In personal income tax, further providing for special tax provisions for poverty.
Impact
The legislative enhancement to the tax code will create a long-term impact by incorporating an annual cost-of-living adjustment to poverty income amounts, which will help these thresholds to keep pace with inflation. This adjustment ensures that the provisions remain relevant over time and that low-income individuals do not lose benefits as the cost of living rises. Thus, the bill encourages a more equitable tax structure that can adapt to changing economic conditions, ultimately aiming to alleviate some of the burden faced by the state's economically vulnerable populations.
Summary
House Bill 1742 aims to amend the tax code in Pennsylvania by providing special tax provisions for individuals living in poverty. The bill specifically increases the poverty income thresholds that allow claimants to be eligible for tax refunds or forgiveness of state taxes paid. For instance, it raises the income limit for single claimants from $6,500 to $10,000, and for married couples from $13,000 to $20,000. The proposal is designed to give financial relief to low-income families and individuals and includes an additional income allowance for dependents, meaning families with children could benefit further.
Sentiment
General sentiment surrounding HB 1742 appears to be largely supportive among advocates for poverty alleviation and social justice. Supporters argue that the bill is a necessary step toward recognizing and addressing the financial struggles of low-income individuals and families. However, there may also be concerns from those who view additional tax credits and provisions as a potential strain on state revenue. Overall, the sentiment reflects a division between the desire to provide financial assistance and the caution about fiscal sustainability.
Contention
Notable points of contention regarding HB 1742 typically revolve around its fiscal implications and the adequacy of the proposed income thresholds. Some legislators and stakeholders express concerns about the long-term economic impact of raising the income limits for tax breaks and whether this could lead to reduced funding for other important state services. Skepticism about the effectiveness of such measures in genuinely lifting people out ofpoverty and providing sustainable economic growth has been a focal point of the debate. Critics argue for a more comprehensive approach that includes job creation and education-based solutions, rather than solely relying on tax provisions.
In personal income tax, further providing for classes of income and for special tax provisions for poverty and providing for alternative special tax provisions for poverty; in corporate net income tax, further providing for definitions, for imposition of tax, for reports and payment of tax, for consolidated reports and for manufacturing innovation and reinvestment deduction; in realty transfer tax, further providing for transfer of tax; in tax credit and tax benefit administration, further providing for definitions; in entertainment production tax credit, further providing for definitions, for credit for qualified film production expenses, for carryover, carryback and assignment of credit and for limitations; in Pennsylvania Economic Development for a Growing Economy (PA EDGE) tax credits, providing for biotechnology; in neighborhood assistance tax credit, further providing for tax credit and for grant of tax credit; providing for expanded neighborhood improvement zones; in Pennsylvania Child and Dependent Care Enhancement Tax Credit Program, further providing for credit for child and dependent care employment-related expenses; providing for Public Transportation Trust Fund; and, in general provisions, further providing for underpayment of estimated tax, for method of filing and for allocation of tax credits.