June 3,2008, Senator David Vitter (R-LA) introduced S. 3076: Home School Opportunities Make Education Sound Act of 2008, which amends the Internal Revenue Service Code of 1986 to allow for tax deductions for homeschool-related expenses. Unfortunately, I am a little dissatisfied with the handling this bill has received by both of the homeschool advocacy groups I know of which have taken a public stand on the bill. Instinctually, I am opposed, but I would like slightly better reasoning than my very basic repugnance at any federal involvement in homeschooling whatsoever. I will explore that topic more later, after I finish reading the many articles I have bookmarked while starting to research the topic of tax credits and how they effect the institutions they are designed to benefit.
Introducing his reasoning for this legislation, Senator Vitter says:
“Like those who choose to send their children to private schools, home school families pay an inequitable share of education-related expenses,” said Vitter. “Even as they pay for expenditures related to home school activities, they fund public schools through their tax dollars. We need to provide them with the same relief offered to private school families, and this bill is intended to do just that, by minimizing the financial burden of these families.” Vitter.Senate.gov
I reject the basic premise that I somehow should expect to pay an “equitable” share of education-related expenses. The wealthy pay an inequitable share of education-related expenses. Here, wealthier homeschoolers may have an opportunity to get up to $500 of that back, but this does not provide much “relief” to those who might actually find that money most useful. Without taxed income, there usually is no tax credit. I also generally disagree with the use of the tax code to influence behavior.
The Home School Legal Defense Association (HSLDA) supports this bill, but does not provide any particular analysis of the bill and its potential effects to homeschoolers. All they really provide is an essential restatement of Vitter’s comments:
…Hence, homeschool parents incur an inequitable financial burden in regard to their children’s education…HSLDA.org
I thought HSLDA was opposed to federal involvement in education, and I would appreciate some sort of explanation of how they view this tax credit separately from other federal education bills. Then they make a statement which seems odd to me.
The HOMES Act would help families subsidize homeschooling expenses and ensure that homeschool students enjoy similar rights and treatment to students enrolled in public education. Ibid.
I have no idea how a $500 tax credit purports to “ensure that homeschool students enjoy similar rights and treatment to students enrolled in public education.” Maybe I am missing something here, but it seems to me that most of us chose to exit the system in order to provide something rather dissimilar to the treatment of students enrolled in public education. Something better. What are our children missing out on that this money is going to rectify?
National Home Education Legal Defense (NHELD), on the other hand, opposes the bill for three basic reasons.
- As explained above, it’s unconstitutional.
- Congress has no authority to adopt any such law.
- There are significant unintended consequences. NHELD
Points one and two are essentially the same. And while I agree in principle, I also know that the weight of Supreme Court decisions rests against this interpretation. “For the general welfare” has been interpreted broadly enough that there are effectively few restrictions placed on the power of the federal government. I don’t see this tax credit being struck down in court any time soon.
The unintended consequences are more what I am interested in learning more about. For NHELD, it focuses on the potential federal definition of homeschooling. NHELD asks (unless otherwise noted, the remainder of the blockquotes come from the NHELD article linked above),
b) Who will decide what the definition of “home school” is? The IRS, the Congress, each state’s legislature, the courts? Again, the bill does not specify.
Whether or not publicly funded homeschool programs would be included may be an issue, but it seems to me that the bill does specify who will define what a homeschool is.
The term `elementary or secondary home school’ includes any home school that meets the requirements of State law applicable to such home schools and that provides elementary education or secondary education (kindergarten through grade 12), whether or not such home school is deemed a private school for purposes of State law. S. 3076
On the surface, at least, it seems that most problematic would be those ten states which do not require any formal notice of intent. I do not see too many homeschoolers clamoring before their respective legislatures demanding state law be amended to require notices in order to be eligible for federal tax credits. In the long run, I definitely agree that the effect would likely be to begin to standardize state law with regards to homeschooling, but I would like to see some examples where exactly this kind of thing has happened, assuming there are any cases which could be even loosely applicable. NHELD then concludes the discussion directly related to this bill with a statement that I agree with completely.
NHELD continues to believe that any such federal benefit is not worth the loss of freedom. Freedom lost is too dificult to regain. In fact, today, it is seldom, if ever, regained.
The difficulty for me with the discussion to this point is that it works well for those who already agree (as I generally do). I do not, however, think it is very convincing to someone who is not already leery of the federal government’s involvement in education.
