Brown eliminates tuition for families up to $125K and removes home equity in the FA equation

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There are many people living in total poverty in SE and NE DC who have inherited properties which are now worth >$500K thanks to the real estate uptick.
This is for kids like this.
Their parents don't work so there is zero money for college, especially an expensive place like Brown but they're penalized in college aid because of the worth of the house. They can't sell the house or they'd be homeless.
This will level the playing field for these kids.
I work as a caseworker in DC. I can think of hundreds of kids who are in this situation.

Those families are an entirely different situation and they'd probably get aid either way as they look at income given they deserve the aid.. The issue is really families who are living above their means making far more and choose million dollar homes vs. lower cost and saving for college.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Now I just have to get my kid into Brown, lol!

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Home equity should be included over $400-500k. If a family has a million dollar house it should be included.

I disagree - no one should have to sell their house or take out a second mortgage (and risk losing their home) to pay for a child's college. Further, just because a house is owned and paid for doesn't mean that the persons living in the house haven't fallen on harder times and/or make less than they did when they bought the house - AND with home prices and "equity" increasing because of the housing shortage - it's really speculative whether that equity will materialize should the house be sold one day - and then what do you do with a second mortgage that can't be paid off by the sale of the house?

Good for Brown - my kid has no interest and/or couldn't get in - but it's a good first step. I personally wish that the Ivies would increase enrollment by 25-50% for those who wish to go to an Ivy - they know that there are enough smart/interesting kids to fill the seats - and they have the endowments to expand. They are just creating artificial scarcity for the sake of exclusivity.

If you make a choice to spend one mil,ion on a house vs 600k then yes. A reasonably priced house, no. But when you overspend and choose not to save you should not be rewarded vs another family who saved with the same income.

Agreed...no one should be able to like in a mansion and collect financial aid! In terms of increasing enrollment, it is hard in terms of space on campus. There has to be more housing/dining halls/study spaces/class rooms/offices/parking. How many schools even have enough space to increase 50%?

Hilarious that you think million dollar home in this area is a mansion.

Life is about choices. There are homes in the area for $350-600K. You choose a million dollar house, then that is ok but don't expect others to fund your child's college.

You must realize that the people who live in million dollar houses right now did not pay a million dollars to buy it right? They didn't choose a million dollar house; they chose a $500K house that is now worth a million. Most of my neighbors couldn't afford to buy their own houses right now. But sure, they may have enough equity to use a home equity loan to pay for college. Its what my parents had to do, but it does put them at risk of losing the home.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Home equity should be included over $400-500k. If a family has a million dollar house it should be included.

I disagree - no one should have to sell their house or take out a second mortgage (and risk losing their home) to pay for a child's college. Further, just because a house is owned and paid for doesn't mean that the persons living in the house haven't fallen on harder times and/or make less than they did when they bought the house - AND with home prices and "equity" increasing because of the housing shortage - it's really speculative whether that equity will materialize should the house be sold one day - and then what do you do with a second mortgage that can't be paid off by the sale of the house?

Good for Brown - my kid has no interest and/or couldn't get in - but it's a good first step. I personally wish that the Ivies would increase enrollment by 25-50% for those who wish to go to an Ivy - they know that there are enough smart/interesting kids to fill the seats - and they have the endowments to expand. They are just creating artificial scarcity for the sake of exclusivity.

If you make a choice to spend one mil,ion on a house vs 600k then yes. A reasonably priced house, no. But when you overspend and choose not to save you should not be rewarded vs another family who saved with the same income.

Agreed...no one should be able to like in a mansion and collect financial aid! In terms of increasing enrollment, it is hard in terms of space on campus. There has to be more housing/dining halls/study spaces/class rooms/offices/parking. How many schools even have enough space to increase 50%?

Hilarious that you think million dollar home in this area is a mansion.

Life is about choices. There are homes in the area for $350-600K. You choose a million dollar house, then that is ok but don't expect others to fund your child's college.

conversely, if a university wants to fund it, maybe you should keep your mouth shut. It's Brown's money and they can spend it how they want.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Those families are an entirely different situation and they'd probably get aid either way as they look at income given they deserve the aid.. The issue is really families who are living above their means making far more and choose million dollar homes vs. lower cost and saving for college.

