Skip to comments.Pregnant on Dec. 31? California Lawmaker Proposes Tax Break
Posted on 02/22/2013 8:00:17 PM PST by randita
A California lawmaker wants to give tax deductions for unborn children, piggybacking on a recent law making pregnant minors eligible for welfare.
If fetuses deserve public aid, why not tax breaks?
Republican Assemblywoman Shannon Grove is pressing that question this week by proposing Assembly Bill 673, which would grant a $321 child income tax deduction for an "expected child."
Robert Smith, Grove's legislative director, said the bill is not specifically intended to spark new debate over California's failure to recognize a fetus as a person for abortion purposes, but it spotlights the current inconsistency.
"If it can drive the discussion, that's an issue we'd love to have a real substantive and honest discussion about," Smith said. His boss, a Bakersfield Republican, opposes abortion.
The bill makes sense on another level, too, by encouraging families that struggle with the cost of living but want to have a child. Current law provides a timely deduction if a child is born Dec. 31, but not one day later, Smith said.
Last year's legislative decision to qualify a pregnant minor for welfare benefits upon verification of pregnancy was part of Assembly Bill 1640. Grove voted no on the measure, which ultimately was signed into law.
Once California set the precedent that a fetus should be eligible for welfare payments, the "logical next step" is that it should be recognized for income tax deductions, too, Smith said.
Last year's bill essentially recognized that "a woman is indeed carrying a human being, regardless of how far along she is in her pregnancy," Grove said in a written statement. "My bill, AB 673, applies this precedent to child tax credits as well."
(Excerpt) Read more at blogs.sacbee.com ...
My son took his time and prevented me from getting a deduction by 8h, 15m. I have never let him hear the end of that.
I didn't see a provision for the money to be refunded if the pregnancy is terminated for any reason.
Sponsoring FReepers are contributing
$10 Each time a New Monthly Donor signs up!
Get more bang for your FR buck!
Click Here To Sign Up Now!
why not really impress the pro-life people and flat-out go for the actual personhood bills? take a real, and obvious stand. not just go hemming and hawing around the edges of the issue. i mean 55+million dead and rising since 1973... the science is so much more on our side, now the left’s best argument is ‘yes it’s a person, so what?’
this is a hopeful attempt to appease the pro-life crowd and hope we’re placated with a little tax break and an indirect reference of an unborn baby as a expected child. like this should be enough to hold us and heap praise on them.
dems will vote it down for this and because it’s a tax break and that cuts into their spending of our confiscated money. just go for the full personhood bills and let them feel the pressure, let them go on record to vote against it, most people are’for it and they’d get more heat going against it. if you’re for’something be 100% for it and go full bore. give people a reason to strongly stand behind you.
I just filed taxes for my deceased son this evening. A last wrap up of his affairs. He earned so little in 2012 that I could claim him as my dependent. His federal and state filings had a net $0 owed either direction. I coughed up $19.00 to e-file the state just to get the task behind me.