Democrats want to overhaul the tax definition of a child to make it more expansive. But some warn it will be a nightmare to enforce
Anyone caring for a child would be able to claim credit payments, not just relatives. Supporters say that would make hundreds of thousands more eligible, but implementing the change could be daunting.
By09/26/2021 07:00 AM EDTLink CopiedHouse Democrats don’t just want to expand their signature Child Tax Credit payment program, they also want to redefine what it means to be someone's child.As part of their sweeping reconciliation plan, they are proposing to overhaul, for the first time in almost a generation, the legal definition of a child that’s used to claim the hugely popular break. But that's not as simple as it sounds, and implementing it could become a bureaucratic nightmare.
Lawmakers want to make the definition more expansive, so that more people can claim the benefit worth up to $3,600 per child. They’re proposing to dump long-standing rules requiring a child to be a relative of the person taking the credit.Instead, they want to award the money to whoever is caring for the child, regardless of whether they’re related.
That’s designed to be more flexible and to accommodate people in a wider variety of living situations — researchers say hundreds of thousands of kids are currently ineligible for the benefit because they live with, say, a family friend."Nobody can claim kids who are being raised by someone who is not a close relative — those kids just get cut off from the break entirely,” said Jacob Goldin, a former Treasury official who now teaches at Stanford University’s law school. headtopics.com
But some warn what Democrats are proposing would be complicated and difficult for the already beleaguered IRS to enforce.It could also be confusing to taxpayers because lawmakers would not change the definition of a child used for other tax benefits such as the Earned Income Tax Credit — forcing people to navigate multiple tax
definitions of a child.giant package of tax and spendingchanges approved last week by the House Ways and Means Committee.Much of the attention to Democrats’ reconciliation plan has focused on their call for $2 trillion in new taxes on high earners and corporations and plans to extend their new
monthly Child Tax Credit payment program beyond this year.Created earlier this year, the program is now sending monthly payments worth up to $300 per child to 35 million families.But Democrats are also proposing a number of changes in how the credit program would work, one of most significant of which deals with the definition of a child.
Lawmakers have periodically battled over how to define children for tax purposes, which affects people seeking not just the Child Tax Credit, but also the EITC, a dependent care break and head-of-household filing status.Congress hasn’t made major changes in the area though since 2004, when, amid complaints the tax code had too many conflicting definitions of a child, lawmakers tried to create a more uniform standard. headtopics.com
The current rules recognize that not every child lives in a traditional nuclear family and don’t require someone to be a parent in order to take the credit. But they stipulate the child must be a relative, with a list of accepted relations that includes sons, daughters, foster children, brothers, sisters, nieces, nephews and grandchildren, among others.
The child also must live with the person claiming the credit for more than half the year.But there has been growing attention to those left out of that formula.People at the bottom of the income ladder — the main target of Democrats’ Child Tax Credit initiative — are more likely to have idiosyncratic living situations, researchers say. About 330,000 kids don’t qualify for the monthly payments because they live with a cousin or neighbor or someone else the IRS says isn’t a close relative, Goldin estimates.
“The kids who get excluded under the current relationship test are a lot of the kids who would benefit most from receiving the financial benefits of the CTC,” he says.Beginning in 2023, House Democrats would drop that rule.In its place, they’d require people claiming the benefit to be someone who provides uncompensated care for a child, including supervising their daily activities. That would also include maintaining a “secure environment” in which the child lives; arranging for their medical care; and being involved in "financial and other support" for education "or similar activities of the individual.”
In addition, a child would no longer have to live with someone for more than half a year to qualify. Under Democrats’ plan, that residency requirement would be calculated monthly, so children would only have to live with a person for more than half a month to qualify for that month’s payment. headtopics.com
Some children live different places over the course of a year, and Democrats’ plan would allow multiple people to take the credit for the kid, although not at the same time.Lawmakers would also have the IRS set up a system to settle disputes when more than one person claims the same child.