The last third of the article takes an interesting turn from an attempt to build a case against the proposed tax credits to an attempt to implicate HSLDA as the instigator of this legislation. I have noted before that I am relatively neutral when it comes to HSLDA, and I have my own concerns with the organization. This discussion seemed out of place, however. I don’t know how to abbreviate this and still maintain any context, so I will simply respond to each of the many questions.
Why was this bill introduced?
I assume for the reasons that Senator Vitter mentioned. And perhaps because Huckabee’s rise to relevance in the primaries made an impression on politicians always happy to have motivated and politically active constituents on their side.
Was Senator Vitter asked by someone to introduce it?
Maybe. Why does it matter? I see where we are going with this, but I fail to see the relevance to a general discussion of whether or not this bill is beneficial or harmful to homeschooling.
Who asked him to introduce it?
What I really do not like about this line of questioning is that suspicion is being cast on HSLDA without any actual proof. I would think it shouldn’t be too hard to find out whether or not there is some shadowy figure behind the introduction of this legislation. I emailed the Senator…maybe I’ll call his office tomorrow just out of curiosity. But whether or not HSLDA has anything to do with it really does not make the bill on its own more or less harmful to homeschooling. It should be supported or fought based on its own merits or lack thereof, not the involvement of HSLDA.
This is not the first bill that has been introduced in Congress to accomplish the goal of providing tax breaks to parents who home school. Several similar bills have been introduced in the past and have not been adopted. Among them was the Home School Non Discrimination Act, or HoNDA. One provision of that bill would have done precisely the same thing that this bill purports to do.
And we have little to fear from this bill for the same reasons that HoNDA didn’t get passed. I seriously doubt this Congress is passing a homeschool tax credit.
Who was responsible for asking Congress to introduce HoNDA? Another national home school organization was responsible; Home School Legal Defense Association (HSLDA).
True enough, but this argumentation is not really going anywhere in my mind. Maybe it is because I was only vaguely aware of HoNDA back when everyone was so upset about it (and I agree that it was the wrong direction for HSLDA to take).
Why did HSLDA ask Congress to introduce HoNDA, or any of the myriad of other bills it has proposd to Congress regarding home schooling?
I’ll go out on a limb and venture a guess that they thought it would be a good thing. And perhaps the success they have had in some things has led them to see themselves as more powerful than they are. That does not mean that they are right, but in the absence of proof I would prefer if all of the professional organizations regarding homeschooling dealt with their differences with each other directly without trying to make it sound like there is some ulterior motive.
If federal laws that conflict with state laws could mean that those state laws would become null and void, why is HSLDA asking Congress to adopt federal laws? (Currently there are 6 federal bills that HSLDA supports).
That bit in quotes is a bit misleading. There are indeed 6 federal bills supported by HSLDA, but only two are about homeschooling:
- The HOMES Act (discussed in this entry)
- Reaffirmation of Parents’ Fundamental and Constitutional Rights which seems to be in direct response to the case in California. And it is just a resolution, not actual legislation.
- Family Tax Relief Act of 2007, which leads me to wonder if HSLDA isn’t going to actively support any tax credit related to families and children whether or not it is related to homeschooling.
- The A-PLUS Act, which is an alternative to No Child Left Behind.
- The Parental Right to Decide Protection Act, which prohibits federal funding or other assistance for mandatory human papillomavirus vaccine programs.
OK, make that five bills. The A-PLUS bill is in both the House and the Senate, but it is effectively the same legislation.
But none of this discussion seems to serve any purpose directly related to this bill and seems heavily based on innuendo. And considering that most of the people I will discuss this bill with who support it will in all likelihood be rather supportive of HSLDA, it may actually be counterproductive.
If you made it this far, congratulations! I am hoping to delve more into this legislation later in the week, but in the meantime, would you vote for this tax credit? Why or why not?
homeschool homeschooling HOMES Act S. 3076 Home School Opportunities Make Education Sound Act
I lived in Louisiana when Vitter was first elected. It seems to me that I recall someone telling me that one of his relatives homeschools. However, I know that Rep. Chris John’s sister homeschools, and that may be who I’m thinking of. Will investigate and report back.
I wouldn’t but not for the reasons NHELD focuses on. They always seem to come down on the side of fear and I don’t live on that planet.
