Who is likely to benefit from the Federal Scholarship Tax Credit?

By Jan.

由简.

1, leaders of all 50 states and the District of Columbia must decide whether to opt into the Federal Scholarship Tax Credit (FSTC) for calendar year 2027.

1 月 1 日起，所有 50 个州和哥伦比亚特区的领导人必须决定是否选择 2027 日历年的联邦奖学金税收抵免 (FSTC)。

1 The FSTC is a new mechanism for providing families with scholarships (or vouchers) using diverted federal tax dollars.

1 FSTC 是一种利用转用的联邦税款向家庭提供奖学金（或代金券）的新机制。

It works by allowing tax filers in participating states to donate up to $1,700 to a scholarship granting organization (SGO), which then distributes most of that money to families to pay for private school tuition or other eligible educational expenses.

它的运作方式是允许参与州的纳税人向奖学金授予组织 (SGO) 捐赠最多 1,700 美元，然后该组织将大部分资金分发给家庭，以支付私立学校的学费或其他符合条件的教育费用。

The filer gets a full, dollar-for-dollar tax credit—not just a deduction—for their donation.

申报人的捐赠可以获得全额的、同等金额的税收抵免，而不仅仅是扣除。

The FSTC has become a hot-button issue in K-12 education policy and a dilemma for many Democratic governors.

FSTC 已成为 K-12 教育政策中的热点问题，也是许多民主党州长面临的困境。

On the one hand, opting into the FSTC gives cash-strapped states access to funds that will be available to residents of many other states.

一方面，选择加入 FSTC 可以让现金短缺的州获得资金，而许多其他州的居民也可以使用这些资金。

On the other hand, there’s a lot to dislike about the FSTC.

另一方面，FSTC 有很多令人不喜欢的地方。

This includes potentially extreme waste, fraud, and abuse, virtually no emphasis on student outcomes, weak protections against discriminatory practices, and no assurance that funds will reach students in need.

这包括潜在的极端浪费、欺诈和滥用，几乎不重视学生的成绩，针对歧视性做法的保护薄弱，以及无法保证资金能够到达有需要的学生手中。

Most Democratic governors seem to be waiting for detailed rules from the Treasury Department before announcing whether they will participate.

大多数民主党州长似乎都在等待财政部的详细规则，然后再宣布是否参加。

Treasury could make the FSTC appealing to governors of essentially any state.

财政部可以使 FSTC 对几乎任何州的州长都有吸引力。

It could give states discretion over which SGOs operate within their borders, allowing state leaders to—for example—prohibit discrimination based on LGBTQ+ or disability status and target funds to students in poverty.

它可以让各州自行决定哪些 SGO 在其境内运营，例如允许州领导人禁止基于 LGBTQ+ 或残疾状况的歧视，并将资金专门用于贫困学生。

However, the Trump administration has signaled this is unlikely .

然而，特朗普政府已表示这不太可能。

This leaves Democratic governors to assess what might happen if they open their doors to the FSTC with little control over where funds go.

这使得民主党州长们需要评估，如果他们向 FSTC 敞开大门，而对资金流向几乎没有控制权，可能会发生什么。

In this post, we consider who is likely to participate in this program.

在这篇文章中，我们考虑谁有可能参与该计划。

We argue that, based on the data available, it’s highly likely the donor tax credit will be claimed disproportionately by wealthy individuals in wealthy communities.

我们认为，根据现有数据，富裕社区的富人很可能会不成比例地要求捐赠税收抵免。

Unless states can somehow prevent a scenario where most FSTC funds stay in the communities where their donors reside, the FSTC seems poised to become a sharply regressive source of education funding—even where those funds are raised for students in public schools.

除非各州能够以某种方式阻止大多数 FSTC 资金停留在捐助者居住的社区的情况，否则 FSTC 似乎将成为教育资金大幅倒退的来源——即使这些资金是为公立学校的学生筹集的。

A few points about FSTC eligibility are important to highlight before we get to the analysis.

在我们进行分析之前，需要强调有关 FSTC 资格的几点要点。

First, you must have federal income tax liability to claim a tax credit for making a donation.

首先，您必须承担联邦所得税义务才能申请捐赠税收抵免。

The FSTC is nonrefundable.

FSTC 不可退还。

This means that filers can’t receive a credit that exceeds what they owe in federal income taxes.

这意味着申报人无法获得超过其所欠联邦所得税的抵免额。

If you owe more than $1,700 in federal income taxes, you can get a credit up to $1,700 for an SGO contribution.

如果您所欠的联邦所得税超过 1,700 美元，您可以获得高达 1,700 美元的 SGO 捐款抵免额。

If you owe between $1 and $1,699, you can get a credit up to the amount you owe.

如果您的欠款在 1 美元到 1,699 美元之间，您可以获得相当于您所欠金额的抵免额。

And if you have no federal income tax liability—e.g., because your income is very low—you don’t qualify for a credit even if you donate to an SGO.

如果您没有联邦所得税义务（例如，因为您的收入非常低），即使您向 SGO 捐款，您也没有资格获得抵免。

Second, the vast majority of students qualify for a scholarship.

其次，绝大多数学生都有资格获得奖学金。

The FSTC has a means-tested component: It restricts scholarship eligibility to students whose households earn less than 300% of their area’s gross median income.

FSTC 包含经济情况调查部分：它将奖学金资格限制为家庭收入低于所在地区总收入中位数 300% 的学生。

However, that’s an extremely high and uneven bar.

然而，这是一个非常高且不均匀的标准。

Over 90% of U.S. children are income-eligible.

超过 90% 的美国儿童符合收入资格。

Furthermore, if you live in an area with a very high median income, you only need to be within three times that threshold.

此外，如果您居住在收入中位数非常高的地区，则只需在该阈值的三倍以内即可。

This means that some families earning more than a half-million dollars per year are eligible for scholarships (while some families earning much less than that, in lower-income areas, are ineligible).

这意味着一些年收入超过 50 万美元的家庭有资格获得奖学金（而在低收入地区，一些收入远低于此水平的家庭则没有资格）。

Third, students in both private and public schools can obtain scholarship funds.

第三，私立学校和公立学校的学生都可以获得奖学金。

Our expectation is that private school students will obtain a highly disproportionate share of FSTC funds.

我们的期望是，私立学校的学生将获得不成比例的 FSTC 资金份额。

However, we are seeing more proposals for how the FSTC could become a mechanism for raising funds for public school districts.

然而，我们看到更多关于 FSTC 如何成为公立学区筹集资金的机制的提案。

The most prominent public school proposal comes from Marguerite Roza’s Edunomics Lab team at Georgetown.

最著名的公立学校提案来自乔治城大学玛格丽特·罗扎 (Marguerite Roza) 的教育经济学实验室团队。

They propose that a local school district could work with an affiliated SGO to raise funds to pay for a bundle of “enhanced” services like field trips and AP classes.

他们建议当地学区可以与附属的 SGO 合作筹集资金来支付实地考察和 AP 课程等一系列“增强”服务的费用。

The idea is that districts could find an enticing revenue stream if families donate to an SGO that supports their neighborhood’s public schools.

这个想法是，如果家庭向支持其社区公立学校的 SGO 捐款，地区就可以找到诱人的收入来源。

Our analysis is not a point-by-point critique of the FSTC or any specific proposal.

我们的分析并不是对 FSTC 或任何具体提案的逐点批评。

However, it has implications for understanding how the FSTC could look in practice.

然而，它对于理解 FSTC 在实践中的表现具有重要意义。

Our contention is that state and local leaders should be realistic about who will donate to an SGO and attentive to the possibility that the FSTC will lead to funds moving heavily in the direction of the wealthiest families and districts.

我们的观点是，州和地方领导人应该现实地对待谁将向 SGO 捐款，并关注 FSTC 可能导致资金大量流向最富有的家庭和地区的可能性。

We don’t yet know who will benefit from the FSTC, because it won’t go into effect until 2027.

我们还不知道谁将从 FSTC 中受益，因为它要到 2027 年才会生效。

However, by pulling together nationwide data on federal income tax filers and evidence from state-level programs, we can make some educated guesses.

然而，通过汇总联邦所得税申报者的全国数据和州级项目的证据，我们可以做出一些有根据的猜测。

We start by examining which communities have more potential local money available based on their residents’ federal income tax liability.

我们首先根据居民的联邦所得税负担来检查哪些社区拥有更多潜在的本地资金。

To be clear, donors could direct their funds to communities other than their own.

需要明确的是，捐助者可以将资金捐献给自己以外的社区。

However, that would deviate from typical giving patterns .

然而，这将偏离典型的捐赠模式。

It also seems unlikely to arise from a district-based SGO model for public schools.

它似乎也不太可能出现在公立学校基于学区的 SGO 模式中。

(We consider the possibility of a state-based SGO model a little later.) Let’s say that you lead a school district in a high-poverty, rural area.

（我们稍后会考虑基于州的 SGO 模式的可能性。）假设您领导着一个高度贫困的农村地区的一个学区。

If your local donor pool is limited, that may leave you to recruit residents of wealthier areas to donate to your district’s SGO instead of their own.

如果您当地的捐赠池有限，您可能需要招募较富裕地区的居民向您所在地区的 SGO（而不是他们自己的）捐款。

How realistic is that at scale?

从规模上看，这有多现实？

To analyze where the potential FSTC money lies, we used 2023 IRS data to identify the distribution of filers’ tax liability.

为了分析 FSTC 资金的潜在来​​源，我们使用 2023 年 IRS 数据来确定申报人的纳税义务的分布。

Our estimates capped what any individual tax filer could potentially donate at $1,700 but allowed those with tax liabilities of $1 to $1,699 to donate up to that amount.

我们的估计将任何个人纳税申报人可能捐赠的金额上限为 1,700 美元，但允许纳税义务为 1 至 1,699 美元的人捐赠最多该金额。

2 For each county, we estimated the maximum amount of FSTC credits available.

2 对于每个县，我们估算了可用的 FSTC 积分的最大金额。

We then divided the potentially available funds by the number of school-age children (taken from ACS data ).

然后，我们将潜在可用资金除以学龄儿童数量（取自 ACS 数据）。

This gives a sense of the maximum pool of local resources per child.

这给出了每个孩子的最大本地资源池的感觉。

We looked at this across different types of counties.

我们对不同类型的县进行了研究。

Figure 1 shows what we found by county median income, poverty rate, and urbanicity.

图 1 显示了我们根据县收入中位数、贫困率和城市化程度得出的结果。

Unsurprisingly, children in higher-income areas have more local FSTC money potentially available in their communities than children in lower-income areas.

毫不奇怪，高收入地区的儿童比低收入地区的儿童在其社区中可能拥有更多的当地 FSTC 资金。

For example, children in counties that are in the top decile (10%) of median income have almost twice as much potential money available per pupil ($3,859) as children in counties that are in the bottom decile of median income ($2,233).

例如，收入中位数最高十分之一（10%）的县的儿童每名学生可获得的潜在资金（3,859 美元）几乎是收入中位数最低十分之一县的儿童（2,233 美元）的两倍。

This pattern is evident across different urbanicities, and we see similar patterns by county poverty levels.

这种模式在不同的城市中都很明显，而且我们在各县的贫困水平上也看到了类似的模式。

These first charts show that wealthier (and nonrural) areas have more potential FSTC funds available locally.

这些第一张图表显示，较富裕（和非农村）地区在当地拥有更多潜在的 FSTC 资金。

In considering potential funds, they reflect the implausible scenario that every filer maximizes their tax credit.

在考虑潜在资金时，它们反映了每个申报者都最大化其税收抵免的难以置信的情况。

Realistically, the true amount of funding will fall far short of the maximum possible funding amount, since most tax filers are unlikely to claim an FSTC tax credit.

实际上，真实的资金金额将远远低于可能的最大资金金额，因为大多数报税人不太可能申请 FSTC 税收抵免。

Additionally, we should be realistic about which tax filers are most likely to maximize their giving.

此外，我们应该现实地了解哪些纳税人最有可能最大化他们的捐赠。

Low-income filers might, understandably, be much less inclined to make a charitable donation and then wait for their tax credit.

可以理解的是，低收入申报者可能不太愿意进行慈善捐赠然后等待税收抵免。

To get a sense of how the actual giving patterns might look, we turn to a state-based, tax-credit scholarship program that is already up and running.

为了了解实际的捐赠模式可能是什么样子，我们求助于一个已经启动并运行的州级税收抵免奖学金计划。

To reiterate, we don’t know who will ultimately donate to SGOs via the FSTC, and we can’t know that until the program is operational.

重申一下，我们不知道谁最终会通过 FSTC 向 SGO 捐款，而且在该计划投入运行之前我们无法知道这一点。

However, we can look to existing state programs for hints.

然而，我们可以从现有的国家计划中寻找线索。

We surveyed the country’s tax-credit scholarship programs for one that shares key features with the new federal program and publicly reports data on tax credit recipients.

我们调查了该国的税收抵免奖学金计划，寻找与新的联邦计划具有共同关键特征并公开报告税收抵免受益人数据的计划。

That search led us to Ohio’s Scholarship Donation Credit .

通过搜索，我们找到了俄亥俄州的奖学金捐赠信用。

This program, which launched in 2021, offers a dollar-for-dollar, nonrefundable tax credit of up to $750 for individual taxpayers and $1,500 for couples filing jointly who donate to certified SGOs.

该计划于 2021 年推出，为个人纳税人提供最高 750 美元的不可退还税收抵免，为联合报税并向经认证的 SGO 捐款的夫妇提供最高 1,500 美元的税收抵免。

In the program’s first four years, about 65,000 filers claimed credits totaling nearly $75 million.

在该计划的前四年中，约 65,000 名申报者申请了总计近 7500 万美元的信贷。

3 Table 1 compares features of the Ohio program and the FSTC.

3 表 1 比较了俄亥俄州计划和 FSTC 的特点。

They share many similarities and a few notable differences (e.g., that Ohio’s program restricts scholarships to students in private schools, with a few exceptions).

它们有许多相似之处，也有一些显着的差异（例如，俄亥俄州的计划限制向私立学校的学生提供奖学金，但有一些例外）。

4

4

So, who has been getting a tax credit for donating to Ohio’s program?

那么，谁因向俄亥俄州的项目捐款而获得了税收抵免？

High-income filers are much more likely to claim this credit than low-income filers.

高收入申报者比低收入申报者更有可能申请此抵免。

This pattern appears in Figure 2.

这种模式如图 2 所示。

Even for the highest earners (over $500,000), only about 3.5% claim the tax credit, but that rate is many times larger than the corresponding rates for low- and middle-income filers.

即使对于最高收入者（超过 50 万美元）来说，也只有约 3.5% 的人申请税收抵免，但这一比例比中低收入申报者的相应比例高出许多倍。

5

5