I am not a lawyer, nor do I play one on TV. But I’ve always had the impression that student-loan debt was right up there with murder, in that there is no statute of limitations. Anyone know for sure what the word on that is?
Correct me if I’m wrong, but I’m guessing your friend also didn’t work his way through undergrad, take out the minimum amount of loans to survive, live 4 people in a tiny budget two bedroom apartment, not have a car, become a vegetarian for financial reasons, etc?
Or did your friend have nice spring breaks, do a junior year abroad to see Europe, had a car, lived in a decent place, etc?
I have a lot more empathy for the former than I do for the latter, and you can guess which route I took through undergrad…
Aren’t “green card” holders also taxed by the US on their world-wide income? I really don’t know off-hand and am curious.
I think we are conflating several things here.
First, this has nothing to do with taxes. The OP is about student debt.
Second, there is currently no criminal matter. This is a civil matter and there would not be a statute of limitations.
Third, there is a difference between federally guaranteed student loan debt and private debt. The restructuring and forgiveness after a certain amount of time paying a percentage of income apples to federally-guaranteed debt but not to private debt. If your friend has only federal debt than there are several methods of payment as noted above, including IBR.
I also just want to add that the Dutch story is disgusting. This guy wanted to live an extravagant life with his new wife so basically screwed over his old family and anybody he owed money to.
Finally, I find the original story hard to believe. Every school I’ve ever been to has had escalating disciplinary procedures and the ability to be represented at them by a lawyer. Your friend would have to have attended several meetings. It also does not make sense that the school would have kicked out a student solely for non-disclosure of suspicion in a crime for which he was later found innocent. The schools don’t make money off tuition and they are not hurting enough for students that they would use this as a money-making scheme. I don’t see why they would kick out an otherwise good student that they had invested training in without a good reason. Accused of a crime he didn’t commit and later found innocent but did not disclose on the advice of an attorney? It just doesn’t make sense as a reason for expulsion.
Yes, downside to having a green card.
And if this client turned around and used all the techniques you taught him, to stiff you of your 70,000€, you wouldn’t be upset or outraged at the loss of your time and expertise, because, hey, that’s how it’s done, right?