SB 3487 amends the Higher Education Act to change the PSLF employment criterion. Specifically, it replaces the phrase that currently requires the borrower to be employed with language that recognizes being employed has occurred in the past, effectively allowing past qualifying public service to count toward PSLF eligibility.
The stated objective is to ensure borrowers who have performed qualifying public service can receive Public Service Loan Forgiveness. The bill does not add new payment counts or alter qualifying employers; it simply clarifies how employment status is interpreted for purposes of PSLF.
By focusing the change on the employment prerequisite, the bill aims to reduce unjust disqualifications for borrowers who completed public service but are not employed in a qualifying capacity at forgiveness time. The mechanism is a precise textual adjustment within the PSLF framework, leaving other program rules intact.
At a Glance
What It Does
The bill amends 455(m)(1)(B) by striking “(i) is employed” and the language that follows through “(ii) has been” and inserting “has been.” This reframes the employment requirement to reflect past service rather than current status.
Who It Affects
Borrowers who performed qualifying public service and may no longer be in a current qualifying employment situation; loan servicers and the Department of Education who administer PSLF; public-sector employers who count on PSLF to attract/retain staff.
Why It Matters
It advances the program’s intent to reward public service by ensuring past service counts toward PSLF, reducing fairness gaps and potential unintended disqualifications while maintaining the core payment and employer-count requirements.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
Public Service Loan Forgiveness (PSLF) is designed to forgive student loan debt after a borrower makes 120 qualifying payments while working for a qualifying employer. The bill you see here focuses on the employment criterion that currently limits eligibility to those who are employed in a qualifying position.
SB 3487 makes a targeted textual adjustment to Section 455(m)(1)(B) of the Higher Education Act: it replaces the phrase that requires the borrower to be currently employed with language that recognizes that employment may have occurred in the past. In other words, if a borrower has performed qualifying public service, that past service can count toward PSLF eligibility even if they are not presently employed in a qualifying role at the forgiveness point.
This change does not alter the number of payments required (120) or the list of qualifying employers. It does not create new payment timelines or broaden the categories of borrowers who qualify for PSLF beyond recognition of past public service.
Instead, it clarifies the interpretation of the employment prerequisite to align more closely with the program’s fundamental purpose: rewarding meaningful public service with loan forgiveness when other requirements (like payment count and employer type) are met. The result should be a more predictable and fair path to forgiveness for individuals who completed public service work, including those who may have left a qualifying job or shifted to non-qualifying roles before achieving forgiveness.
The Five Things You Need to Know
The bill amends the PSLF eligibility rule in 455(m)(1)(B).
It replaces the requirement that a borrower “is employed” with a reference to past employment—“has been.”, The change is designed to recognize past qualifying public service for PSLF eligibility.
Other PSLF rules (payments, qualifying employers) remain unchanged.
The bill was introduced in the 119th Congress by Sen. Andy Kim on December 16, 2025 and is currently introduced.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Amendment to PSLF eligibility: recognize past public service
Section 2 amends the Higher Education Act by modifying PSLF’s employment criterion. The language shift from requiring ongoing employment to acknowledging past employment for qualifying public service aligns forgiveness eligibility with the program’s public-service intent. This is a narrow, interpretive change that leaves intact the 120-payment threshold and other PSLF requirements.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on Education across all five countries.
Explore Education in Codify Search →Who Benefits and Who Bears the Cost
Every bill creates winners and losers. Here's who stands to gain and who bears the cost.
Who Benefits
- Borrowers who performed qualifying public service and would have qualified had past employment been counted, including public-sector workers who left qualifying roles before forgiveness
- Public-service employees (e.g., teachers, nurses, first responders) who completed service and payments and would benefit from clearer eligibility
- Public-sector employers relying on PSLF to recruit/retain staff, due to a fairer forgiveness pathway
- Loan servicers and the Department of Education, which gain clearer administrative rules and a more predictable eligibility determination
Who Bears the Cost
- Uncertain federal cost if more borrowers become eligible for PSLF and have loans forgiven
- Administrative costs for the Department of Education and loan servicers to recalibrate eligibility determinations and ensure proper recording of past service
- Potential program integrity considerations as past service is counted toward forgiveness, necessitating robust verification mechanisms
- Sponsoring agencies may face higher workloads in records maintenance and compliance oversight
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The central dilemma is whether recognizing past public service for PSLF eligibility (which enhances fairness and aligns with program intent) should be pursued at the expense of potential cost growth and administrative complexity, given the need to verify historical employment and maintain stringent payment-count criteria.
The bill represents a clarifying reform rather than a wholesale expansion of PSLF. The central tension is between fairness to borrowers who performed qualifying public service and the need to maintain program integrity and fiscal discipline.
If past service can be counted toward forgiveness, the program could forgive more loans than previously anticipated; this raises questions about how past service is verified and how updates to borrower records are handled across multiple public-sector employers. Implementers will need to rely on accurate historical employment data and the continuity of qualifying service to ensure eligibility determinations are correct.
Implementation will require clear guidance on what constitutes qualifying public service, how to document past employment, and how to reconcile this with existing payment-count timelines. There may be transitional questions about borrowers with overlapping employment histories, gaps in documentation, or periods of non-qualifying employment that occurred between service episodes.
These questions highlight the trade-off between expanding access to forgiveness and preserving the integrity of a program that balances borrower relief with program costs.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.