programs funded. In the abstract, these arrangements could be an interesting alternative to the existing student loan regime. However, while existing programs are not equal in terms of benefits and risks, there is evidence that some variations of ISAs are being used to further new iterations of a classic American tragedy: targeting minority communities for exploitative and predatory products. And even in the more benign forms of ISAs, some features used to set terms and conditions — such as school- or major-based distinctions — risk unnecessarily perpetuating disparities adverse to historically underserved groups. <br><br>This article assesses ISAs under core anti-discrimination frameworks such as traditional disparate treatment and impact, as well as reverse redlining. Although this article focuses on the Equal Credit Opportunity Act (ECOA) — the primary federal statute prohibiting discrimination in credit transactions — it also highlights other anti-discrimination statutes that may apply to ISAs, including state and local fair lending and public accommodations laws.","PeriodicalId":42250,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Discrimination and the Law","volume":"74 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2020-07-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Solving Student Debt or Compounding the Crisis? Income Share Agreements and Fair Lending Risks\",\"authors\":\"Stephen Hayes, A. Milton\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/ssrn.3661698\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Income Share Agreements (ISAs) have been touted as a solution to the recent staggering increases in student debt. That debt crisis is a civil rights crisis. On average, Black Americans have more student debt, which they face against a backdrop of stark disparities in wealth, income, and related metrics. Although the U.S. is desperately in need of solutions for the student debt crisis — and the accompanying racial and ethnic disparities — features of existing ISAs threaten to exacerbate, not mitigate, inequalities. <br><br>ISAs are essentially educational loans that students agree to pay back using a percentage of their future income. ISAs come in a variety of forms — including differences in terms and conditions, the parties offering them, and the quality and types of educational programs funded. In the abstract, these arrangements could be an interesting alternative to the existing student loan regime. However, while existing programs are not equal in terms of benefits and risks, there is evidence that some variations of ISAs are being used to further new iterations of a classic American tragedy: targeting minority communities for exploitative and predatory products. And even in the more benign forms of ISAs, some features used to set terms and conditions — such as school- or major-based distinctions — risk unnecessarily perpetuating disparities adverse to historically underserved groups. <br><br>This article assesses ISAs under core anti-discrimination frameworks such as traditional disparate treatment and impact, as well as reverse redlining. Although this article focuses on the Equal Credit Opportunity Act (ECOA) — the primary federal statute prohibiting discrimination in credit transactions — it also highlights other anti-discrimination statutes that may apply to ISAs, including state and local fair lending and public accommodations laws.\",\"PeriodicalId\":42250,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Discrimination and the Law\",\"volume\":\"74 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-07-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Discrimination and the Law\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3661698\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Discrimination and the Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3661698","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

收入分成协议(ISAs)被吹捧为最近学生债务惊人增长的解决方案。这场债务危机是一场民权危机。平均而言,美国黑人的学生债务更多,而他们面临的背景是财富、收入和相关指标的明显差异。尽管美国迫切需要解决学生债务危机,以及随之而来的种族和民族差异,但现有isa的特点可能会加剧,而不是缓解不平等。isa本质上是教育贷款,学生同意用未来收入的一定比例来偿还。isa有多种形式,包括条款和条件的差异,提供isa的各方,以及所资助的教育项目的质量和类型。抽象地说,这些安排可能是现有学生贷款制度的一个有趣的替代方案。然而,尽管现有的项目在收益和风险方面并不平等,但有证据表明,isa的一些变体正被用来进一步重复一个经典的美国悲剧:针对少数民族社区提供剥削和掠夺性产品。即使在较为良性的isa形式中,一些用于设定条款和条件的特征——比如基于学校或专业的区分——也有可能导致对历史上服务不足的群体不利的不必要的持续差异。本文评估了核心反歧视框架下的isa,如传统的差别待遇和影响,以及反向红线。虽然本文的重点是《平等信贷机会法》(ECOA)——禁止信贷交易中歧视的主要联邦法规——但它也强调了可能适用于isa的其他反歧视法规,包括州和地方公平贷款法和公共设施法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Solving Student Debt or Compounding the Crisis? Income Share Agreements and Fair Lending Risks
Income Share Agreements (ISAs) have been touted as a solution to the recent staggering increases in student debt. That debt crisis is a civil rights crisis. On average, Black Americans have more student debt, which they face against a backdrop of stark disparities in wealth, income, and related metrics. Although the U.S. is desperately in need of solutions for the student debt crisis — and the accompanying racial and ethnic disparities — features of existing ISAs threaten to exacerbate, not mitigate, inequalities.

ISAs are essentially educational loans that students agree to pay back using a percentage of their future income. ISAs come in a variety of forms — including differences in terms and conditions, the parties offering them, and the quality and types of educational programs funded. In the abstract, these arrangements could be an interesting alternative to the existing student loan regime. However, while existing programs are not equal in terms of benefits and risks, there is evidence that some variations of ISAs are being used to further new iterations of a classic American tragedy: targeting minority communities for exploitative and predatory products. And even in the more benign forms of ISAs, some features used to set terms and conditions — such as school- or major-based distinctions — risk unnecessarily perpetuating disparities adverse to historically underserved groups.

This article assesses ISAs under core anti-discrimination frameworks such as traditional disparate treatment and impact, as well as reverse redlining. Although this article focuses on the Equal Credit Opportunity Act (ECOA) — the primary federal statute prohibiting discrimination in credit transactions — it also highlights other anti-discrimination statutes that may apply to ISAs, including state and local fair lending and public accommodations laws.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
23
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信