How can I get 0 payment…I see no point filing separately because we live in a community property state…if you know the tax rules we both end up with income and it seems silly….so we ffiled jointly….my husband works, I don’t and I’m the one with student loans. 

I am the borrower who signed for the loans when unmarried…everything I read says his agi is factored.  Why is he getting punished ..these are not his loans and he has no hand in my debts.

I am the borrower, not him whether married or not…can I tell them despite the tax return I have 0 income therefore my payment should be low/zero?...

I realize ur thinking….I’m trying to get out of payment (the payment is unaffordable whether in ibr or not)...and you would be right, don’t judge.  Just looking for if anyone has an answer to married filing jointly and ibr issues like this.

My wife and I file mfs and it is just my income that is used to calculate the payments because of how we file.  The thing is, we are not a community property state.  While I do have some clients that do live in community property states, they all file mfj.

@sstatier @MereNick - I’m not sure if I follow. Just because a borrower lives in a community property state, you do not have to count both of your incomes in calculating student loan payments if you file your taxes as married filing separately.

The Department of Education specifically addresses this issue in comments to the regulations and recommended that you rely on §§ 682.215(e)(1)(B), 685.221(e)(1)(i)(B) and Sec. 685.209(a)(5)(i)(B) to file alternative documentation of income.

This forum doesn’t like it when you post a lot of external links, so I’ll follow up with the actual links to the regulations and comments.

-Biglaw Investor
http://www.biglawinvestor.com

Here’s the actual comments from the regulation:

Comments: Some commenters who are married and reside in States that treat income and property acquired during the marriage as community property strongly objected to the fact that they are required, as a general matter, to pool all community income on their Federal income tax return if they file their taxes jointly or to split all community income equally between them if they file their taxes separately, thus significantly affecting their eligibility for IBR and the calculated scheduled monthly payment amount under the IBR plan in comparison with other married borrowers residing in non-community property states.

Discussion: As described in the response to the previous comment on married borrowers, the treatment of income of married borrowers when determining IBR eligibility is specified in the HEA. The Department acknowledges, however, that application of these requirements to married borrowers who reside in community property states and who file separately from their spouse results in a different outcome than for similarly situated married borrowers residing in other states.

As an example, a married couple resides in a community property state and has no dependents. The borrower earns $40,000 and the spouse earns $60,000. They filed their income tax returns separately and have no pre-tax deductions from pay, no other income, and no adjustments to income when filing their Federal income tax returns. Only the borrower has IBR-eligible Federal student loans, which total $50,000. Each spouse would be considered to have an AGI of $50,000. The borrower is eligible for the IBR plan, with a calculated monthly payment amount of $341.31. If the same couple did not reside in a community property state and filed separately, the borrower would have an AGI of $40,000 and the spouse an AGI of $60,000. Because the borrower’s AGI would only be $40,000, the borrower would be eligible for the IBR plan, but would have a lower IBR scheduled monthly payment amount of $216.31.

The Department understands that married borrowers who file their Federal income tax returns separately from their spouses and who reside in community property states may be disadvantaged when determining IBR eligibility when compared to similarly situated married borrowers in non-community property states. However, Sec. Sec.  682.215(e)(1)(B) and 685.221(e)(1)(i)(B) and Sec.  685.209(a)(5)(i)(B) authorize the use of alternative documentation of a borrower’s income if the Secretary or the FFEL loan holder believes the borrower’s reported AGI does not reasonably reflect the borrower’s current income. Because the Department believes that it is inequitable to treat married borrowers who file their Federal income tax returns separately differently based on where they reside, we encourage FFEL loan holders to use alternative documentation of the borrower’s income under these circumstances. The Department will take the same approach with the loans it holds.

Here’s a link to §§682.215(e)(1)(B):

https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/34/682.215

Here’s a link to the Federal Register which has the comments I quoted above. Search for the word “community” to find the actual language should you need to reference it for anyone.

https://www.ifap.ed.gov/fregisters/FR110112FinalRule.html

Thanks, Biglaw Investor.  As I said in my post, none of our clients in community property states file mfs and none of them are dealing with education debt.
Thanks for the information you’ve given for sstatler’s benefit.  It looks like for her the thing to do is to show alternative documentation instead of the tax return.