I’m just fine with using the tax code to influence behavior. Give some car manufacturers the right incentives and we might see some progress in alternative fuels.
But from what you wrote here it sounds like the rich would be helped with this credit and the rest of us would get “left behind.”
Make it an additional child or family deduction or whatever it takes to help as many people as possible who are paying little or no taxes and it would appeal to me more.
Give tax incentives to, say, county institutions, like libraries or community centers, that help hsers.
I think, though, you are right on target with your doubt about any of this going anywhere. And, I will add, ever.
It’s a nice little pander but it never seems to get anywhere. Whether we agree with it or not.
Nance
I think the idea is that if HSLDA gets some kind of federal law pertaining to home school, there will be more incentive to get their constitutional ammendment passed. One of the main reasons for not supporting it is that it would make home school law-making a federal responsibility. If you can say that homeschooling is already a federal responsibitity, the switch goes from fighting it to trying to modify it. NHELD has spoken against this–it’s harder to fight at the federal level (and others more legally based than pragmatic).
As you can guess, NHELD and HSLDA are at odds about how homeschooling rights should be defended. I am completely on board with NHELD and regard HSDLA suspiciously, given their other agendas. Moving homeschooling to a federal venue would negate NHELD’s abilities to be a voice for homeschoolers. One main attorney, no matter how great her heart, will not have the resources that HSLDA has, given their broad donation-base of Christian who are hoping to mandate their morals in federal law.
I couldn’t find this last night while I was looking for it, Nance, but I remember correctly, the whole notion of tax deductible donations came about early in the last century when the government sought to promote certain activities it was bound by the Constitution not to promote. Like religion. Giving some sort of precedent, I guess, to Bush’s faith-based initiatives.
I know there is a bit of animosity between HSLDA and NHELD, and honestly the whole tangent about HSLDA would not have bothered me in the least had it been a separate article to the one discussing the bill. To me, it comes across as doing the same sort of thing HSLDA is continually accused of doing…using fear and suggestion to motivate people rather than reason or logic.
And I still can’t help but wonder if HSLDA doesn’t sense that the national tide with regards to homeschooling is beginning to change toward greater monitoring and is trying to get something through before that happens. I don’t know…I don’t like to jump on the suspicions without proof. All sorts of groups of people do things I think are very harmful to the nation, but the majority of them are simply trying to do what they think is best.
They certainly have broader goals than “just” homeschooling, but they don’t really hide that. And they haven’t been very successful so far, so I don’t think they are much to fear in the way of the other morality issues. Christians aren’t as unified on those issues than one might like to think. There are also a lot of people, like me, who may have similar values, but do not think it is the federal government’s job to monitor such things. They are matters of the heart, and increasing laws will not change that. But then, my religious beliefs are not rooted in Reconstructionism nor particularly influenced by it.
And it’s not what we decide to say anyway, but how we say it.
Never mind this bill or HoNDA or anything else we ever discuss — neither NHELD nor HSLDA should be speaking for homeschoolers at all, because the way they say it sends the wrong message even when we “agree” with their issue or position. Here are some dysfunctional similarities between them, that “negate their ability” to speak for homeschoolers:
1) What Kim says — they both make a point of presenting themselves as national. So even as they argue homeshcooling is not a federal or national issue, how can their message NOT have the actual effect of treating home education as a national issue? If we’re doing it ourselves, why shouldn’t politicians and government regulators?
2) What Dana says — it’s always about impugning the other organization’s motive, tactics, spokespeople, politics, etc etc. If we don’t want homeschooling to be a political football, why do “our” organizations keep suiting up for that game and bashing each other trying to score some advantage for their own side?
3) What JJ says (and Dana nearly said I think) — home education is not *about* the law, nor is it about money including taxes, nor competition to score and win against schools or other lobbies or other families. It certainly is not a “profession” or a career –
So the whole model of “professional organizations regarding homeschooling” focusing on legislation and tax issues, likely sounds to the public like Warren Zevon (send lawyers, guns and money. . .)
and negates our rightful voice and message no matter what bill we mean to support or oppose.
I’m an educator by profession, not a lawyer. Back in the 80s my large public school district tapped me to be its legislative and policy liaison specifically to send that message, and we we not alone in thinking that was a smart move. My colleages from other districts almost all were professional educators and communicators, rather than lawyers. We did focus on money because public schooling IS all about tax money, but at least we could keep lawyer-legislators focused on kids and learning while we argued over how to spend it.
It’s tempting. Who doesn’t want more money? However, my children do not belong to the government, so I don’t want state money to educate them. Tax credits are not free gifts. They have a price I am not willing to pay. Namely, the requirements to get them.
I’m adamantly opposed to a federal tax credit for homeschooling for many reasons. The primary reason, however, is that we homeschoolers are completely free from FEDERAL involvement (interference?) in the education of our children. To accept this credit opens the door to future federal involvement.
It’s a sad state of affairs, that we must choose between our money and our freedom to homeschool. In this case though, as Renae pointed out, the possibility of federal involvement in homeschooling is not a risk I’m willing to take–the ultimate price is too great.
I wrote about this in February and I stand behind what I wrote:
http://rationaljenn.blogspot.com/2008/02/freedom-from-feds.html
One of the things that bothers me is the idea that educating my own child is some sort of “above and beyond the call” virtuous sacrifice. Um, isn’t it my responsibility to see that my kids are trained and educated for life? I chose homeschool, others choose private or public schools. It’s part of being a responsible person, and I don’t need an “attaboy” from the government for doing my job. It’s similar to those stupid “homemakers do $9 million dollars worth of work stories.” Okay, what parents don’t feed, clothe, and shelter their kids. Throw those people in jail and shut up about how taking care of your family is some sort of extra-specially virtuous act. I neither need nor want the state’s approval via tax credit for what I’m supposed to be doing anyway. Thanks so much.
Thank you for reminding me of that post, Jenn. That is more what I am looking for.
The Supreme Court has made some relatively recent rulings that make me a little less uneasy about the whole tax credit thing, but it would still be a huge political fight that we just don’t need to fight. Right now, when we are accused of not supporting public education, it is easy enough to point to the fact that we do indeed pay our share of public education. Local funding formulas are not our fault. 
I don’t see where it could be workable in the long run, and I hate to even think where this legislation would end up after the amendment process got started. But you know what struck me as I read the bill? I don’t think the Senator has any idea just how differently homeschooling is handled in different states beyond the homeschool as private school option. I don’t know how the bill would be workable in its current form, which would almost necessitate amendment of some kind.
You don’t have to itemize your tax form to claim it, so I am guessing that means that all you have to do is submit your state’s paperwork, assuming you have any.
Hmmm, well $500 is about what I spend for books and supplies each year. But I doubt we’d even qualify since our income bracket is so low that we don’t pay much in the way of taxes anyhow. And I am *glad* my tax dollars support the public schools. I suspect HSLDA supports this bill at least in part because it would amount to a tacit federal endorsement of homeschooling as legal and legitimate. Thanks for the post, Dana. I guess I’ll write to my reps & senators.
I have to agree with April and Jenn above, in that I do not want or need any further federal involvement with raising and teaching my child. Their motives may or may be well intended but where will it lead? Perhaps down a road that I chose to pull off of in the first place!
A problem with arguing against this proposal as April and Rational Jenn do above, is that there is a $1,000 per child tax credit now.
I’ve never heard a parent homeschooling or not, object to this annual tax credit intended to help offset the routine costs of child-rearing. Has it been argued that it’s an affront or that it compromises our independence, much less that it has somehow federalized their family and parenting?
If not, have you ever heard a persuasive explanation of why that credit is okay and this isn’t?
I believe there’s a special tax credits for adopting a child too? Is that an affront or a co-opting of all adoptive parents?
I have to agree with comment #6. One reason we began to home school was because we didn’t want the government educating our sons. Government funds never come without government strings attached. I don’t question the senator’s motives on this–or anyone else’s for that matter–but I am leary to accept money from them because when the government gives you money, they generally feel it gives them the right to step in and start laying down rules and requirements as well.
I am no consipiracy theorist, but this type of stuff makes me a little nervous.
JJRoss, those are the kinds of questions I have and the reason I would like to explore beyond my reflexive rejection of the tax credit and develop an actual argument against it (or maybe even for it by the time I get through reading all of my bookmarks). But none of the arguments raised thus far would convince me if I weren’t already leaning that direction.
What I want to know is how tax credits have affected the organizations they are intended to benefit. And these kinds of examples would go further in construction an argument rather than suspicion.
After all, even the Cato institute supports federal tax credits for private education. They see it as control for parents, not as control for government.
I am against the tax credit, but for the moment I want a better reason to be against it.
To points made by Dana and Nance, this week’s New York Times Magazine has on its cover a piece titled “Childless Europe.” All sorts of cultural, economic, demographic and government policy differences are examined, and one expert sums it up as:
Dana, the adopted child credit seems a good candidate for comparison then, to test out arguments one by one, to ferret out problem areas and review any trends and general impact since it was first passed, or should I say adopted!
Maybe someone reading has direct experience with adoption and claiming this credit?
JJ, I’m generally always up for paying less taxes. But I think there is a significant difference between adoption and homeschooling. If (as some have suggested) tax-credits are a way of encouraging certain behavior, then it’s more acceptable for adoption than homeschooling. I see it as the difference between flossing and paying for dental care for the indigent.
Should the government give us tax-credits for doing what we’re supposed to do anyway? I don’t think they should. I don’t think social-engineering through taxes is the government’s job.
And, of course, with government “benefits” comes government busybodies.
One important difference between the child tax credits and this one that I see is how you prove you have an “eligible child.” For the child tax credit and adoption credit, you simply need to have a social security number for your child and that is all you provide.
What is a qualifying child when related to homeschooling? At the moment, the legislation looks like it is deferring to the state to define it, but ten states don’t really have anything at all.
Hi April – we might all agree with your answer to the “should” question but the government DOES “give us tax credits for doing what we’re supposed to do anyway.” The child tax credit of $1,000 is an example I already mentioned, and we’re all eligible even though it’s certainly our responsibility to pay for rearing our own children. Saving energy and investing in R&D are other examples that come to mind.
But the adoption credit seems most like the proposed homeschooling credit to me. It’s a parent option that most people do not choose and therefore do not qualify for, and having a federal tax credit says (I think) that we recognize: 1) there are significant specific costs to both adoption and homeschooling that others do not incur; and yet 2) there’s a benefit to society generally when more parents are encouraged either to adopt or homeschool.
I see these as are positives, and I imagine they are the main arguments behind HSLDA’s support for the HS credit.
On the negative side, adoption and homeschool credits also seem quite similar (more so than either is to the child tax credit for example, which is automatic for any child with a social security number.) The adoption credit requires documenting various qualified adoption expenses, before you get part or all of the credit.
Also as I said above, I think both homeschooling and adoption can be — is diminished the word I want? — if people start to view them as money and legal definitions, forms and transactions. Look at how different marriage and divorce are, in emphasis, for example — on the marriage side a pre-nup seems small and mean, a reduction. I wonder if the main down side of tax credits is this feeling, that when we’re really in love we won’t be thinking about the price we might pay? Something like that.
What I do know is that both adoption and homeschooling involve complicated feelings and family way beyond rubies.
Thank you for the further information on the adoption credit. I haven’t looked into it yet. Here in NE, we have subsidized adoptions. Some of the families I worked with received up to $749 a month for adopting a child from foster care. Plus medicaid benefits for the child and potential scholarships for college.
That is likely a tangent. But oh well.
JJ, consider it my attempt to push back against the encroaching nanny state. I do agree with you that something is lost when we do a sterile cost/benefit analysis on every decision in our lives. (Not that we shouldn’t count the cost. You better know what you’re in for or you’ll go crazy! It’s too late for me.) How do you quantify the benefit of adopting an abused child compared to the costs. You’re right. It’s diminished.
I would support a general $500 tax credit for educational materials available to all parents. After all, many traditional schools charge a textbook fee to parents. I know that when I was in high school, my parents had to purchase the textbooks for the Advanced Placement courses I took.
Making it available to all parents would benefit homeschoolers without unduly getting the Feds involved in defining “homeschooling”.
Thank you for this thoughtful and well written post. I’m in agreement with you. When I was homeschooling I would have loved a tax break, considering how much we spent on supplies while our taxes were funding the public school system.
But I do believe that nothing is without a price, and when you start to accept funding from the government you are opening yourself up to further legislation or control as well.
Moving homeschooling to a federal venue would negate NHELD’s abilities to be a voice for homeschoolers.
***
When did NHELD become a “voice for homeschoolers?” I would venture to guess that most hsers have never heard of NHELD and those of us who have don’t unanimously want NHELD speaking for us.
Nance
Crimson Wife, I don’t think it passed, but Nebraska actually considered a tax credit for parents of public schooled students in order to assist with fees, gas and other education related expenses.
