College/grad school tuition sucks. Med school charges 30,000 a yr and 60,000 for out of staters! What's even more upseting is that a friend who graduated 8 yrs ago only paid 15 grand. How do you double tuition in 8 yrs?
OT - Student claims University of Michigan discriminates against veterans
The cost of university attendance in this country is scandalous. American college students have to spend more money to go to college than their counterparts anywhere else in the world. We're saddling an entire generation with debt that will take many years to pay off. This is something that's going to have long-term repercussions for our country's economy and society.
Sure, it's no fun to deal with a difficult economic climate where state appropriations are reduced, but passing the cost off to the students, year after year (at rates that invariably exceed inflation), is the most unproductive way to go after the problem. Instead of finding ways to reduce costs, schools are just robbing their own students of their future income. I'm glad that I managed to get through U-M before tuition got too out-of-hand, but I feel terrible for current students.
And the really sad thing is that if you look at where the spending is going, it's almost exclusively going to administration, rather than new faculty positions. The absolute number of administrators at the average university has increased something like three-fold over the last 20 years, while tenure-track faculty has pretty much remained static.
Of course, most of the reason for the increase in adminstration is the increase in regulations from the Federal Government, increasing the need for oversight positions in administration to make sure money is being spent properly. Decrease regulation, and decrease the number of necessary administration positions.
Well, kinda, but not quite. The problem is that the Federal government says that banks have to issue student loans to anyone regardless of risk. What the banks get back is the guarantee that the loans will be remain (no bankruptcy). So if loans can be safely made to anyone regardless of risk, there is no incentive to keep prices in check. The banks don't care to whom and how much because they are guaranteed to get their money back, so thre is no true market for education.
From what I remember from a couple of years ago, that policy has changed. The feds make the loans themselves and bypass banks. Banks can still make private loans, but the loans are not federally backed.
It has, and without getting too political, it's been an excellent policy change. The banks were just rent-seeking within the structure of federally guaranteed loans.
Without getting political also, I have several thoughts about the program.
For starters, the current rate, 3.4 percent, is higher than certain mortgage rates and is not renegotiable as are other forms of indebtedness. From what I also understand, interest rates for graduate school loans are not 3.4 percent, but can be 6.8 percent or higher. Maybe some of our grad students can weigh in on this topic, particularly med, law or MBA students, as many of the engineering/science PhD programs are tuition-free and include stipends.
That's a common explanation, but I don't find it compelling at all. Such duties and positions account for a small fraction of university administrators.
I think it has to do with a change within universities themselves away from faculty governance and toward administrative rule. Fulltime, career administrators have been very good at consolidating power and justifying their importance within the larger university bureaucracy, largely because they see university administration as a career in itself, rather than what it used to be: primarily a temporary sojurn for faculty (usually when paying their own kids' tuition) before returning to teaching.
I have this conversation about this with many others, and there is a lot of interesting factoids (unverified):
1. College enrollment has only gone up about 7% (as % of the population) over the past ~50 years.
2. Its much easier to get access to private (i.e. scholarships) or public funds (i.e. student loans) these days. It took me about 30 minutes to get my grad school loan to Michigan.
2. College tuition as % of per capita GDP has stayed pretty steady. HOWEVA, not for big brand schools.
The laws of demand are in full affect for big brand schools, but the supply for available schools are increasing. Therefore, college is fully available at a reasonable cost, you just have to go to somewhere other than the Michigans of the world.
...and yet a handful of student athletes insist that they are toiling for free. If only those kids had a clue the kind of misery they are avoiding by graduating debt-free (thanks to their scholarships).
It was my understanding that all State Universities in Michigan agreed in 2007 to provide in-state tuition for people in this individual's situation. And the reason I think so is that I sort of brokered that deal.
A cool story bro moment?
I can believe it. The University's financial people can be real assholes on this issue. I've known people who have lived almost their entire lives in Michigan but because they happened to live out-of-state for a year or two before they enrolled (and then moved back to Michigan), the University declared them "out-of-state."
That's not called being an asshole. It's called "You're no longer a resident." I can understand it if you moved in the past year, but if you have been out of the state for longer than a year, you're not a resident in most cases.
I find it amusing that , even though you know none of the details to which I refer, you're willing to blindly defend these people.
I know someone who lived in Michigan his entire life except for his first two years of high school. (Not his last two - his first two. He was back in the state for his junior and senior year.) U-M made him pay out-of-state tuition. You want to tell me that's fair?
