I met with my financial advisor last week, which made me miss the bliss of having my student loan repayments paused. After a battle in the courts, my dream of having 83% of my student loans evaporated before it started. Now a topic of presidential debates, conversations around student debt have shifted to tackling financial literacy, with the Department of Education citing that “loan defaults and delinquencies remain at record highs.” Across the United States, student debt is described in neat, tidy aggregate numbers like “More than 42 million Americans carry federal student loan debt.” However, when we break down data by gender and race, disparities emerge.
The “Gender-Neutral” Debt That Somehow Isn’t
Women hold roughly 63% of all outstanding student debt, compared with 37% for men (see Figure 1). We’re talking about nearly two-thirds of a trillion-dollar problem sitting squarely on women’s shoulders.
Figure 1. Share of Total Student Loan Debt by Sex
Source: Calculations by the Women’s Institute for Science, Equity and Race using the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System 2024
These aren’t small differences we can chalk up to statistical noise or women’s “personal choices.” This is the amalgamation of discourse urging women to get degrees and the growing price tag faced by Black, Hispanic, Indigenous, Asian, and Multiracial women. The student loan financial system promotes access to educational opportunities that vary in quality, value, and student outcomes, so it’s hard to know exactly how much of a payoff comes with graduation. The story becomes even clearer when we disaggregate by race and ethnicity.
Where Intersectionality Meets Debt
While women collectively hold more debt, the burden isn’t distributed equally. Hispanic women comprise 54% of the women with student loans, nearly double the rate of Black women (24%) (See Figure 2). The disparities in student loan debt are not about individual financial planning or “making better choices.” They are the consequence of structural inequality, which demands credentials while providing unequal access to the wealth needed to pay for them.
Figure 2. Student Loan Debt Among Women, By Race and Ethnicity
Source: Calculations by the Women’s Institute for Science, Equity and Race using the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System 2024
The Details in the Debt Brackets
Many understand that it’s not just about who has debt. It is about how much is owed. Data show that Black women are more likely to fall into those mid-to-high debt brackets, around $30,000–$74,999. Asian women often land in lower debt ranges, reflecting different patterns of family wealth, educational pathways, and economic access. This isn’t financial mysticism; it’s math with consequences. Higher debt loads may mean delayed homeownership, family planning, economic vulnerability, or choosing between loan payments and emergency savings.
Previously, COVID-19 prompted the Trump Administration to pause eligible loan payments and set their interest rates to 0% from March 2020 to September 2023. For most borrowers, the first payment was due in October 2023. For borrowers enrolled in Income-Driven Repayment Plans (IDR) or the SAVE plan, which base their monthly student loan payments on income and family size, the Department of Education’s Office of Federal Student Aid (FSA) automatically placed their loans in forbearance in July 2024. This means they still did not have to make payments, and interest did not accrue.
Flash forward to February 2025. A federal court issued an injunction preventing the Department of Education from implementing the SAVE Plan and parts of other IDR plans. With the new Trump administration, interest accrual for borrowers on the SAVE plan began on August 1. Any money saved by the paused payments would have been eaten up by inflation; therefore, people struggling to meet increased expenses are more financially vulnerable. As women’s loan payments resume, they won’t just bear most of the debt; they will also face most of the consequences. For single-mother households, these consequences will likely break an already fragile budget.
“But Can’t They Just…” (The Rebuttal No One Asked For)
Some of you might think, “Can’t they just get forgiveness? Current forgiveness programs have approval rates hovering around 1-3% for most borrowers. Public Service Loan Forgiveness is an option for those working in qualifying public service jobs. The salaries for these jobs pay approximately 10-12% less than private sector equivalents at the state and local levels, or about 20-25% less for federal positions. With the signing of the One Big Beautiful Bill into law on July 4, 2025, borrowers wave goodbye to the SAVE plan. Future borrowers face new limits, which are expected to make it more difficult for lower- and middle-income borrowers to attend more expensive graduate programs. Borrowers can also expect a significant shift in current repayment plans.
Others might be thinking: “Go to a cheaper school?” Here’s the thing about that brilliant advice: women already do. They’re more likely to attend public institutions, live at home, work during college, and graduate with practical degrees. The problem isn’t that women choose elite private colleges over community or public colleges. The problem is that even “affordable” education costs have risen dramatically while wages have remained flat (See Figure 3).
Figure 3. Growth Rate of Median Earnings vs. College Tuition
Source: 2022 U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey and Consumer Expenditure Survey data patterns
*Note: specific annual values represent illustrative estimates consistent with documented trends rather than exact historical data points, due to the limited availability of fully disaggregated time series data in public releases
Understanding these disparities is crucial for crafting policies that don’t accidentally make things worse. For example, every universal program helps everyone except those who need it most. Black, Hispanic, Asian, and Indigenous women face what researchers politely call intersectional disadvantage and what the rest of us call getting hit from multiple directions. They’re more likely to carry student debt and contend with systemic economic inequities that make repayment harder, wealth building slower, and financial security more elusive.
All women live at the intersection of race, ethnicity, and gender. We disaggregate data to see how race and ethnicity interact with gender to create outcome disparities. Figure 1 shows that women have more student loan debt, and Figure 2 shows that the debt is not equal. Systems interact and co-create each other, leading to unique social experiences that can shape what it means to be a woman in the United States. But we can move away from this.
The Bottom Line (Literally)
Just yesterday, a federal judge blocked President Donald Trump from firing Federal Reserve Board Governor Lisa Cook as the lawsuit challenging her removal continues. Cook, a Ph.D. economist nominated by President Joe Biden, holds a position that doesn’t even require a Ph.D., a nearly five-year educational investment. This signals that the courts may protect women’s investment in their education. In a time when all women navigate an economic landscape that promises education will be their pathway to equality, only to be buried in debt for taking that path, it’s nice to see some support.
Similar to the courts, WISER’s mission to expand women-focused research ensures that when we discuss solutions, we solve the correct problems for the right people. Rhonda and I know this about aggregate data: It’s great for hiding inequities but terrible for crafting policies to address them. Student loan relief programs must be designed with these realities in mind.
Universal programs that don’t account for differential impact? That’s not equity—that’s policy malpractice.
Targeted financial education that ignores structural barriers? That’s victim-blaming.
Payment caps without addressing predatory lending practices? That’s treating symptoms while feeding the disease.
Real solutions require acknowledging what the data reveals: that women’s student debt crisis is inseparable from broader patterns of economic inequality that layer disadvantages along lines of race, gender, and class. Meaningful reform means targeted debt cancellation where women are overrepresented, interest rate caps that prevent loans from multiplying beyond reason, and accountability for institutions that profit from women’s aspirations while leaving them financially vulnerable.
Lily S. Johnson is a former research assistant. She worked on projects focused on financial well-being and menstrual health.
