The One Big Beautiful Bill ended Grad PLUS for new borrowers on 1 July 2026 and imposed hard caps: $20,500/year and $100,000 lifetime for graduate programmes, $50,000/year and $200,000 lifetime for professional ones. For medical, dental, law and veterinary students the professional cap sits below actual cost of attendance, and the gap moves to private lenders — priced on credit rather than enrolment, with no income-driven repayment, no forgiveness, and generally no discharge in bankruptcy.
The Grad PLUS loan programme ended for new borrowers on 1 July 2026, after twenty years. Autumn semester starts this week, which is when several hundred thousand graduate and professional students encounter the replacement in practice rather than in a policy summary.
The change is simple to state and consequential to model. Grad PLUS had no borrowing ceiling; it lent up to the full cost of attendance as certified by the school. Its replacement has hard annual and lifetime caps. For most graduate programmes: $20,500 a year, $100,000 lifetime. For professional programmes — medicine, dentistry, law, veterinary medicine and similar: $50,000 a year, $200,000 lifetime.
For a large share of professional students, the cap sits below what the degree costs. This piece is about what happens to the difference.
The change came through the One Big Beautiful Bill, which eliminated Grad PLUS for new borrowers effective 1 July 2026. According to the Council of Graduate Schools, more than 440,000 students across a wide range of programmes borrowed through Grad PLUS in the 2023-24 academic year.
There is a grandfathering provision that materially changes who is affected this autumn. Borrowers who took out a Grad PLUS loan before 1 July 2026 may continue borrowing through the programme for three more years or until their programme ends, whichever comes first. So a second-year medical student who borrowed last year is largely insulated. A first-year starting this week is not.
The practical dividing line is whether you had a Grad PLUS disbursement before 1 July 2026. If yes, you have up to three more years of access under the old rules. If no — including everyone matriculating this autumn — you are subject to the caps immediately.
The professional cap is $50,000 a year. Set that against what professional programmes actually cost.
For medical school, the average annual cost of attendance for 2025-26 was about $61,110 — a figure that includes tuition, fees, health insurance and estimated living expenses, which is the correct basis for comparison because Grad PLUS lent against exactly that. Four-year totals run to roughly $297,745 at public medical schools and about $408,150 at private ones.
So for the average medical student, the annual gap is on the order of $11,000, and the lifetime picture is worse: a $200,000 professional ceiling against a four-year cost of attendance of $297,745 to $408,150 leaves roughly $98,000 to $208,000 unfunded across the degree, before residency-application costs and board examination fees.
Law is closer but not comfortable. Average tuition and fees were $50,720 for 2025-26 — already marginally above the annual cap before any living expenses are counted, in a degree students typically pursue full-time without meaningful income. A private for-profit law degree cost $214,791 in total for 2026 graduates, against the $200,000 lifetime ceiling.
These are averages, and the variance matters in both directions. In-state public programmes with low living costs may fit inside the caps comfortably. High-cost private programmes in expensive metros will not come close. The point is not that every student faces a gap; it is that the cap was not set with reference to what the degrees cost, so whether it binds is close to arbitrary.
A borrowing cap does not reduce the cost of the degree. It changes who lends the difference. For most students who cannot cover the gap from savings, family or institutional aid, the answer is a private student loan — and a private loan is a materially different instrument from a federal one in four ways that compound.
On pricing, one data point with a caveat attached. Forbes Advisor reported the average fixed rate on a 10-year private student loan at 8.63% for borrowers with credit scores of 720 or above, for the week of 17-22 August 2026 — down from 10.12% the prior week and 10.74% a year earlier. A 1.49-point weekly move is large enough that it should be read as sampling noise in a weekly survey rather than a trend, and the 720-plus qualifier excludes most borrowers without a cosigner. Treat it as an indication of the best available terms, not the typical ones.
“The debt does not shrink. It moves from a lender that indexes repayment to your income to one that does not.”
The second-order effects are where this gets interesting. If the binding constraint on entering medicine or law becomes access to private credit, then it becomes access to a cosigner — which is to say, family balance sheets. That is a composition effect on who enters these professions, and it operates independently of anyone's intent. It also plausibly steers graduates toward higher-paying specialties and practice settings, because a non-income-driven repayment obligation makes a lower-paid public-service career harder to carry.
The argument for capping is not frivolous, and anyone dismissing it is not engaging with the strongest version.
Uncapped federal lending to graduate programmes creates a pricing problem that is hard to solve any other way. When a school can raise tuition knowing that a federal programme will lend whatever it certifies as the cost of attendance, the ordinary discipline that price exerts on a market is absent. Institutions face no penalty for raising prices and a direct revenue benefit from doing so. Graduate and professional tuition has risen faster than undergraduate tuition over the Grad PLUS era, and the mechanism is at least plausible. A borrowing cap is the most direct instrument available against it — arguably the only one Congress can pull without regulating tuition directly, which it has no clear authority to do.
For the cap to work as intended, one thing has to be true: schools have to respond by lowering prices, or at least by expanding institutional aid, rather than watching students substitute private credit. That is an empirical question with an answer arriving over the next several admissions cycles, and it turns largely on whether applications fall. If demand for professional degrees is price-inelastic — which decades of evidence suggests it broadly is, given lifetime earnings premiums — then the cap relocates borrowing without disciplining tuition, and the entire cost of the policy is borne by students in the form of worse loan terms.
That is the honest way to hold both positions. The diagnosis is largely right. Whether the instrument reaches the target depends on an elasticity nobody has measured, and if it misses, the people who absorb the miss are 26-year-olds carrying private paper.
A twenty-year-old programme ended quietly in July with no news cycle attached. Its effects arrive this week, one financial aid package at a time.
Yes, under a grandfathering provision. Borrowers who took out a Grad PLUS loan before 1 July 2026 may continue borrowing through the programme for three more years or until their programme ends, whichever comes first. Students matriculating this autumn with no prior Grad PLUS disbursement are subject to the new caps immediately. Confirm your status with your school's financial aid office rather than assuming.
DrafterDaily works through what new rules actually cost the people subject to them.
Read more Finance analysisFitch tracks sixteen perpetual non-traded BDCs. In Q2 2026, redemption requests averaged 10.3% of shares against a standard 5% cap, and ten of the sixteen breached it. Nothing broke — which is the uncomfortable part.
Nationally, asking prices are down about 2% and inventory is up 3.2% — a picture of orderly rebalancing. Underneath it, Austin's median list price is down 12.2% while San Francisco's inventory has fallen nearly 20%. Those are not variations around a mean.
A composite index of 56.0 is the strongest US reading since April 2022. It is also an average of a services sector at a 20-month high and a factory sector going the other way.