- The Senate student loan bill removes language that allowed married borrowers to exclude a spouse’s income from repayment calculations.
- This change applies to the new Repayment Assistance Plan (RAP), but not to the old IBR plan.
- The change conflicts with GOP messaging about supporting families and reducing financial strain on parents.
In its latest draft of student loan reform, the Senate has revived a familiar issue for married student loan borrowers: the marriage penalty.
The proposed change would apply to the new income-driven Repayment Assistance Plan (RAP) created under the Big Beautiful Bill. It would require the use of combined household income when calculating monthly payments, regardless of whether borrowers file their taxes jointly or separately. This eliminates the option for married borrowers to file separately and exclude their spouse’s income, a feature that would still be available under the older Income-Based Repayment (IBR) plan.
While the Senate plan offers higher student loan caps and more funding for Pell Grants than the House version, this shift has drawn concern from borrowers. It’s hard to miss the contradiction between the bill’s overall theme, strengthening American families, and the financial penalties it introduces for those who are married.
What The Senate Bill Changes
The House version of the bill had included language allowing married borrowers who file separately to use only their own income to determine payments under RAP. That exemption is now gone.
Here is the House version of the definition of Adjusted Gross Income previously said (emphasis added):
ADJUSTED GROSS INCOME.—The term ‘adjusted gross income’, when used with respect to a borrower, means the adjusted gross income (as such term is defined in section 625 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986) of the borrower (and the borrower’s spouse, as applicable) for the most recent taxable year, except that, in the case of a married borrower who files a separate Federal income tax return, the term does not include the adjusted gross income of the borrower’s spouse.
The current Senate draft refers to adjusted gross income (AGI) “of the borrower (and the borrower’s spouse, as applicable),” and omits the carveout for married-filing-separately (MFS) households. This signals a deliberate policy choice to include spousal income in all RAP monthly payment calculations, just as the older REPAYE plan did.
The result: married borrowers could face significantly larger monthly payments than unmarried peers earning the same amount.
The contrast is even more stark for borrowers who file separately to manage finances independently from a spouse, such as in blended families or situations involving financial abuse. Under this bill, that option no longer helps.
By contrast, the existing IBR plan, established by the Higher Education Act, includes a provision stating that for borrowers filing separately, only their own AGI will be used to determine payments. That rule remains unchanged, but it applies only to those with loans issued before July 1, 2026, or who qualify under the amended IBR framework.
Implications For Families
The policy shift could significantly increase repayment burdens for newly married borrowers or those whose spouses have moderate to high earnings.
Take, for example, a public school teacher earning $48,000 with $55,000 in student debt. Under the current rules, they might file separately to lower their monthly payment. Under the new RAP Plan, this person would have a monthly payment of $160 per month.
But under the proposed RAP rules, if their spouse earns $80,000, the household AGI would push their monthly payment far higher. Using the combined AGI of $128,000, that same borrower would have a student loan payment of $1,066.67 per month. Almost 10x higher.
And there’s no way for the borrowers to separate their income to prevent this.
The irony is that these changes come at a time when both parties are focused on making family life more affordable. Republican leaders have proposed tax credits for new parents, baby bonuses to encourage having children, and more. But purposely creating a repayment plan that makes repaying student loans more expensive for married borrowers runs counter to all these plans.
Why The Change Matters
The new rules don’t just affect how much married borrowers pay, they affect which repayment plans are viable.
Under the bill, the old income-driven repayment plans are being phased out. RAP becomes the only income-driven repayment plan option for new loans issued after July 1, 2026. That means future borrowers will have no alternative plan that allows them to file separately and exclude spousal income.
The Senate’s removal of the MFS exemption appears intentional. If the lawmakers had wanted to allow the option, they could have kept the House’s wording.
What Happens Next
Since the House and Senate version of the bill don’t match, neither the House or Senate version are final. The different houses of Congress will have to negotiate to resolve the differences before a final version can be created and signed into law.
With that in mind, this proposal may change before the final passage.
The revived marriage penalty contradicts several other Republican-backed policies intended to ease financial burdens on families. And it adds tension to the political narrative that marriage and family should be supported (not penalized) by federal policy.
For student loan borrowers with existing student loans, migrating to the amended IBR program still allows MFS. However, for new student loan borrowers starting college in the fall of 2026, this is a big potential problem.
Don’t Miss These Other Stories: