Yesterday, a panel of state officials, lawmakers, parents and political advocates held a panel discussing the need for the passage of a permanent, state child tax credit, echoing the proposals of Democratic lawmakers last session.
“We know that Connecticut is a state of great opportunity, but for too many families, it is also a state of great cost,” said Melvette Hill, Executive Director of the State’s Commission on Women, Children, Seniors, Equity, and Opportunity (CWCSEO). “The data is clear; targeted policy investments and evidence-based economic supports are not just nice to have, they are essential infrastructure for poverty reduction. So today isn’t just about discussing a tax code, it’s about discussing stability.”
Discussions of creating a permanent state child tax credit are not novel, with proposed legislation on the subject going as far back as 2021. Sean Scanlon, the State’s Comptroller, was one of a long list of state officials and lawmakers who spoke in support of the proposal. Scanlon recounted that it was he who proposed “the first version of this bill” in 2021 when he chaired the state’s Finance Committee.
“I did it, not because I read about it in some book, I saw [in] my own life, what this would have meant for people like my mom, who worked to go from having a high school education and no career, to starting a small business, and even though she ran the small business, she could never, ever get ahead when it came to paying the bills and paying the rent and paying for the electric bill,” said Scanlon. “And the sad reality is that the same things that my mom really struggled with 30 years ago, are the same things that people struggle with today.”
Last legislative session, Democratic lawmakers pushed for Gov. Ned Lamont’s biennial budget to include a $600, refundable child-tax credit for working families, with households of three or more children able to receive up to $1,800 in relief. If such a proposal were included in the budget, it would have meant a projected $300 million loss in state tax revenue. Lamont, worried the state may be strapped for cash in the event of federal cuts to Medicaid and SNAP benefits, decided against it. Ultimately, a compromise was reached, providing for the creation of a $250, non-refundable tax credit, which would be provided to any household eligible to receive the state’s Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC).
Connecticut’s EITC, first passed in 2011, mirrors the guidelines of the federal EITC and supplements the savings it provides. It is available primarily to lower-income parents or families, but can also be filed by childless residents making less than $19,104, or childless married couples making less than $26,214. Under current state guidelines, the highest qualifying household income that can apply for the state’s EITC is $68,675, for married couples with three or more qualified children, filing jointly. The state’s EITC provides 40% the benefit of the federal EITC, meaning families of three or more children can receive up to $3,218 in tax relief on their earned income (wages, salary, tips, disability, or union strike benefits), in addition to up to $8,046 in relief from the federal EITC.
Panelists shared data, information, as well as their own perspectives, to argue why state lawmakers should look to increase the state’s child tax credit’s eligibility and maximum relief. Additional state officials who spoke in support of the proposal were Mark Boughton, Commissioner of the State’s Department of Revenue Services and Erick Russell, the State’s Treasurer. State lawmakers who spoke in support included State Representatives Savet Constantine (D-Wilton), Robin Comey (D-Branford), William Heffernan (D-West Haven) Nick Menapace (D-East Lyme), Nick Gauthier (D-Waterford), Frank Smith (D-Milford) Kathy Kennedy (D-Milford), Geraldo Reyes (D-Waterbury), Kaitlyn Shake (D-Stratford) and State Senator Julie Kushner (D-Danbury).
Lisa Tepper Bates, President and CEO of the Connecticut United Way, said that she and a “coalition” of “more than 60 organizations” believe the state should offer a $600-per child, refundable tax credit, with a maximum benefit of $1,800, in line with the proposal made by Democratic lawmakers last session. She said that polling conducted by the United Way revealed wide support for such a proposal, showing that “73% of voters” supported the creation of a child tax credit. Tepper Bates stressed that making the tax credit refundable is “an important point,” explaining that a refundable tax credit would provide cash refunds to families that are too poor to pay income taxes.
“So, think about a retired grandparent raising a grandchild, a disabled parent who is not working, they would actually get that cash back so that they can spend it on essentials for their family, for their children,” said Tepper Bates.
Additionally, Tepper Bates proposed expanding the tax credit eligibility so that it is not available only to EITC recipients, but to “anyone with an income up to $100,000 for singles and up to $200,000 for dual filers.” Tepper Bates said this would cover 75% of Connecticut’s families with children, providing relief to the households of 550,000 children. Janée Woods Weber, Executive Director of She Leads Justice, said that ALICE (Asset Limited, Income Constrained, Employed) metrics show that a “survival budget,” or one that accounts for “just the basics for a family of four” is now “north of $125,000 a year.”
“So when we talk about a child tax credit of $600 per child, it certainly would have a tremendous impact for those families that are needing to make really hard choices about what to spend their dollars on,” said Woods.
Tepper Bates stressed that Connecticut would not be at the cutting edge of implementing a permanent child tax credit, and said “we’re actually following the pack.” She noted that Rhode Island “just proposed” a $325 refundable child tax credit, and said that other states such as New York, Maine, New Jersey, Massachusetts and Vermont are now “moving this direction.”
“And why?” asked Tepper Bates. “Because it works; It works to alleviate poverty, it works to support families who are struggling with the high cost of raising their children.”
Juan Hernandez, a father of three children aged 17, nine and five-and-a-half years old, said he found out he had cancer in 2022, leaving him “bedridden,” and reliant on his wife’s stay at home care. Hernandez said the time away from work has left their finances “significantly heading in the wrong direction,” as they miss mortgage payments, and has taken them out of their “happy-go-lucky” mindset around their kids.
“The impactfulness of not being able to pay a bill rolls down to our child when I’m trying to put him to bed,” said Hernandez.
Caitlyn Gelfand, an early childhood educator and mother of two children aged nine and three years old, said she spends half of her $31,000 a year salary on childcare costs for her toddler.
“We are a family of four,” said Gelfand. “I have a lot more bills than that. So it means, my kids go to the dentist regularly, but I don’t. My kids have new shoes when they need them, but my soles flop up and down when I’m at work, but at least I get to go to work every day and be reminded that, even with all of that, my family is one of the lucky ones.”
Gelfand said the children she works with often come from even worse financial situations; that some have missed school in cold weather until their parents could save up for coats, or missed school until parents could save up for the laundromat, and that some have even asked her if they could bring leftovers from lunch home to their parents, who go without meals. In response, Gelfand said she has begun a “mobile food pantry” out of her car, and has seen parents cry from her classroom window.
“And contrary to popular belief, every single one of those kids had parents who work,” said Gelfand. “I saw visible stress on parents’ faces, it was just palpable speaking with them in the hallways at drop-off.”
Staria Spence, a single mother of four children aged 24, 19, 17 and nine years old, said that trying to pay for summer camp for four children “was ridiculous,” and that back to school shopping was “a hassle.” Spence, who works as a records specialist for the Department of Corrections, said her salary was too high to reap benefits such as free lunch or free after-school programming, but not high enough to adequately pay for her mortgage, bills, or the needs of her children.
Barbara Channels, who has three adult aged children but a fourth, 11-year old adopted son, said that a $600 child tax credit would help to “bring him up as a well-rounded child,” and “help his self-esteem instead of having to go without.”
Channels said she would use the extra money to provide her son with the occasional day trip or birthday gift free of financial worry. Hernandez said he would use it to pay down treatment expenses for one of his children with severe asthma. Gelfand said it would help alleviate her of financial stress. Having moved to Connecticut 11 years ago, Gelfand said that when outsiders think of the state, they evoke images of affluence, such as “Greenwich and Yale and Gilmore Girls and Hallmark Christmas movies,” but that in reality, the state includes working class communities too, and she’s asked herself why the state doesn’t have a child tax credit like others do.
“I was thinking about this question last night and my nine year old came over and asked me what I was doing, and I told him, I was wondering why Connecticut doesn’t have a program for kids that other states do,” said Gelfand. “He goes, ‘What, kids don’t live here?’ Like, hello, kids live here! Let’s make it that simple.”
Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under a Creative Commons license.