If the University's financial folks can find any pretext to call someone out-of-state, they will do it. I guess it makes sense from their perspective - some of them might be facing layoffs if they couldn't come up with new revenue streams. But it's shitty as hell for the students involved.
...Robo's comment is perfectly justifiable by the way you wrote your post.
The situation you described sounds fair to me. They have to draw a cut off somewhere. Pretty sure the current cut off for how long ago you can have lived in a different state is five years. At least I think that's what it was when I was applying. For both Michgan and the state I'm from.
My GF lived in Virginia for 9 months, came back, worked for the University for 3 years and was labeled as out-of-state when she applied to UM for grad school this year.
She had to print her W2 off of Wolverine Access and take it to the financial aide office to prove her residency.
Yes, cause they will definitely overcharge you and return your money rather than undercharge you and then have to hound you for more money. Makes perfect business sense...I'm sure as soon as she realized and took her W-2 they changed it, right?
My GF lived in Virginia for 9 months, came back, worked for the University for 3 years and was labeled as out-of-state when she applied to UM for grad school this year.
She had to print her W2 off of Wolverine Access and take it to the financial aide office to prove her residency.
but I have known many people to travel abroad in lieu of studies (for Umich) and come back and be told they are not in-state, because they have been gone for a year.
HOWEVER, I have known some to have divorced parents (one in Mich and the other in Illinois) and live in Michigan their whole life and still be considered out of state.
I know this makes for a long post, but it is incredibly relevent: I know a girl who I grew up with (known since 2nd grade I believe) who has not moved, been labeled as out of state just because of . . . ???
Love my future alma mater, but jeez, some of these cases are very upsetting.
If you are active duty military, you can continue to be a "resident" of your home state. After spending 6 and a half years away from Michigan while in the Marines, I was still a Michigan resident, my car had Michigan liscense plate, etc... The University is in the wrong on this issue if it turns out they are trying to push the issue of residency.
As others have noted, they have to make a cut-off somewhere, and 2 years seems as reasonable as any. Most states have residency requirements for a host of state-financed/administered utilities (like marriage, driver's license, etc.), and schooling is the same way. I think the OP's linked story is a special case that should be treated differently, but while it sucks that two years was the cut-off for you it doesn't seem unreasonable.
My roommate at UofM was born in NY and lived most of his life in South Carolina. And just because he had never "been to Michigan" or "resided in the state" during his life they charged him out-of-state tution. Assholes.
Where was his duty station while in the Navy? For example, if he established residency in California while in the Navy, he would be entitled to in state tuition there. If he had kept Michigan as his permanent residence, which you can do no matter where you are stationed, you maintain the right to in state tuition. If you establish residency somewhere else, which many in the military do for lower tax rates, auto insurance, etc, you gain the benefits of that state.
So wouldn't have been able to establish residency in another state, if that's accurate.
I second this. Dude had the option, when enlisting/comissioning, to choose Michigan as his state-of-residency. If he didn't, then got stationed in say Great Lakes and chose IL as his state, that's on him. I feel bad for the kid that he didn't know this, but his ignorance shouldn't be a reason for UM people to get insulted.
(1) Article says he was overseas. (2) Letter he got from Michigan apparently denied him in-state tuition because of his "overseas service", not because he was a resident of some other state.
Obviously, getting the facts from only one side of the story, but there's no evidence he was stationed in another state and became a resident of that state. That may be what many in the military do, but it doesn't seem like that's what he did.
I would think wherever he is, if he is serving, then he should get the in state rate, if lower. I just think if you are serving our country, the federal government or that state government should pick up the tab.
Saying the University discriminates against veterans because of this is a pretty big stretch.
It sounds like there might have been some missed paper work or maybe something like jvblaha said.
...it kind of seems like there is something we are missing here. The U has pretty extensive (and I believe fair) regulations regarding residency. The fact that this guying is crying discrimination in public makes me pretty skeptical of him.
Discrimination may be the wrong label, but it is not right. The regulations/policies may work for some, but doesn't mean they're fair for this type of student.
1991. I grew up in MI, did two years in the Army, three years in college (out of state), another year in the Army, then came back for law school. And paid in-state rates. My brother did three years in the Army, then a year at CMU and three at UM; also paid in state.
My understanding of the rule was that if you had left the state only for college/military, it was not counted against you for residency purposes. Fact that this guy was overseas should not impact that at all. If you haven't "moved" to another state, you should still be a resident of Michigan.