Well, my source for all things legislative in Louisiana has a stomach virus and is out for a couple of days, so no news on David Vitter to report. Sorry to have failed on my mission. I called his D.C. office and spoke with someone who either had absolutely no idea what the bill was about or was a very good actor. Some intrepid journalist I am.
That is comforting. Staffers with no clue. I would hope they would at least know who to ask to direct the call from. I realize there are far too many bills containing far too many pages to expect anyone to actually read them all. That is why I like that bill about how politicians should read bills before signing them. I doubt they’d read it, either, but imagine how much less legislation there would be? And how many trees we could save?
What I do know is that both adoption and homeschooling involve complicated feelings and family way beyond rubies.
***
Which is nice. But it don’t pay the rent.
So how about avoiding all those icky feelings and expanding the child tax credit to $2000 or $5000 a year? What’s a decent private school cost these days? $10,000? How much does a good PTA Mom donate to her public school in a year?
How about all those books I donate to the library book sale or the Boys and Girls Club?
Everyone always wants to know if I need a receipt “for tax purposes.” No, I don’t. Because then the giving would feel “icky” and, also, because it doesn’t make any difference in my low tax bracket.
But what if, instead of encouraging me to give my leftovers, we all encouraged (and by that I mean, gave me some money) me to spend more on learning, in general. Whether through hsing or a private school or public school functions or whatever. What if we trusted that I would do that — even without the horrible “intrusion” of having to submit receipts for textbooks purchased — and gave me the larger child credit with the certain knowledge that better-off homes can afford the things that we like to see in better schools and in better learning setups — like books. Just like we assume I spend the existing child credit on the general welfare of my child.
Nance
Actually, I think that is how the credit is set up. Maybe there i to be an additional form, but since you do not need to itemize your deductions to claim the credit, I’m wondering if there is any real monitoring at all?
Nance, what I like instantly about that approach as an alternative, is how it connects all parents and kids back to learning from all sorts of things besides “textbooks” and school stuff, and to all having that in common as the important thing. And the only thing that gets diminished is divisions between us based on school program labels!
Call me a cynic, but a good percentage of the parents I know would spend the tax savings from an expanded child tax credit on luxuries for themselves rather than on something that would benefit their children. I really have to bite my tongue when I hear what some people of my acquaintance choose to spend their tax refunds on…
We paid off a student loan with our refund. Is that a luxury?
It sure felt like one to me!
We spent mine on my husband’s eye surgery.
And Crimson Wife, I’ll be kind to people and say that perhaps they have slaved away all year giving their children the best they can offer and splurge with that little bit they get back from what they overpaied for something for themselves.
Maybe it is just me, but most people I know seem to actually tend to indulge their children a little too much.
Well, and some people spend their food stamp money on chocolate cake. At least with tax refund money, it’s money we had originally worked for and paid to the gov’t. We are not getting it back with interest or anything, either.
I have a lot of mixed feelings about the whole idea. I’d rather NOT pay for everyone else’s public school because it makes orgs. like the NEA and local school districts able to hire lobbyists, lawyers and the like to work against homeschooling with MY money. I’m pretty sure it isn’t going away anytime soon, though, and part of me figures I might as well get some of my own money back.
But now that homeschooling, taxes and federal regulation are all mentioned in the same sentence I’m more than just a little leery. Thank you, Dana, for blogging on this and giving that handy synopsis of the proposed legislation.
The “home school” legislation is significant and the legislative timing in presenting the federal “home school” bill has been unfortunate historically.
A few years ago, Illinois had just recovered from a HSLDA influenced legislative ‘rescue’ from bully Regional Office Superintendents when HSLDA wrote the federal HoNDA. Illinois homeschoolers seemed to have been very clear in not wanting “home school” legislation in their state, so it seemed logical that they wouldn’t want it in federal law either. That was ignored. Here’s an article from Harvey Bluedorn related to this attempted intervention in our state:
http://www.eduwrit.com/blog/?p=735
The ‘rescue’ was a state shell bill presented by a very well meaning Illinois Senator led by HSLDA that was to include “home school” specific documentation to “protect” us. In Illinois, there are no specific “home school” legislative references, which keeps us under the much larger private school umbrella. (This status was determined with a 1950 IL Supreme Court ruling regarding a 7th Day Adventist homeschooling family)
As an aside, NHELD wrote up an interesting bulletin about such private school status. http://www.nheld.com/BTN61.htm
It’s where IL is at, so there isn’t much we could do if we wanted, but some of the concerns there do ring true under the circumstances.
