Congress mandates clearer college price tags, bans selling student data

What it does

This bill requires colleges to improve their net price calculators—the online tools that show prospective students what college will actually cost them after financial aid. It sets minimum standards for how these calculators must display information (prominently, clearly, with specific data about costs and aid), prohibits colleges from selling student data entered into the calculator, and authorizes the Department of Education to create a single universal calculator so students can compare prices across multiple colleges at once.

Why we flagged it

The bill's core function is mandating clearer disclosure of college costs to students and families, plus prohibiting misuse of their data. It is fundamentally a transparency and consumer-protection measure, not a subsidy, deregulation, or appropriation.

What the text implies

• Colleges may face compliance costs to redesign calculators and audit data practices, which could be passed to students through higher fees or reduced aid.
• A universal calculator may reduce institutional differentiation in pricing perception, potentially affecting enrollment competition and institutional pricing power.
• The 1-year implementation deadline is tight; institutions with legacy systems may struggle to comply, creating uneven compliance across sectors.
• Data privacy prohibition may limit colleges' ability to use calculator data for legitimate institutional research or targeted outreach to underrepresented student groups.

Who it affects

Ordinary students and families gain clearer, more standardized information about true college costs before enrolling, reducing information asymmetry and hidden surprises. Data privacy protections prevent colleges from monetizing student information. The universal calculator reduces friction and makes comparison shopping easier.

Who stands to gain

• Educational technology vendors (calculator platform developers)
• Consulting firms specializing in higher-ed compliance

Named in the bill

Department of Education, Higher Education Act of 1965, Section 132, Institutions of higher education, Federal student financial aid (Title IV), NET (mapped stock reference)

Where it stands

3 cosponsors: 3 Democrats.

• May 1, 2025 — Introduced · Congress.gov: “Introduced in Senate”
• May 1, 2025 — Referred to Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions · Congress.gov: “Read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions”

Dates and quoted wording are Congress.gov's action record; the timeline shows status changes, not every procedural step.

Money around this bill

14 lobbying clients named this bill on 23 disclosure filings across 2 quarters, Dec 2025 to Jun 2026. Those filings disclosed $660,000 in lobbying spend. A filing names 2 bills on average, so that figure is what each filing reported, not a share belonging to this bill.

More lobbying clients named this bill than 94% of bills with at least one filing.

Chuck Grassley, the sponsor, reported $49,167 in PAC receipts in the 2026 cycle.

• Crea — $120,000 on 2 filings
• Cohnreznick Llp — $100,000 on 2 filings
• Inland Group — $60,000 on 2 filings
• The Nrp Group — $60,000 on 2 filings
• The Pacific Companies — $60,000 on 2 filings

Lobbying Disclosure Act filings through Jul 19, 2026. A filing shows who paid to lobby on a bill it names, not what changed.