How am I supposed to write this legal memo based on the IRAC model? Like, how should

Fantastic news! We've Found the answer you've been seeking!

Question:

How am I supposed to write this legal memo based on the IRAC model? Like, how should I split it off of parts 1 and 2?

Hypothetical Fact Pattern

Michael Brooks is the Chief People Officer at a medium-sized public company, and he is responsible for overseeing the firm's approach to talent acquisition, human resources, onboarding, training, compensation, benefits, and the overall people experience. Since 2018, Michael has held this position in which he has successfully developed and executed a plan for organizing people to work remotely, created new support systems for employees' mental health and wellbeing under the strains of the pandemic, and had to deal with motivating and engaging employees in an uncertain economic environment in which budgets were stretched thin.

It's August 2022, and Michael is returning from a much-needed vacation after upheaval the pandemic caused for his family and firm, when he receives a request from Ryan Reed, who serves as the Chief Financial Officer ("CFO") of the firm. CFO Reed wants Michael to get input from business law experts and brief him on: (i) the legality of the Biden's Administration's Student Loan Relief Plan, and (ii) the legality of their firm implementing its own Student Loan Relief Plan.

Michael Brooks, of course, recognizes that student loans are an important issue. He has heard the numbers. There is more than $1.7 trillion in federal and private student loan debt and it is held by more than 44 million Americans. He knows that this burden has enormous repercussions, especially when it comes to hiring. Recent graduates may experience a narrowed sense of possibility; decisions like when to start a family or buy a home can become

overwhelming in the shadow of debt obligations. The challenge of saving for retirement while paying off student debt may also deter entrepreneurship and risk-taking, which are crucial economic drivers. Moreover, the stress and strain caused by economic insecurity can impact everything from well-being to productivity. Financial issues are commonly cited as leading cause of stress and can induce poor performance at work.

He is also quickly familiarizing himself with the Biden-Harris Student Loan Debt Relief Plan. On August 24, 2022, President Biden, Vice President Harris, and the U.S. Department of Education announced a three-part plan to help federal student loan borrowers transition back to regular payment as pandemic-related support expires. This plan includes loan forgiveness of up to $20,000 in debt for as many as 40 million borrowers making under $125,000 a year. The administration said nearly 90 percent of the benefits would go to borrowers who had already finished school and were making less than $75,000 a year.1

Part 1 of the Student Loan Debt Relief Plan is the final extension of the student loan repayment pause. Due to the economic challenges created by the pandemic, the Biden-Harris Administration has extended the student loan repayment pause a number of times. This final extension will ensure a smooth transition to repayment and prevent unnecessary defaults, the Biden-Harris Administration will extend the pause a final time through December 31, 2022, with payments resuming in January 2023.

Part 2 of the Student Loan Debt Relief Plan provides targeted debt relief to low- and middle-income families. Specifically, to smooth the transition back to repayment and help borrowers at highest risk of delinquencies or default once payments resume, the U.S. Department of Education will provide up to $20,000 in debt relief to Pell Grant recipients with loans held by the Department of Education and up to $10,000 in debt relief to non-Pell Grant recipients. Borrowers are eligible for this relief if their individual income is less than $125,000 or $250,000 for households.

Part 3 of the Student Loan Debt Relief Plan makes the student loan system more manageable for current and future borrowers. Income-based repayment plans have long existed

1 https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2022/08/24/fact-sheet-president-biden-announces- student-loan-relief-for-borrowers-who-need-it-most/

within the U.S. Department of Education. However, the Biden-Harris Administration is proposing a rule to create a new income-driven repayment plan that will substantially reduce future monthly payments for lower- and middle-income borrowers.

The rule would:

Require borrowers to pay no more than 5% of their discretionary income monthly on undergraduate loans. This is down from the 10% available under the most recent income- driven repayment plan.

Raise the amount of income that is considered non-discretionary income and therefore is protected from repayment, guaranteeing that no borrower earning under 225% of the federal poverty levelabout the annual equivalent of a $15 minimum wage for a single borrowerwill have to make a monthly payment.

Forgive loan balances after 10 years of payments, instead of 20 years, for borrowers with loan balances of $12,000 or less.

Cover the borrower's unpaid monthly interest, so that unlike other existing income-driven repayment plans, no borrower's loan balance will grow as long as they make their monthly paymentseven when that monthly payment is $0 because their income is low.

Part 1

CFO Ryan Reed needs the assistance of Michael Brooks and you, the business law expert hired to assist Michael Brooks with this issue. Specifically, CFO Reed wants to know if Biden's plan to relieve Federal debt is legal? Ryan had heard on the news that the Student Debt Relief Plan may be an "unconstitutional exercise of Congress's legislative power," but his Democratic friends pointed out to him that the Biden-Harris Administration does have legal authority under the Higher Education Relief Opportunities for Students Act. Are these the only two legal issues or are there any additional legal issues that Ryan should be aware of? Given all of the potential legal issues, whose claims are likely to hold up in Court?

Part 2

Second, CFO Ryan Reed wants to know if their publicly-traded firm may be able to obtain a competitive advantage in a tight labor market by offering its own version of the Student Debt Relief Plan. CFO Reed thinks that it would be an attractive perk to new recruits. CFO Reed

recognizes though that this may be a large expense, and thereby, such an investment may not be justifiable under a traditional profit-maximization framework. Although the CFO also heard that it may be possible, under the Consolidated Appropriations Act signed into law as part of the pandemic relief efforts, to structure this employee benefit in a tax-free way. The tax incentives would surely make this idea more attractive from a return on investment (ROI) perspective and to shareholders.

In addition, CFO Reed has been hearing a lot more from investors about their interest in the social responsibility of business lately, and thinks that showcasing this new employee benefit may bring the firm additional indirect gains like a better reputation and thereby, more revenue or lower costs. If the Biden-Harris Student Debt Relief Plan does not stand up in the Courts, CFO Reed is leaning toward implementing just such a plan. But CFO Reed wants to be sure he's thought through all the business ethics and legal considerations. For example, would the firm need to give student loan relief to everyone? Isn't debt relief just another employment perk and therefore, subject to nondiscrimination considerations? Or if the firm did offer this benefit, how would it be perceived from a business ethics point-of-view? What stakeholders or principles should he use to evaluate the decision? Or should he be worried that the media would construe his firm's Student Debt Relief Plan as just another benefit that rich, white people get rather than solving real issues like the black-white income gap or other sources of inequality.