A Republican bill with 2 Democratic cosponsors · See all 3 cosponsors
Last activity — Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 394.
Cleared committee, waiting for its first floor vote
A committee approved it and it is on the calendar of the chamber it started in.
This is further than most bills get, and still no promise of a vote: the calendar is a queue, and the majority leadership decides what is called. A bill can sit here until the Congress ends.
Its path through Congress
- Introduced
- On Calendar
What this bill would do
The College Financial Aid Clarity Act of 2025 seeks to amend the Higher Education Act of 1965. This bill requires the Secretary of Education to develop specific requirements for how institutions of higher education format their financial aid offer forms. It mandates that institutions include clear information regarding costs, grants, scholarships, and loans. The act also establishes a process for consumer testing to ensure these forms are simple and understandable for students and families. Additionally, it requires the Secretary to review a sample of financial aid offers for compliance every two years.
Yes· 3 of 9
- Scored +6
Would students be better off under this?
Students benefit from much clearer information regarding loan interest, fees, and the actual net price of their education.
- Scored +6
Does this give people more protection from unfair business practices?
The bill requires institutions to provide clear, standardized disclosures about financial aid costs, loan obligations, and net prices to prevent deceptive practices.
- Scored +5
Would households on low incomes be better off under this?
The bill specifically includes low-income students and families in its consumer testing process to ensure aid forms are understandable.
The opposite
No question was scored the opposite.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Improved Transparency for Students and Families: Institutions must include specific information such as the annual net price, estimated cost of attendance, and details regarding the renewability of financial aid (Section 2(a)(1)(A) and Section s 2(a)(2)).
-
Clarity on Loan Obligations: The bill requires disclosures stating that loans must be repaid, that interest rates and fees affect total costs over time, and that students can borrow less than the offered amount (Section 2(a)(2)(C) and Section 2(a)(1)(A)(i)(E)).
-
Standardized Information Formats: Financial aid offers must use plain language and a specific order of information to ensure that required costs are not inappropriately omitted or deemphasized (Section 2(d)(1) and Section 2(d)(2)).
-
Consumer-Centric Rulemaking: The Secretary is required to establish a consumer testing process involving representatives of students and their families to ensure the requirements are simple and understandable (Section 2(b)(1)(A)).
-
Access to Comparison Tools: The bill requires institutions to provide links to the College Financing Plan website, a net price calculator, and the College Scorecard website to help families compare costs and outcomes (Section 2(a)(2)(D) and Section 2(a)(6)(E)).
Potential Negative Impacts for People
-
Institutional Compliance Burdens: Institutions of higher education that receive Federal financial assistance must follow new requirements for all financial aid offers, including paper, mobile-optimized, or other electronic offers (Section 2(a)(1)(A)).
-
Changes to Electronic Confirmations: For electronic offers that require a student to confirm receipt, the institution may no longer consider such a confirmation as an acceptance or rejection of the offer (Section 2(a)(1)(B)).
Groups and Interests Ranking
Every group the model scored this bill for, from -10 to +10. Tap or hover a score for the reason it gave.
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Would students be better off under this? — Students benefit from much clearer information regarding loan interest, fees, and the actual net price of their education. Would households on low incomes be better off under this? — The bill specifically includes low-income students and families in its consumer testing process to ensure aid forms are understandable. Would veterans be better off under this, taking everything together? — The bill includes veterans in the consumer testing process to ensure financial aid disclosures are clear and accessible. Would people in their twenties and thirties be better off under this? — Prospective college students receive clearer information regarding the long-term costs and obligations of their financial aid packages. Would middle-income households be better off under this? — Increased transparency helps families better navigate the complexities of college financing and debt.
- Economy And Finance
- Does this give people more protection from unfair business practices? — The bill requires institutions to provide clear, standardized disclosures about financial aid costs, loan obligations, and net prices to prevent deceptive practices.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see? — The bill mandates standardized and transparent financial aid disclosures that allow the public to better understand institutional costs.
- Education And Technology
- Does this make college cost less? — The bill improves clarity around the true costs of attendance and the renewability of aid, aiding long-term financial planning for students.
- Social Issues And Justice
- Is this likely to lift people out of poverty? — By increasing financial aid transparency, the bill helps low-income families make more informed decisions regarding educational costs.
- 1/21/2026
- Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Education and Workforce. H. Rept. 119-460.
- Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 394.
- 12/17/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 12/11/2025
- Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held
- Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by the Yeas and Nays: 23 - 10.
- 12/10/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 12/9/2025
- Referred to the House Committee on Education and Workforce.
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- Introduced in House
Young KimRepublican · California
Donald NorcrossDemocrat · New Jersey
Eugene VindmanDemocrat · Virginia