In the unprecedented transition to the funnel more state tax dollars to groups against abortion, the republican lawmakers in Missouri promote the plan to allow residents to donate to resource centers of pregnancy, not pay any state taxes.
The proposal would set 100% tax loan, which is compared to $ 70 and $ 50,000 annual taxpayer restriction. Bottom line: Almost all Missouri households – with the exception of those who have the highest income – can fully satisfy their state tax bills by redirecting their payment from the state at the center of pregnancy.
The move takes four months after the voters of Missouri canceled one of the most strict abortion prohibitions in the country, and just as the clinics began to carry out the procedure after overcoming the national obstacles.
Proponents of the bill, which cleared the key legislative obstacle in the state home last month, say that it gives taxpayers more control over where tax dollars go, and allows them to support organizations that help pregnant women and give alternatives to abortion. Alice Gros, CEO of Health Resources, who manages four pregnancy resources in the Kansas -Siti area, said the Committee in written testimony that tax credits had led to the donations for its organization and that 100% tax loan can bring even more.
“Our ability to influence more men and women for life, and building healthy families was significant,” she said.
Critics claim that the support of the state in pregnancy resources, also known as crisis centers of pregnancy, distracts tax revenues from the necessary services, such as health care and public education, and becomes a flow of financing. Many centers say little helps women; Instead, they say they just interfere with abortion women.
What do we watch
During the second presidency, Donald Trump Propublica will focus on the areas most in need of control. Here are some questions that our journalists will watch – and how to contact them securely.
We are trying something new. Was this useful?
“The 70 -percent tax loan was unnecessary without restriction. The 100 percent tax loan is inappropriate,” Katie Boyly wrote, lawyer and reproductive rights defender based in Kansas -Sity, testified by the Committee. “This is an icon for Missouri that our legislators spend time, even given this bill.”
Tax policy and philanthropy experts have stated that the dollar tax loan for dollars-for any purpose-rareness and may be much more expensive for the state, especially if the centers of pregnancy are actively promoting it.
Experts point out a big psychological difference for donors between 100% tax loan and 70% loan. 70%donors still have to pay taxes, but 100%is no reason to donate less than their tax liability.
“I could imagine if there is a large advertising campaign in these centers, or a viral company, and a large number of conservative Misurians decide to give up the state government effectively in favor of these pregnancy resources,” said David Hamid, Tax Law and Policy at Missouri Law School.
However, the expansion of tax credits will face another republican press on the elimination of the Missouri income tax. Recently two suggestions replace it with a higher sale tax Expanded in a public SenateAlthough it was unclear whether they could pass. If Missouri abolished state taxes, tax loans would become meaningless.
The bill is another expansion of measures that Missouri’s legislators have been growing for several years. By 2021, Missouri taxpayers, who donated a resource centers of pregnancy, were able to demand a tax loan by 50% for their donations, that is, for every 1000 donations, the taxpayer’s bill decreased by $ 500. It was then that the expansion of the approved legislative body in 2019 entered into force and raised the rate to 70%. This has changed the great amount of the value of these deposits to the state because tax loans are working directly by reducing the amount of money that the taxpayer owes the state. Unlike the deductions that reduce taxable income, tax loans are a decline in tax liabilities in dollars. When these loans are redeemed, they prevent the state from collecting this income, effectively reducing total income available to public services.
The legislative body also removed the $ 3.5 million restriction per year and has deleted the shelf life.
At the time, the changes attracted little attention because it was laid into the same legislation that created the law on the Missouri triggers to ban abortion when ROE V. Wade has been canceled is a step that prevailed. And there were few warnings about how much it could cost.
The official assessment of the bill prepared by non -partisan legislative supervision is forecast only by a modest increase in taxpayers’ expenses. The tax loan is expected to increase the annual tax credits from 3.5 million to $ 4.9 million. This assessment is assumed that the donations will remain stable.