During my 20 yrs in the Air Force, I was a Michigan resident the whole time. My leave and earning statement even said so. I filed Michigan state tax returns. As far as Michigan is concerned, I was still a resident.
UM may not necessarily "discriminating" against veterans, but they're rules/policies or what have you are very unfair to veterans. Not to mention self-serving.
And in turn out of country on his own accord, so I can see the university's argument. Yet, residence is determined by domicile, which is the place you expect to return to when you finish your tour. If he didn't have a residence in Michigan and was in fact stationed somewhere else, the university has a good claim.
Then again, just give him in-state tuition so it's a good media move.
If he didn't have a residence in Michigan and was in fact stationed somewhere else, the university has a good claim.
Wrong....the school's policy states that: "If you are domiciled in Michigan at the time of entry into active military duty, missionary work, Peace Corps, or similar service, you are presumed to retain your eligibility for resident classification as long as you are on continuous active duty or in continuous service and continuously claim Michigan as the state of legal residence for income tax purposes."
I was in this guy's scenario a few years ago, and the presumption was definitely that I was not a resident. It was a paperwork battle and unpleasant experience. I had lived in only two places in my life: Michigan and overseas, on orders, but I never was able to convince UM that I was a Michigan resident. (Eventually moot, since I went somewhere else.) I'm not saying UM shouldn't confirm someone's residency status with independent documentation; it's just that the presumption was - once I lived outside Michigan - I was proving my residency from ground zero.
I don't think this is evidence that UM "discriminates against vets". Only that they're a large organization that doesn't trust individuals, which is not surprising.
Establishing residence for military members means becoming a resident for tax purposes. Lots of servicemen end up in Texas or Florida and choose to become residents so they don't need to pay state income tax there or at subsequent duty stations.
I kept Michigan residency for my entire term of service, so I stayed an in-state resident.
During my four years of service, state taxes were waived. I had to file, but once the box was checked that I was active duty, that exercise was over.
State of Michigan, for clarification purposes.
Yeah, same here, but people tend to switch when they end up in Florida or Texas. I had to pay minimal capital gains taxes on some income, but that was all.
The exercise may have been over, but you're still a resident in the legal sense of the State. UM is definitely in the wrong on this one.
"and continuously claim Michigan as the state of legal residence for tax income purposes."
As a military person myself, whose whole family has served (save for the little bro, but he's still 17), I know a lot of people switch residencies for those tax breaks. Like I said above, most people do it in states like IL (no income tax on military personnel). I think he did the same when he went to basic, or A-school, or whatever. If he didn't then this would be a non-issue.
So he wouldn't have switched residencies for tax purposes.
The university's policies on residency are ridiculous. I grew up in Muskegon, went to purdue for undergrad, while maintaining Muskegon as my permanent residence. I had to go in front of a residency officer to prove I was a Michigan resident.
I spent my whole life in Michigan, then went to school in California for a bit while keeping Michigan as my permanent residence. Took months to sort out even though I was living in Michigan at the time of my application.
The difference between in-state and out-of-state tuition is pretty significant (especially at the graduate level).
The fact that you had to be spend a handful of hours (5?, 10? whatever) to prep your case and present it to a school administrator to save yourself potentially $30K to a $100K hardly seems ridiculous.
As a vet, I understand this. The military tells you to either choose a state tax-free residence or as in the case of overseas, he changed his residence to not have to pay state taxes. A benefit for most. For instance, coming from Alabama, I had the right to choose Florida or Texas for my state of residence which has no state taxes. The down side, if I wanted to go to a school outside the state of Florida/Texas, I am now an out of state student. Luckily, I was warned about this before I changed my residence. (Un)fortunately, I chose Michigan so I was still an out-of-state student. Go blue. And suck up the huge student loans like the rest of us.
Plus, I'm pretty sure my military record help me get into UM in the first place. I mean, I came from Alabama after all.
I'm confused as to how he was charged out of state tuition for 4 months. This is a one-time payment, not something you pay monthly. And if they decide to change his classification he will likely get reimbursed. The University won't undercharge people and then ask for more. They will overcharge and then reimburse you...as does any other business.
EDIT: Meant to reply to a post above originally
The University gives you the option to make the payment in monthly installments, if choose to do so
Right, but if tuition changes then he would have that reimbursed. You're paying for the whole semester, not on a per-month basis. They payment for the WHOLE semester is split up.
