Institutions of Postsecondary Education - Institutional Debt - Report
HB877 requires Maryland institutions of postsecondary education to submit periodic reports to the Maryland Higher Education Commission on institutional debt. The bill defines institutional debt broadly to include tuition, room and board, fines, fees, and related obligations owed by students in their capacity as students. Beginning in 2027, institutions must report detailed, disaggregated data on the amount, status, collection, and disposition of these debts, including information on tuition payment plans, voluntary payments, charge-offs, credit reporting, litigation, third-party collections, administrative holds, and degree conferrals delayed because of debt.
The bill also requires the Commission to compile and submit a summary report to the General Assembly every two years and to publish a data dictionary defining the required terms and reporting categories. Institutions are prohibited from being required to report personally identifying student information. The Commission is authorized to adopt regulations and may impose civil penalties of up to $10,000 per violation for failure to file a report or for knowingly submitting inaccurate information, subject to notice and hearing procedures.
HB877 adds a new reporting and enforcement section to the Education Article, § 11-212, creating a statewide institutional debt transparency framework for public and private postsecondary institutions. It imposes new compliance obligations on colleges and universities, requires the Maryland Higher Education Commission to standardize reporting through a published data dictionary, and gives the Commission authority to penalize noncompliance. The bill affects institutions, students with outstanding balances, and state oversight of higher education finance and debt collection practices.
The bill appears to have broad legislative support, passing the House on third reading by a vote of 107-21. The committee report was favorable with amendments, suggesting the measure was generally viewed positively but refined during committee review. No committee transcript was provided, so the available record indicates overall support with some need for technical or policy adjustments rather than major opposition.
The main points of potential contention are the scope and burden of the reporting requirements, the breadth of data to be collected, and the Commission’s authority to impose civil penalties for inaccurate or missing reports. Institutions may be concerned about administrative workload, compliance costs, and the need to track detailed debt-related outcomes across demographic categories. Another possible issue is the bill’s focus on debt collection practices such as credit reporting, litigation, third-party collections, and administrative holds, which may raise concerns among student advocates and institutions about fairness, transparency, and institutional discretion.