Apologies for the length, but I wanted to offer an explanation of one particular concern.
I have and will always have a concern with any “home school” legislation. Illinois, TX, OK, Alaska, NJ….I’m not sure of other states w/o “home school” legal documentation get thrown under the bus with this federal intervention. I have other concerns too, but that one is significant for our particular state (and others).
For my money (pun intended) I’d rather have Mrs. C speak just that honestly to legislators, media and the public! Who needs lawyers when you can put that full-spectrum human face on homeschooling?
There’s a popular subculture rant about the income tax being unconstitutional. The NHELD rant about public education as unconstitutional hits the same wrong notes and I’ve seen nothing to persuade me it would (or should) fare any better in the courts or the court of public opinion.
Btw, in honor of Independence Day Snook put together a new page retreading different popular posts and links centered on the common idea that lessons of freedom are learned best IN freedom. Some of you might find a way to put new mileage on them.
These kinds of shenanigans are why I am for The FairTax.
My other concern is the effort to define homeschooling- on the one hand, if you want to be able to enforce certain laws regarding educational neglect, you have to define what an ‘adequate’ education is, but I do not believe that in order for home education to be recognized as viable that it needs to be defined legally.
And I ditto those who don’t like the idea of ‘national’ organizations that give the public the idea that homeschoolers are some kind of cohesive unit or organized subculture. Local support groups and state organizations are quite enough for that arena, ifn’ you ask me.
At Senator Vitter’s website, his premise for this bill was, “Like those who choose to send their children to private schools, home school families pay an inequitable share of education-related expenses,” said Vitter. … We need to provide them with the same relief offered to private school families, and this bill is intended to do just that, by minimizing the financial burden of these families.”
Earlier this month I commented at:
http://www.homeedmag.com/blogs/newscomm/?p=1521
(link to Vitter’s website included)
The premise of the bill is flawed, as far as I can tell.
I imagine that flawed-premise bills aren’t unknown (and have been made into law), but I would also imagine that there are perhaps a couple private schooling parents in the Senate, and that someone would say, “Just a minnit ….”
Valerie, that was another questions I had. I am not aware of tax credits for private secondary and elementary schools, however the idea has come up so many times, I was wondering if maybe something was passed I wasn’t familiar with. I asked the Senator in my email, but I don’t know how long it will take to get a response.
At the state level, I have always gotten a response from a staffer pretty quickly. At the national level…well, once I got a whole box of promotional materials from a Congresswoman, but no answer to what I was actually asking. So we’ll see.
There was one credit that begins with a “C” that I can’t find that I wasn’t sure what was meant by a “qualifying institution.” I assume they are talking about post-secondary institutions, but the HOPE and Lifetime Learning credits were very clear on this. Now, of course, I can’t even find that information.
But since CATO was still arguing for tax credits for private schools last year, I doubt anything snuck in. Maybe the Senator is confusing post-secondary? Or some program in LA?
While I would get a lot of benefit from the tax credit – being barely able to buy the few textbooks that we use and completely unable to provide much by way of extra-curricular for my kids… I would have to say no.
Money comes with strings. Especially when it has to do with our Government. Sorry – they can keep their money and I’ll keep my freedom. No New Deal for me.
“Sorry – they can keep their money and I’ll keep my freedom.”
Sorry to disagree with you, Sprittibee, but it’s not THEIR money.
How about this for a good idea – a tax cut for everyone. That way we can keep OUR money and our freedom.
…but it’s not THEIR money.
That is one of the fundamental differences between a tax credit and government “hand outs.” It is not filtered through the system first, and it doesn’t have the same kinds of restrictions on how it can be used.
And I always like tax cuts.
Crimson Wife,
I like your idea of granting a $500 credit toward educational material, usable by any parents. This could be used for curriculum, book fees, foreign language programs, maybe even tutoring.
Valerie & Dana,
I wonder if the parallel credit might be the one for classroom teachers who spend their own money on supplies. I think the dollar amount is similar and I often see homeschoolers asking if they can claim this (or is this a deduction?)
Another interesting black hole is what about military and expats who homeschool overseas. Expats might have some host nation rules to follow that would fulfill the -in accordance with state law- requirement, but military families overseas expressly do not.
