Child tax credit

The followed statement is laced with the words poverty and children. In reality the tax credit was not directed at the poor or children living in poverty and there is no way to determine how the credit was spent each month or on what and certainly no way to claim the payments lifted children out of poverty or its expiration returned them to poverty.

Pandering at its best.

Washington, D.C. — Following a report from the Census Bureau finding that childhood poverty more than doubled last year, Colorado U.S. Senator Michael Bennet made the case about the critical need to restore expanded, enhanced Child Tax Credit (CTC). 

During a press conference urging Congress to fight child poverty and expand the CTC, Bennet said:

“We’ve now seen the largest increase in childhood poverty that we’ve ever seen in this country, the richest country in the world. On the other hand, we know that it’s in the backdrop of the promises that we made about [the Child Tax Credit] actually being fulfilled.”

“30 million children benefited from this. We cut childhood poverty in the United States of America in half. 90 percent of the kids in Colorado and across the country benefited from this.”

“I’ve been here on Christmas Eve and on New Year’s Eve when tax cuts for the biggest corporations in America were expiring. I’ve been here when tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans were expiring. And I’ve seen the Senate stay here until 2 o’clock in the morning to make sure those tax cuts were extended. In this case, we turned our back on America’s children. For once, we treated America’s children like they were our children, not someone else’s children, in the richest country in the world. But in the end, we turned our backs on them.”

On MSNBC’s 11th Hour with Stephanie Ruhle, Bennet said:

“We turned our backs on America’s kids. We enacted a policy that cut child poverty in half, which is what the proponents of this bill, including myself, said it would… Families got the checks every month and they were able to pay for a little bit of extra food or buy some school clothes for their kids, or not have to make such a stressful decision about affording rent or paying for health care or after school stuff. They spent their money on kids, and the richest country in the world cut child poverty in half. Now we have seen it double, in effect, because we did not extend the child tax credit.

“My goal is to end childhood poverty in this country. I think that that should be a goal for the richest country in the world. We now know how to do it, and we’ve got to fight to make this child tax credit, the enhanced child tax credit, permanent.”

Watch the full interview HERE.

In an interview with ABC for Grand Junction, Colo., Bennet said:

“[Because of the expanded Child Tax Credit] families on the West Slope of Colorado got a little bit of breathing room so they could help a little with the rent. They could pay down to not make such a tough choice between food and other bills at the end of the month or buy school clothes for their kids. It really was real breathing room.”

In an interview with FOX for Denver, Colo., Bennet said:

“In a country as wealthy as the United States, [childhood poverty] is inexcusable.”

“5 million more kids in America have fallen into poverty as a result of the child tax credit alone being taken away.”


Here is what the report actually says:
The official poverty rate in 2022 was 11.5%, with 37.9 million people in poverty. Neither the rate nor the number in poverty was significantly different from 2021. The SPM rate in 2022 was 12.4%, an increase of 4.6 percentage points from 2021. This increase can be attributed to key changes in federal tax policy, including the expiration of temporary expansions to the Child Tax Credit (CTC) and the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) as well as the end of pandemic-era stimulus payments.
The SPM child poverty rate more than doubled, from 5.2% in 2021 to 12.4% in 2022.

The Supplement Poverty Rate (SPM) is the rate including government assistance programs for a household. That doubling is based on households with children, and elimination of several programs, not money specifically for children. SPM rates also increased for 18- to 64-year-olds and people age 65 and older.


Here is how the enhanced child tax credit worked.

This amount may vary by income. These people qualify for the full Child Tax Credit (CHILDCTC):

  • Married couples with income under $150,000 ✔️✔️
  • Families with a single parent (also called Head of Household) with income under $112,500
  • Everyone else with income under $75,000

These people will qualify for at least $2,000 of Child Tax Credit (CHILDCTC), which comes out to $166 per child each month:

  • Married couples with income under $400,000 ✔️✔️
  • Families with a single parent (also called Head of Household) with income under $200,000
  • Everyone else with income under $200,000

7 comments

  1. It’s easy to propose benefits during a run up to an election. Saying we are the richest country is disingenuous when we have the largest public debt in the world. We are spending heavily on the federal credit card and it is time for some fiscal restraint. Adding on a new tax credit should be balanced by taking away from an expenditure somewhere else. What would this guy Bennet propose we give up spending on to finance his proposal? I won’t hold my breath because I know his answer will never be forthcoming.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. “Six reasons why an expanded Child Tax Credit or child allowance should be part of the US safety net”

      Was published by the Brookings Institute in Oct. 2021. It’s not just during elections. There is another way to provide benefits than “give up spending”, especially those which would yield positive social returns.