But they didn’t do it. The program has grown significantly: last year alone, the authorized $ 11.8 million tax credits. However, it remains a small part of the overall budget of Missouri; Governor Mike Keho proposed a $ 54 billion spending plan for the next year.
Once again, legislative studies humiliate the potential influence on the budget of Missouri. A fiscal note for the bill of accounts only for jumping from 70% to 100% of the tax loan, not considering the likely increase in donations that such an incentive would have caused – although an increase in the cottage – the whole meaning of politics.
The note states that it was “unclear” whether the tax loan will be expanded to push more people to contribute and require a loan, which will lead to more tax income for the state.
A legislative research employee, which was the author of the application for impact, refused to comment, and sponsor of the House of the bill, representative of Christopher Warwick, did not answer the questions of propublica.
Warwick, Republican from Bolivar, in the southwest Missouri, told the tax reform committee that his proposal allows taxpayers to support important work without the state, “trying to check what programs work.” He also said he would oppose pregnancy resources requirements to report how they spend money by saying he wanted to “limit the bureaucracy”.
Warwik’s bill will also increase the tax loan for donations to home for motherhood from 70% to 100%, and for banks with 50% to 100%. The state has not yet studied the influence of these changes.
A bill was submitted in the Senate, but has not yet advanced.
Res. Steve Butz, a Democrat from St. Louis, claimed that the tax loan would effectively transfer charity from people to the state.
“It will be the fourth bill I heard, which will lead to a decrease in profit, which is probably obvious that your goal is to reduce the profit to the state,” Butz Warwick said during a legislative hearing on the bill. He claimed that if the donors receive a full tax loan for their contribution, they actually do not give their money – rather, the state effectively makes a donation for them. “That’s why I don’t know what I find a great charity cottage.”
In an interview, Booth said he considered himself Pro-Life and donated a resource centers of pregnancy, receiving 70% tax credit. However, he said he did not believe that the program should take an advantage over others who receive less tax benefits.
The Missouri approach to the crisis centers of pregnancy reflects the growing gap between the red and blue states. While republican states such as Florida. Texas and Tennis Demanded funding of pregnancy resources, states led by Democrats, including Massachusetts and California.
Missouri is one of the national per capita centers for pregnancy resource centers before the tax loans, according to the state -funded states. Kehoe proposed to increase direct state funding by almost 50% to more than $ 12 million in the financial year, which starts on July 1.
In his statement, Gabi Picard, director of communications in the Kehov office, said the governor “seeks to support services that help women choose their unborn baby for a term, and therefore his budget recommends increasing financing” for an alternative to abortion, including pregnancy resources.
Missouri became the first state to use tax credits to finance pregnancy centers, becoming a model for other states seeking to support abortion. One health care expert, who found the influence of pregnancy centers, said Missouri was a leader and an innovator in these efforts. “What Missouri offers really makes them others at the top of the game,” said Andrea Suartzandruber, Associate Professor of the Department of Epidemiology and Biostatism in Georgia.
Warick’s initiative stems from extensive changes in Missouri’s abortion law.
In November, voters approved a amendment to the Constitution, which guarantees the right to abortion and other decisions on reproductive health, effectively annuling the almost thick ban that has taken place since 2022, when the US Supreme Court canceled ROE V.
The first abortion, which took place as part of the new amendment, took place in Kansas -Sity on February 15, after the judge reduced the limitation rules that prevented suppliers, such as planned paternity to restore services in the state.
In response, republican lawmakers introduced a wave of bills aimed at restriction of the impact of the amendments. Among the measure is another proposed amendment to the Constitution, which restricts abortion and prohibits gender assistance for minors, to combine what voters support something that they do not hope to shut off abortion supporters.
Some supporters of human rights defenders see an extended tax loan within the broader pressure of legislators against abortion, which came as a result of lifting the ban on abortion. After the adoption of the legislators, there are “some victories,” said Kemp Strickler, a Democrat from the Kansas -City suburbs.
“But even if the amendment lost,” Stricler said, “they probably go with such things.