At least grad school was in-state.
They volunteered, got paid, and get education benefits besides. It's not even all that hard to get the military to pay for multiple degrees while you're enlisted, or at least it doesn't seem to be given the number of people i know who received advanced degrees on the taxpayer dime.
A couple reasons. First, the military will only cover in-state tuition w/ the GI Bill. As for "enlisted people getting multiple degrees," they have to stay < $4,500/yr. Good luck trying to fund a reputable degree w/ that. Second, military personnel have 0 choice of where they move to. For example, if I weren't bound to the military, I would have moved to CA a while ago to get in-state tuition to UCLA or Berkeley.
You can volunteer for a lot of things and get paid, but how many of them involve you possibly getting killed in the line of duty? Please, stop applying reasoning that insults the commitment, sacrifice and dedication that our vets accept as part of our military.
Edit: Neg me all you want, don't really care. But when people who have never served start making assumptions and voicing opinions that aren't fully supportive of our military it pisses me off. This whole thread is slowly becoming more and more infuriating.
I agree, and it looks like it might happen at all U.S. public schools. It's called the GI Bill Tuition Fairness Act of 2013 :
It would be nice to cut the vets a break but frankly tuition at public universities should be lower in general for everyone, low enough that it should almost be a moot point as to whether you are a veteran or not.
That most other developed countries offer free (or nearly free) higher education really makes the US appear to have a lousy commitment to education. Couple that with the debt that many students are compelled to burden themselves with and it's difficult to be optimistic for the future of American prosperity.
The university did the same thing to me 20 years ago. I served six years in the Army and enrolled at UM after returning from Germany. When I got my first tuition bill I was shocked to learn that UM had accepted me as an out-of-state student. Luckily, I was able to get a state representative to contact the university president. My situation was fixed quickly and the president sent me a letter of apology.
I knew a handful of other veterans on the Ann Arbor campus at the time who did not have this problem. But if accepting veterans who served overseas as out-of-state students is UM policy now, it needs to change. Interestingly, the report from WDIV did not have a response from the university.
This is embarrassing and pathetic.
It pays to treat your veterans right. Exceptions can, and should be made.
I'm a student veteran and I know exactly what he's talking about, but there is a residency classification form that would have taken care of this problem. I had to do it myself, and was eventually classified as an in-state student. The only thing is, the process takes several months, and meanwhile you're still being charged out of state tuition.
It's frustrating, and to be honest I was surprised they didn't have a work around for military vets, but there are avenues set up to resolve the situation. The bigger issue I had was that the GI Bill is counted as a "gift" making the student vet ineligible for most school and state aid. You know, the kind of gift you work 4 to 6 years for, making $23k, in miserable conditions to get.
I'm curious how this all came about. Michigan participates in the Yellow Ribbon program, so if you get 100% G.I. Bill benefits then the university covers the rest of your tuition(what they did for me when I came back for grad school) and I believe has some sort of matching for partial benefits as well. I think there's more to the story here.
If he was at <= 90% of the GI Bill, he wouldn't qualify for a dime of Yellow Ribbon $. I'll be at 80% when I start my MBA in Aug., so no chance for me. Also, most schools have a limited quota of Yellow Ribbon participants. It takes officers 7 yrs. to get to 100%.
Thanks for the explanation, I was in for nine and a half before Ross so had full coverage. Never knew how it worked for partial benefits. Sorry to hear it's not more of a matching program.
How many vets have gone to Michigan? Hundreds? Thousands? And yet this kid is the first to have a problem and he responds by calling out the University as discriminating. More likely he made some error and the attempt at publicity to shame the U into covering for him is pathetic.
He's not the first. Have you read the responses in this thread?
I had a similar situation with UM and it took an entire semester to straighten it out. It was all because i happened to have mailed my grad school application from St. Petersburg, Russia. My permanent address had remained in MI throughout my time in Russia but the uni didn't seem to care. It wasn't until i took my passport to a meeting and read the visa information to those concerned that it got fixed.
But if this guy actually changed his residency, filed taxes in another state, etc. while in the military i don't see why the UM should give him in-state tuition.
This is stupid. I hate the off season.
if this was Facebook I would like this
Before people go apeshit on the University, can someone who actually knows the situation explain what the University's policy is and how it's applied here?