Is this really "the issue"?

To qualify for a mortgage on a $1M home, you'd have to make more than $125K. There are lots of suggested calculations, but here is a common one:

1. Multiply Your Annual Income By 2.5 or 3
This was the basic rule of thumb for many years. Simply take your gross income and multiply it by 2.5 or 3, to get the maximum value of the home you can afford. For somebody making $100,000 a year, the maximum purchase price on a new home should be somewhere between $250,000 and $300,000.

https://www.doughroller.net/mortgages/how-much-house-can-i-afford/

So by that measurement, the choice seems unlikely to affect financial aid.

This one is more liberal with super low interest rates of tday

2. The 28% Front-End Ratio
When banks evaluate your home loan application, they will look at one very important calculation in particular. This is known as your housing-expense-to-income ratio.

Also called the front-end ratio, banks will take your projected housing expenses for the home you want to buy and divide by your total monthly income. Generally, mortgage companies are looking for a ratio of 28% or less.

For example, let’s say that your income is $10,000 a month. Judging by this, most banks would qualify you for a loan (subject to other factors, of course), so long as your total housing expenses do not exceed $2,800 each month. This means that your mortgage payment (principal and interest), property taxes, PMI (if required), and homeowner’s insurance all need to stay below this threshold.

According to https://bundleloan.com/blog/1-million-dollar-mortgage/, The monthly payment on a 1 million dollar mortgage is $5,694. More than twice what a $120K income can qualify for.

So, it appears that only with lower incomes those that bought long ago will now get financial aid with home value excluded. The "choose million dollar homes vs. lower cost and saving for college" family is largely a myth.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Home equity should be included over $400-500k. If a family has a million dollar house it should be included.

I disagree - no one should have to sell their house or take out a second mortgage (and risk losing their home) to pay for a child's college. Further, just because a house is owned and paid for doesn't mean that the persons living in the house haven't fallen on harder times and/or make less than they did when they bought the house - AND with home prices and "equity" increasing because of the housing shortage - it's really speculative whether that equity will materialize should the house be sold one day - and then what do you do with a second mortgage that can't be paid off by the sale of the house?

Good for Brown - my kid has no interest and/or couldn't get in - but it's a good first step. I personally wish that the Ivies would increase enrollment by 25-50% for those who wish to go to an Ivy - they know that there are enough smart/interesting kids to fill the seats - and they have the endowments to expand. They are just creating artificial scarcity for the sake of exclusivity.

If you make a choice to spend one mil,ion on a house vs 600k then yes. A reasonably priced house, no. But when you overspend and choose not to save you should not be rewarded vs another family who saved with the same income.

Agreed...no one should be able to like in a mansion and collect financial aid! In terms of increasing enrollment, it is hard in terms of space on campus. There has to be more housing/dining halls/study spaces/class rooms/offices/parking. How many schools even have enough space to increase 50%?

Hilarious that you think million dollar home in this area is a mansion.

Life is about choices. There are homes in the area for $350-600K. You choose a million dollar house, then that is ok but don't expect others to fund your child's college.

You must realize that the people who live in million dollar houses right now did not pay a million dollars to buy it right? They didn't choose a million dollar house; they chose a $500K house that is now worth a million. Most of my neighbors couldn't afford to buy their own houses right now. But sure, they may have enough equity to use a home equity loan to pay for college. Its what my parents had to do, but it does put them at risk of losing the home.

Some people bought at that price, others didn't. But, at the time they probably couldn't afford the $500K either. Life is about choices. You forgo things like fancy vacations, new cars, etc. and put that money away to college if you can afford a $500K house. $500K, 10-20 years ago is equal to a million now. So, you screaming poverty is silly. And, one would assume some of their incomes have gone up so instead of increasing spending, you save for college. We managed to save on very little income. We bought a horrible little house and DIY (or just live with it). And, yet, our kids have good college funds to pay for a state school and state graduate school. I'd love a bigger house but I love even more I can pay for college and graduate school and they'll be debt free.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Home equity should be included over $400-500k. If a family has a million dollar house it should be included.