      Clue: The richest country is also one of the lowest taxed. Since I am (slightly) above median household income, I propose my taxes and anyone above me, be increased. I’d rather start paying down this debt than leave it to my grandkids.

      Like

      1. I really don’t have a problem with the child credit and it is probably more worthy than a lot of things that the federal government spends on. But the debt is growing by the day and even a large tax increase wouldn’t pay down the debt but would slow down deficit spending. That is why I say get spending under control before adding more to the deficit.

        Like

      2. From the CBO:
        “Projected Savings From Options For Reducing the Deficit” 2023-2032

        Establish Caps on Federal Spending for Medicaid 501 to 871Billion dollars

        Reduce Tax Subsidies for Employment-Based Health Insurance 500 to 893 billion dollars

        Reduce the Department of Defense’s Annual Budget 995 Billion dollars

        Reduce Nondefense Discretionary Spending 332 Billion dollars

        Increase Individual Income Tax Rates 502 to 1,329 Billion dollars

        Eliminate or Limit Itemized Deductions 541 to 2,507 Billion dollars.

        In what world does increasing taxes not reduce the deficit? Especially when “get spending under control” primarily means reducing social services. I.e. tax the poor.

        “Taxing the billionaires” is just a start. Increase taxes on the top income quintile. Many of them agree.

        Like

      3. In what world does increasing taxes not reduce the deficit?

        Ask President Obama, or for that matter, President Trump. Their experience is shown below:

        Tax
        Revenue Spend Deficit

        2010 2,162,706 3,457,079 -1,294,373
        2011 2,303,466 3,603,065 -1,299,599
        2012 2,449,990 3,526,563 -1,076,573
        2013 2,775,106 3,454,881 -679,775
        2014 3,021,491 3,506,284 -484,793
        2015 3,249,890 3,691,850 -441,960
        2016 3,267,965 3,852,615 -584,650
        2017 3,316,184 3,981,634 -665,450

        2018 3,329,907 4,109,047 -779,140
        2019 3,463,364 4,446,960 -983,596
        2020 3,421,164 6,553,621 -3,132,457
        2021 4,047,111 6,822,470 -2,775,359

        2022 4,897,399 6,273,324 -1,375,925
        2023 4,802,483 6,371,827 -1,569,344
        FY 2024 5,036,384 6,882,738 -1,846,354

        In 15 years, revenues (taxes) have increased from just over $2 Trillion a year to $5 trillion a year – that’s a 150% increase, yet, the deficit has never been less than $440 Billion dollars at anytime in the past 15 years and it has exceeded $1 Trillion more than half of those years.

        Why is that? Spend, spend, spend, spend. and spend some more – ,,,

        Here’s what President Obama said about taxes and spending:
        Calling President Bush II irresponsible and unpatriotic for adding $4 Trillion to national debt

        Then he added almost $10 Trillion to the national debt,
        His understanding of economics is crap as well – less raise taxes on capital gains, even if it reduces revenue:

        Trump was even worse, and Biden is even worse than Trump.

        It isn’t that we’re not paying enough in taxes, it is spending that is out of control.

        Like

      4. You’re talking about two black swan events.* Three, if you count the longest war in our history.

        Nevertheless, the CBO has projections to decrease the deficit by either spending reductions or revenue increases. Or presumably a combination of each. It’s what they get paid to do.

        The U.S. is one of the richest OECD countries per capita and one of the lowest taxed. Yes, we can reduce the deficit/debt by increasing revenue. Count me in.

        *Not that there couldn’t be another in our future.

        Like

  2. It’s complicated. I never heard of Melissa Kearney until your article on two parent families. And had no knowledge of the child tax credit since my kids were long gone in 1997. *

    FWIW, here is one response to it’s elimination.

    https://www.brookings.edu/articles/six-reasons-why-an-expanded-child-tax-credit-or-child-allowance-should-be-part-of-the-u-s-safety-net/

    *Let alone the enhanced child tax credit. The devil is in the details, of course, but if I had to vote tomorrow, I would vote to keep the enhanced credit. What’s the alternative, extending tax credits to the wealthy? (No offense intended. Some of my best friends are wealthy. JK)

    Like

Leave a reply to Stephen Douglas Cancel reply