The university has an incredibly strict policy regarding in-state vs out of state even among other state universities. They do this because they make so much more on out of state students, the current plan is for the school to actually be 50%-50% in state vs out of state sometime in the next few years. The fact that they would do this really is not surprising. Mary sue has been good for the school in a lot of ways but under her leadership the endowment has grown but the amount of aide given to students has hardly kept up with tuition increases. Apparently the focus of the next fundraising campaign is student aide so hopefully there will be a change in this soon.
"the amount of aide given to students has hardly kept up with tuition increases."
This is not entirely true. Under current financial aid policy, all in-state students have 100% need met. Yes, out of state students get screwed on that side, but in-state students should not have a problem paying for UM.
Not only does Michigan have about the strictest requirements to receive in-state tuition, it also has, I believe, the highest out of state tuition of any public university. Compared to other B1G schools, tuition for OOS students is off the charts, typically averaging over 10 K more than most of the other public U's in the conference. I wonder how many top OOS students choose other institutions over Michigan based on costs.
As for the mix of instate vs OOS, I thought the ratio was currently about 65/35, so going to a 50/50 mix would have significant impact upon the landscape and a major disaster for kids from Michigan who are fortunate to have such a great university being subsidized by OOS students. Considering how little the state of Michigan actually contributes these days in terms of funding to the school, switching the balance makes the financial side of things much easier, as long as there are people willing to pay the cost of attendance. Based on the number of applications, that doesn't seem to be an issue.
Current law is basically that any member of the military who chooses to may keep their home state as their state of residence regardless of where they live, as long as they keep filing tax returns in state. U of M treats me as an in-state student, even though I came from California via about five other states. I had to file some paperwork that was a little obnoxious, but they were cooperative.
I've found Michigan (Ross in particular) to be very helpful and eager to accommodate Vets. Ross is more concerned with finding more Vets to apply.
This is true. I only had half my Ross MBA app. completed, and they personally called me to see how they could help me finish the process. They explained Ross started a campaign to attract more veterans. It is considered a military friendly school because they don't even charge veterans app fees.
Yup. Before I take sides, I want to see the last state tax return this guy had on file. For example my cousin is from New York, was stationed in Florida, and then deployed elsewhere. He opted to start filing Florida returns due to the favorable state rates there, got his driver's license there, etc. When he went to Stony Brook, he was considered out of state.
If something like that is the case here, once you file elsewhere, you stop being a resident.
<kanye> UM hates Veterans </kanye>
Saying that, these men and women should get free tuition.
UM if clerical error...fix it, and bend over backwards to help a vet
Student...choose your words more carefully, discrimination requires that UM treat one class of people differently from another...based on the post it seems this issue would apply equally to missionaries, peace corp, etc. aka not discrimination this is a technicality over domicile
I too hate the offseason...aren't there any top recruits that we have no chance at getting that list Michigan in their top 25 that someone can write about?
but just wanted it to be know that:
Agree with the student.
...but did he really need to flash the "discrimination" card. Seems fairly isolated and correctable. Next up, Michigan "discriminates" against sub-3.0 GPA, no national honor society member, JV sports playing, couldn't find a date for prom high school senior.
I can just see it in front of the Michigan Union:
Rally Leader: "WHAT DO WE WANT?!"
Rally: "EQUALITY FOR AVERAGE STUDENTS!"
Rally Leader: "WHEN DO WE WANT IT?!"
Denotatively it's still used in the right context here, it's just the connotation of the word due to civil rights and other related issues that turn it into a bit of a loaded word
...with what you are saying for the most. Contextually speaking, the manner in which the OP present his/her post says that UM discriminates against veterans (meaning all veterans). Based on the anecdotes of many former veteran posters on this board, its seems that this is not the case (in fact quite the opposite) and that this is somewhat of an oversight that can be fixed. Still no need to through around the word discriminate in this case.
Before I forget, for those who have served this country, thanks a ton. Always appreciated.
So, as some regular readers know, my 19 year old daughter recently enlisted in the Navy. In fact, she is part way through boot camp right now. Her rating requires almost 2 years of A & C school after boot camp, and then 4 years of active duty, for a total of about 6 years. We live in the Chicago area, and one of the reasons she isn't at UofM is that there is no way she or I can afford it. Out of state costs are just too high for us.