I disagree - no one should have to sell their house or take out a second mortgage (and risk losing their home) to pay for a child's college. Further, just because a house is owned and paid for doesn't mean that the persons living in the house haven't fallen on harder times and/or make less than they did when they bought the house - AND with home prices and "equity" increasing because of the housing shortage - it's really speculative whether that equity will materialize should the house be sold one day - and then what do you do with a second mortgage that can't be paid off by the sale of the house?

Good for Brown - my kid has no interest and/or couldn't get in - but it's a good first step. I personally wish that the Ivies would increase enrollment by 25-50% for those who wish to go to an Ivy - they know that there are enough smart/interesting kids to fill the seats - and they have the endowments to expand. They are just creating artificial scarcity for the sake of exclusivity.

If you make a choice to spend one mil,ion on a house vs 600k then yes. A reasonably priced house, no. But when you overspend and choose not to save you should not be rewarded vs another family who saved with the same income.

Agreed...no one should be able to like in a mansion and collect financial aid! In terms of increasing enrollment, it is hard in terms of space on campus. There has to be more housing/dining halls/study spaces/class rooms/offices/parking. How many schools even have enough space to increase 50%?

Hilarious that you think million dollar home in this area is a mansion.

Life is about choices. There are homes in the area for $350-600K. You choose a million dollar house, then that is ok but don't expect others to fund your child's college.

conversely, if a university wants to fund it, maybe you should keep your mouth shut. It's Brown's money and they can spend it how they want.

I have family who donates to Brown. So, no, it isn't exactly their money.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I have family who donates to Brown. So, no, it isn't exactly their money.

do·nate
/ˈdōˌnāt/
verb
give (money or goods) for a good cause, for example to a charity.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Home equity should be included over $400-500k. If a family has a million dollar house it should be included.

I disagree - no one should have to sell their house or take out a second mortgage (and risk losing their home) to pay for a child's college. Further, just because a house is owned and paid for doesn't mean that the persons living in the house haven't fallen on harder times and/or make less than they did when they bought the house - AND with home prices and "equity" increasing because of the housing shortage - it's really speculative whether that equity will materialize should the house be sold one day - and then what do you do with a second mortgage that can't be paid off by the sale of the house?

Good for Brown - my kid has no interest and/or couldn't get in - but it's a good first step. I personally wish that the Ivies would increase enrollment by 25-50% for those who wish to go to an Ivy - they know that there are enough smart/interesting kids to fill the seats - and they have the endowments to expand. They are just creating artificial scarcity for the sake of exclusivity.

If you make a choice to spend one mil,ion on a house vs 600k then yes. A reasonably priced house, no. But when you overspend and choose not to save you should not be rewarded vs another family who saved with the same income.

Agreed...no one should be able to like in a mansion and collect financial aid! In terms of increasing enrollment, it is hard in terms of space on campus. There has to be more housing/dining halls/study spaces/class rooms/offices/parking. How many schools even have enough space to increase 50%?

Hilarious that you think million dollar home in this area is a mansion.

Life is about choices. There are homes in the area for $350-600K. You choose a million dollar house, then that is ok but don't expect others to fund your child's college.

conversely, if a university wants to fund it, maybe you should keep your mouth shut. It's Brown's money and they can spend it how they want.

I have family who donates to Brown. So, no, it isn't exactly their money.

i don't think you understand the concept of donation, then.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:https://www.browndailyherald.com/article/2021/10/brown-to-eliminate-tuition-for-families-earning-under-125000-through-financial-aid-expansion

Nice move!

/full pay Brown parent and happy about this.

This is awesome. My H was full pay, I was on scholarship and DC1 is on full pay now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Home equity should be included over $400-500k. If a family has a million dollar house it should be included.

