Bill Overview
Title: Educators Expense Deduction Modernization Act of 2022
Description: This bill increases the tax deduction for the expenses of eligible educators from $250 to $1,000, An eligible educator is, with respect to any taxable year, an individual who is a kindergarten through grade 12 teacher, instructor, counselor, principal, or aide in a school for at least 900 hours during a school year.
Sponsors: Rep. Brown, Anthony G. [D-MD-4]
Target Audience
Population: K-12 teachers, instructors, counselors, principals, and aides
Estimated Size: 8500000
- The bill increases the tax deduction specifically for eligible educators, which includes K-12 teachers, instructors, counselors, principals, and aides.
- Eligible educators must be employed for at least 900 hours during a school year.
- The impact is on educators both currently in the profession and potentially those who might consider entering the profession due to improved financial incentives.
- This bill impacts educators worldwide in regions with similar legislative structures or collaborative systems with the US relating to educational deductions.
Reasoning
- The targeted population is specifically K-12 educators including teachers, instructors, counselors, principals, and aides. There are about 8.5 million educators in the US that fit this category.
- The budget allocated for this policy needs to consider how widely this deduction will be used. With a maximum deduction increase of $750 (from $250 to $1000) per educator, the program can serve about 5.67 million educators in year 1 on average.
- This assumes all eligible educators claim the maximum deduction, meaning not everyone in the estimated target will benefit simultaneously to the maximum possible extent.
Simulated Interviews
High school teacher (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 32 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The increased deduction would definitely motivate me to invest in better supplies for my classes.
- Finally, there is recognition of the out-of-pocket expenses we incur.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Middle school counselor (Austin, TX)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I don't spend that much, so the deduction increase won't really impact me significantly.
- It's good for teachers who do spend more, though.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Elementary school aide (Chicago, IL)
Age: 28 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I don’t reach the 900 hours required to benefit from this.
- It’s not very helpful to part-timers in my position.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 4 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 4 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 4 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 4 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 4 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 4 | 4 |
High school principal (Seattle, WA)
Age: 39 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Any bit of financial alleviation helps, but our roles typically provide more support through other funding.
- This deduction is more impactful for my teaching staff.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
Elementary school counselor (Boston, MA)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- While the increase is nice, I already maximize my possible deductions.
- It will encourage others to invest more in their resources.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Kindergarten teacher (Miami, FL)
Age: 25 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Great news! I always use my own money for additional educational tools.
- This deduction increase is a relief.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 5 |
Middle school instructor (Nashville, TN)
Age: 30 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It's a reasonable change, perhaps it'll help offset expenses for projects.
- Not all educators spend equally though. Some will benefit more.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
High school teacher (Detroit, MI)
Age: 55 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- At this stage, I welcome any additional support.
- Financial stability should be a focus for teacher retention.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Primary school aide (Denver, CO)
Age: 27 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I've only reached the deduction once, but it encourages increased spending for the classroom.
- Nice to see aides included.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
High school teacher (Phoenix, AZ)
Age: 60 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This change would have been helpful earlier in my career.
- There's support for the younger generation, which is crucial.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $4250000000 (Low: $3500000000, High: $5000000000)
Year 2: $4250000000 (Low: $3500000000, High: $5000000000)
Year 3: $4250000000 (Low: $3500000000, High: $5000000000)
Year 5: $4250000000 (Low: $3500000000, High: $5000000000)
Year 10: $4250000000 (Low: $3500000000, High: $5000000000)
Year 100: $4250000000 (Low: $3500000000, High: $5000000000)
Key Considerations
- Potential increase in teacher retention due to improved financial incentives.
- The effect of effectively increasing teacher salaries by reducing taxable income could enhance education quality indirectly.
- A consistent deduction may encourage more educational professionals to remain or join the profession, potentially alleviating shortages.