Here's my question. Several have stated that residency for vets is established by the state they choose once in the service. So, if you choose "Texas" as your legal state of residence, you pay Texas state taxes, and are considered a Texas resident (and thus, not a Michigan resident.) I'm really curious if the reverse is true. That is to say if my daughter established Michigan as her State of residence at the beginning of Navy "A" school, and continued this for her six years of continuous service, would she be considered an in-state resident by the University of Michigan, having had more than five years of continuous uninterrupted "residency?" You can see this has important future tuition ramifications and implications. The GI Bill offers her 180k towards college costs once she is done with active duty. At in-state rates starting in 2019, 180k just might cover most of a Michigan education. And if she is able to establish residence simply by a declaration of residency, that's worth considering.
I do know that UofM has always been harsh regarding the establishment of (and losing of) in-state and out-of-state status. Way back in my day, my parents moved away from Michigan part way through my undergraduate education (just before my junior year.) It was at that point that I became independent and not dependent, and that my parents no longer claimed me on their taxes. I didn't dare do anything to jeopardize my Michigan in-state resident status.
No, either she would have to be domiciled in MI upon entering actor duty (this is her home of record), or she could establish MI upon being stationed there. However, the only chance of being assigned w/ the Navy in MI is through a recruiting, ROTC , or similarly odd job
Technically speaking, when she is presented the form to establish a state of residency, she only has two legal choices: where she came from and where she is stationed. You're not allowed to just pick any of the 50 states. I don't know how fully the military enforces that. If Grandma and Grandpa or Aunt Millie or Cousin Bob live in Michigan and she uses that address, the Navy would probably let her get away with that, although I can't say whether the IRS or state agency would bird-dog her for proof. And it sounds like U-M certainly would.
She can change her state of residency, by the way, any time she gets re-stationed. But, and this is important, once she changes it she can't change it back. In other words if she gets stationed in California and picks Illinois as her state of residency, she can keep Illinois as long as she wants. If she then moves to hypothetically Virginia and changes to Virginia, she can't go back to Illinois unless she's stationed there again, nor for that matter, California.
Also, the GI Bill doesn't offer a lump sum. The $180K figure probably came from someone saying "if such and such than this is how much you'd get"; they like to put it in dollar figures instead of running you through the convoluted state-by-state formula and that $180K that was quoted also probably includes housing allowance, which you get while you're getting GI Bill funds. The way it used to be calculated is that, whichever state you were getting your education in, that state's most expensive instate tuition was the tuition money you'd get. So if U-M is the most expensive school and it's $9,000 a year for instate students (I made that up) then studying in Michigan gets you up to $9,000 a year regardless of what school you choose. (You don't get to pocket the difference by going to a cheaper school.) It's similar still but different somehow and more complicated and I'm not too sure what exactly they do now. Also, schools that participate in the Yellow Ribbon program will cover between half and 100% of the difference between the GI Bill and the actual tuition, if tuition is more expensive.
What you wrote is the new method of calculating tuition reimbursement. Until 2011, 9/11 GI Bill reimbursement was limited to the most expensive in-state, UNDERGRADUATE tuition. They changed it because the huge variance in program costs (e.g., $10k for UM undergrad, $45k for UM MBA). Good point, though, on the fact that actual payout is situation-specific, not what they quote in the pamphlet.
Undergrad, yes, forgot that part. As I understood it part of the reason they changed it was that they needed to shuffle money around because there was a hue and cry about wanting vo-tech schools to be paid for too, but they weren't going to get any extra money to do so. So they had to move some away from the college pool.
I'm buggered now if I know exactly what the calculation is anymore. You'd think I would since I'm taking their money.
If you are really interested in your daughter attending the UofM, you really need to speak to the veterans advisor (Phil Larson) on campus to explore your options before closing the door for good. Also, ask about the Yellow Ribbon Program. It negates out-of-state tuition costs, and UofM is fully participating.
This is such a Michigan thing to do. However, I think the system automatically changes your status. I went on a study abroad for a semester and when I came back I was considered "an out of state" student. A quick trip to the Registrar cleared that up. The office said if you leave AA for the duration of a semester sometimes you are switched. Dumb but whatever. Do the right thing, Michigan
This needs to stop immediately. Disgraceful.
I would like to know all the facts before people start bashing UofM. Being a retired veteran I have no problem with UofM classing the serviceman out of state if he changed his address to another state. If he's the one who CHOOSE to do this to put a few more bucks in his pocket then to bad.