A spokesperson for Ways and Means Committee Chair Richard Neal (D-Mass.) did not respond to requests for comment.Janet Holtzblatt, a former Treasury official who helped develop the current child definition, sees trouble ahead for the IRS should the plan become law.
The agency will have difficulty policing the break, she predicts, because it is poorly equipped to determine “nebulous” things like who is supervising a child or whether he or she is living in a secure environment.And it may also be hard on beneficiaries who get audited because they will have trouble proving to the IRS that they were ones who, for example, took the child to a doctor.
"It can be more advantageous in these complicated family situations, but it's also going to be burdensome for the taxpayer to establish, if called in for an audit, to demonstrate they meet these criteria," said Holtzblatt, now at the Washington-based Tax Policy Center.
“I get what [Democrats] are trying to do and, from a social welfare perspective, maybe they’re on the right track,” she said. “But from a tax administration perspective, I think the disadvantages outweigh the benefits.” Read more: POLITICO »
Hear Sounds From Mars Captured by NASA’s Perseverance Rover
Two microphones aboard the six-wheeled spacecraft add a new dimension to the way scientists and engineers explore the Red Planet.
VoteBlue2022 Useless policy of Biden adminstration will brought American so many problem. Responsible journalism headline: Democrats recognizing the large number of children being raised without a formal parent or guardian, want to prevent them falling through the cracks for child tax breaks. However, a former tax official warns that implementation may be difficult.
The reason why most of us don’t make it in this crypto trading is because of what others has said about crypto, have you tried trading with chrisdiaztrade!? well if you do you won’t leave or look for another Mentor, he’s Real and legitimate chrisdiaztrade JonLemire Should include adult disabled dependents
JonLemire Politico is a nightmare People been doing this. People on the system, paying $15.00 a month in rent for a 4 bedroom house 🏡 and getting $1,300 a month in food stamps always let other people carry their kids and they get like $10,000 back from the Government. Meanwhile us working class end up paying tax
sure y not ...since they are into revising terms Help LongCovid survivors financially. We are debilitated, can’t work and are the forgotten ones of this pandemic. 🆘‼️JeffBezos elonmusk and BillGates help your fellow hurting humans please.
Panel OKs Dems' $3.5T bill, crunch time for Biden agendaDemocrats pushed a $3.5 trillion, 10-year bill strengthening social safety net and climate programs through the House Budget Committee, but without unanimous party support We do not need this expensive bill! Democratics have the ball lets try not to F**K it up!! Again The cost is 0 like Obamacare it’s paid for
Panel OKs Dems' $3.5T bill, crunch time for Biden agendaWASHINGTON (AP) — Democrats pushed a $3.5 trillion, 10-year bill strengthening social safety net and climate programs through the House Budget Committee on Saturday, but one Democrat opposed the measure in an illustration of the challenges party leaders face in winning the near unanimity they'll need to push the sprawling package through Congress. RepScottPeters is NOT a 'moderate' Democrat, DINO saboteurs are CONservatives
Dems, Don’t Waste This Chance to Make Community College FreeOpEd: Democrats should seize the opportunity to make college free. Nothing is free.
House Budget Dems aim to show movement on social spending planThe House Budget Committee met Saturday to approve the $3.5 trillion plan for floor action, even as Democratic leaders struggle to finalize bill text that can pass both chambers. Help LongCovid survivors financially. We are debilitated, can’t work and are the forgotten ones of this pandemic. 🆘‼️JeffBezos elonmusk and BillGates help your fellow hurting humans please. VoteBlue2022
Kyrsten Sinema faces no confidence threat from Arizona Dems over filibusterThe Arizona Democratic Party accused Sinema of protecting a 'Jim Crow relic' under the guise of bipartisanship.
As Dems race forward, Manchin pumps brakes: ‘There is no timeline’President Joe Biden wants Sen. Joe Manchin and other holdouts to find a top-line number they are comfortable with for the transformational spending bill that will run into the trillions of dollars, but Manchin isn’t yet ready to give one He’d rather waste time. Get with the program Joe! I guess your for all that black lung in West Virginia!