I don’t need another tax credit. The government has financed our homeschool for years through the Earned Income Credit.
Sebastian, I haven’t any idea about what the proposed credit is being compared to, so I’m clueless if it refers to the money that teachers spend in their classrooms.
As for the tax credit, I suppose it would be nice for any parent to have this credit, but that would then leave only the people without children being fully taxed to support the schools. That seems kind of churlish. “You people without kids to put in any school ought to pay for all kids’ schooling at the state(?) level as a public good, but we people with school-aged children who don’t use the system get cash back from the feds as a private good because we’ve 1) incurred the expense of children, and 2) chosen not to use the fee-free system.”
Transference of wealth based on manifested fecundity and rebuffing of services?? [shakes head to clear it]
Since schooling is presumed to be a public good, then all of the public shoulders the cost, regardless of the presence of children in the taxpayers’ lives, and regardless of how any of those children are schooled.
I don’t think that teachers should have to pay in order to be able to do their jobs, but I don’t see homeschoolers claiming this relief are doing the same thing. Homeschooling isn’t a paying job for the homeschooling parents, it is their choice of schooling. (I’m really not trying to be a meanie, it’s just what seems to follow, logically)
I don’t know about expat taxation. It probably varies with the country in question, but I’m pretty sure [crosses fingers] that US taxation of those overseas workers is a given. I know that after the German reunification, the German government chased the cash cow of non-taxpaying homesteading DoD civilians and contractors, and caught it. Sorting out who qualifies for what could be quite a can of worms.
For military, the sponsors just pay ‘normal’ taxes regardless of the lack of any schooling laws to be followed. US citizen-spouses-of-military who work on the economy often don’t have to pay German taxes because they don’t receive German benefits; EU citizens do, and are eligible for benefits such as Kindergeld (money paid to parents specifically _for_ the children). There was a lawsuit ages ago concerning a refund (??) for American Wedgwood employees in American exchanges (the PX system) in Germany. I don’t think it was settled with a return of money to employees. (it was all murky when it was explained to me when I worked for Wedgwood — yes, I have lovely china — and so much depends on your citizenship; I didn’t keep up with the suit. I _*may*_ have a lot of that bass-ackwards as it was [yikes!] about 20 years ago.)
(I’m assuming the inclusion of expats and military was about paying taxes — apologies if I’ve mis-read)
Dana- Are you perhaps thinking of the Coverdell Educational Savings Account? That is a way to save money tax-free for tuition and fees charged by qualifying colleges and private K-12 schools. It’s not a tax credit, however. IIRC, there was some discussion a while back about allowing homeschoolers to use Coverdell $ for homeschooling expenses (I think HSLDA was pushing that one, too) but AFAIK the change was never enacted.
Valerie,
In general, I actually agree with you on the tax credit issue. I would prefer to see most tax credits wiped out and taxes lowered and simplified.
My comment about the military serving overseas was that these families are still liable for US taxes, but do not have a US state homeschooling law with which they comply. So any kind of tax credit that was dependent on possession of some kind of letter from the state or notice of intent would be difficult or impossible for them to claim.
In most cases, expats would have to comply with local host nation laws and might have some form from local authorities (although there are all sorts of exceptions for countries that don’t have universal attendance).
Yeah, once you have a tax credit extended to that much of the population, it does seem like a general tax cut is better. But we have the Earned Income Credit, which I have no qualms claiming but it seems odd. And the Child Tax Credit.
And the federal government spends an average of $168 per American on education. To then give a $500 credit to every child would be problematic. Where is the money coming from? And for as many children as there are in the US, that proposal might be getting close to using up the almost $60 billion budget the DOE currently has.
And thank you, CW. I think the Coverdell ESA was what I was thinking of. You can see how fresh it was in my memory.
But Dana — what a perfectly marvelous use for the entire F-ED budget, you’re brilliant! The IRS will administer it and we can just shut that other place down.
If I thought for a moment that is how they’d deal with it, I’d go for it in a heartbeat. Unfortunately, I think the real effect would be to raise taxes on everyone and increase the DOE’s budget…as part of some compromise to satisfy the NEA.
Aha, now I understand, Sebastian. That would be a nasty wrinkle.
I can see ’staff weenies’* writing inappropriate policy letters to bridge that gap.
*unofficial term used by non-staff weenies to describe those who get to write policy affecting everyone