People who enter the military while living as TX residents are entitled to a free TX education via the Hazlewood Act. Many state-specific VA benefits such as that are dependent on the home of record listed on the DD214. In my situation, if I'm reliant on MI's minimal VA benefit system, shouldn't I at least get UM in-state tuition? Even though I changed my tax residency to TX, I didn't inherit all their veteran benefits.
University of Michigan's endowment is 7.8 billion. Where in the hell is that money going towards. As a recent, out-of-state graduate, I can say that the only thing that upset me was a supposedly non-profit organization deferring all of the costs to the students, while having that money in the bank. When the supposed purpose is to educate the students and not to accumulate profits, there is no reason for a public school to have that amount of money in its endowment. Otherwise, come out as a for profit corporation, something we all know universities are anyways these days.
...is not exactly the same as having $7.8B in spending cash. There are quite a few restrictions on how the money is to be managed. And frankly, given the shaky state of global finance in 2013, it's probably best for the U. to chart an extra-conservative course right now.
UofM uses the endowment money for scholarships and debt management. If UofM used it like this organization it would look like this!
An Overview of the United States National Debt
The Current Outstanding Public Debt of the United States is:
Last Updated: Friday, February 22nd, 2013 (updated daily)
Every man, woman and child in the United States currently owes $54,481 for their share of the U.S. public debt
I had the exact same issue, and it was a real pain to get fixed. I maintained a Michigan license and paid taxes in Michigan throughout my time in the military. Still got classified as out of state after being back in Michigan for 3 years and paying bills, taxes, etc. the whole time.
Needless to say they make it a huge hassle to correct something which should never have been an issue in the first place.
They r pulling so much shit on vets that it's to the point, sadly, this shit ain't news. They, the VA, runs a VRAP program for instance that states certain criteria, i.e., age, school planning to attend, etc., but nowhere does it say when you must begin the pursuit of retraining program. Then suddenly veterans are sent emails and postal services stating if they don't begin schooling within the next 8 days, they r fucked. typical VA ´¨HA HA, just kidding bullshit.
...did you save by getting it reduced to in-state tuition? Given that dollar figure, ask yourself again if it was really that big of a pain.
This should be remedied in an appropriate manner, but people freaking out about the general premise that people's residency status can change so fluidly need to relax. In-state tuition to UM is quite a bit less than out-of-state, and I've known of (perhaps apocryphal) tales of people claiming residence with an uncle or cousin just to save on the tuition. So at some point the University needs to make a policy and stick with it. Obviously veterans and people who must travel for their life situation have special circumstances, but at the same time let's wait for all of the details to come out (and not a 300-word write-up) before jumping on the admins.
As a current student-vet I have a couple of points.
1) You can change your state residency when you are stationed overseas. I don't know if that happened here, but you go through the military to file paperwork and among other things have to show that you intend to live in said state when you leave the military. It is an option at least. (I was stationed overseas for almost 5 straight years)
2) I have never lived in the state of Michigan before and am thus classified as an out-of-state student. However, I am using my GI Bill which covers up to the maximum amount of in-state student tuition levels. Additionally, the University of Michigan is partnered with a national education program called the Yellow Ribbon Program which works with participating universities to cover additional tuition fees for veterans that may not be covered by the GI Bill. Thus, the University of Michigan and the Yellow Ribbon program are paying the rest of my out-of-state tuition not payed by the GI Bill (which is the majority sum).
While I do not know this guy, nor the particulars of his case, I am guessing that there is either a great miscommunication being perpetrated here, or there is more to this than is being reported or hombre is telling us.
As a vet, I have found the University and its staff to be very helpful and am extremely grateful for the support they have provided me, both financially and otherwise. While I am not all veterans here, I do not expect that I am the exception. Finally, with the Yellow Ribbon on tap, I really do wonder about hombre's claims here. I do not think the UofM is selective in its use. I am not sure it has the right to be. Other than perhaps the states of Illinois and Texas (I believe Illinois and maybe Texas provide automatic free four-year college educations to all in-state veterans), I have considered the public University of Michigan to be one of the most military friendly establishments I have come across in the public sector.
You have to have a physical presence in a state and an intent to remain indefinitely. If you change your residency through DFAS while overseas based on nothing more than an intent to go to your new state, expect your old state to want some back taxes when it finds out.
... that nothing malicious is going on here. Similar thing happened to me, and I found the residency office to be a bunch of inept, lazy individuals with sinecures. It took me 6 months worth of haggling to finally get my status changed to resident.