I disagree - no one should have to sell their house or take out a second mortgage (and risk losing their home) to pay for a child's college. Further, just because a house is owned and paid for doesn't mean that the persons living in the house haven't fallen on harder times and/or make less than they did when they bought the house - AND with home prices and "equity" increasing because of the housing shortage - it's really speculative whether that equity will materialize should the house be sold one day - and then what do you do with a second mortgage that can't be paid off by the sale of the house?

Good for Brown - my kid has no interest and/or couldn't get in - but it's a good first step. I personally wish that the Ivies would increase enrollment by 25-50% for those who wish to go to an Ivy - they know that there are enough smart/interesting kids to fill the seats - and they have the endowments to expand. They are just creating artificial scarcity for the sake of exclusivity.

If you make a choice to spend one mil,ion on a house vs 600k then yes. A reasonably priced house, no. But when you overspend and choose not to save you should not be rewarded vs another family who saved with the same income.

Agreed...no one should be able to like in a mansion and collect financial aid! In terms of increasing enrollment, it is hard in terms of space on campus. There has to be more housing/dining halls/study spaces/class rooms/offices/parking. How many schools even have enough space to increase 50%?

Hilarious that you think million dollar home in this area is a mansion.

Life is about choices. There are homes in the area for $350-600K. You choose a million dollar house, then that is ok but don't expect others to fund your child's college.

conversely, if a university wants to fund it, maybe you should keep your mouth shut. It's Brown's money and they can spend it how they want.

I have family who donates to Brown. So, no, it isn't exactly their money.

Please.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Home equity should be included over $400-500k. If a family has a million dollar house it should be included.

I disagree - no one should have to sell their house or take out a second mortgage (and risk losing their home) to pay for a child's college. Further, just because a house is owned and paid for doesn't mean that the persons living in the house haven't fallen on harder times and/or make less than they did when they bought the house - AND with home prices and "equity" increasing because of the housing shortage - it's really speculative whether that equity will materialize should the house be sold one day - and then what do you do with a second mortgage that can't be paid off by the sale of the house?

Good for Brown - my kid has no interest and/or couldn't get in - but it's a good first step. I personally wish that the Ivies would increase enrollment by 25-50% for those who wish to go to an Ivy - they know that there are enough smart/interesting kids to fill the seats - and they have the endowments to expand. They are just creating artificial scarcity for the sake of exclusivity.

If you make a choice to spend one mil,ion on a house vs 600k then yes. A reasonably priced house, no. But when you overspend and choose not to save you should not be rewarded vs another family who saved with the same income.

Agreed...no one should be able to like in a mansion and collect financial aid! In terms of increasing enrollment, it is hard in terms of space on campus. There has to be more housing/dining halls/study spaces/class rooms/offices/parking. How many schools even have enough space to increase 50%?

Hilarious that you think million dollar home in this area is a mansion.

Life is about choices. There are homes in the area for $350-600K. You choose a million dollar house, then that is ok but don't expect others to fund your child's college.

conversely, if a university wants to fund it, maybe you should keep your mouth shut. It's Brown's money and they can spend it how they want.

I have family who donates to Brown. So, no, it isn't exactly their money.

I am a Brown alum who donates every year. I am thrilled with this decision and have made an extra donation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
We have very low income but 4M in assets (that we can't use for tuition, but it's in our name and we disclose it to the IRS).

I somehow doubt we'd still qualify, but does anyone know?

It depends on what the assets are and what you mean by "can't use". For example, if it's 401K, it usually doesn't count.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
We have very low income but 4M in assets (that we can't use for tuition, but it's in our name and we disclose it to the IRS).

I somehow doubt we'd still qualify, but does anyone know?

It depends on what the assets are and what you mean by "can't use". For example, if it's 401K, it usually doesn't count.

It's a stock portfolio we manage for our family back in our home country. The name on the account is ours, but it's really family money. We can't take out a chunk and use it just for our kids. I realize nobody cares about the details, I just need to know what rules Brown lays out for assets like that.

[Anonymous]

Why don’t you send your kids to WashU? It’s the new Brown and will soon surpass most of the Ivies in prestige with its new endowment.