Bill Overview
Title: To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide for an exclusion from gross income for compensation of certain school resource officers, and for other purposes.
Description: This bill excludes from gross income, for income tax purposes, compensation paid to a qualified school resource officer. The bill defines qualified school resource officer as a retired law enforcement officer who is employed as an armed school resource officer at an elementary or secondary school. The bill also exempts such compensation from employment taxation and withholding requirements.
Sponsors: Rep. Weber, Randy K., Sr. [R-TX-14]
Target Audience
Population: Retired law enforcement officers employed as school resource officers
Estimated Size: 50000
- The bill targets school resource officers, specifically those who are retired law enforcement officers employed in schools.
- This population includes individuals who are in a position to choose employment as school resource officers, and who may be incentivized by the tax exclusion.
- The legislation may impact schools by potentially making it easier to hire retired law enforcement officers.
- The tax exclusion might indirectly affect school communities by possibly increasing the availability of resource officers.
- Globally, the primary focus will be on countries with similar school security models, but this is heavily a U.S.-centric issue given its specific revenue code.
Reasoning
- The policy specifically targets retired law enforcement officers employed as school resource officers, a relatively small target population estimated at around 50,000 individuals in the U.S.
- Economic benefit from the policy is largely restricted to income tax savings, which will vary based on the retired officers' compensation and tax bracket, but will generally be modest per individual.
- The policy's budget should support the tax exclusion benefits effectively for the estimated population, assuming an average compensation for school resource officers.
- The direct impact will be felt by this specific group; indirectly, schools might find it easier to attract retired officers due to the tax benefit, enhancing school safety.
- Not all retired officers will choose this path; many might be unaffected due to personal choice or other career opportunities. Thus, the overall impact is expected to be low in terms of affecting broader societal wellbeing.
Simulated Interviews
School Resource Officer (retired police officer) (Atlanta, GA)
Age: 61 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy makes my job that much more rewarding financially.
- I appreciate the government acknowledging the work we do in schools.
- It's a small token, but it certainly helps maintain a stable income post-retirement.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 4 |
School Resource Officer (retired police officer) (Dallas, TX)
Age: 65 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This is a nice incentive, but honestly, I was going to do this job regardless.
- It's a meaningful way to give back to the community after retiring from the force.
- The extra financial benefit just adds a bit more comfort.
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 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Consultant (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 58 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy doesn't impact me as I chose a different path after retiring.
- I see the need and advantage for schools employing resource officers.
- Personally, I am content with my current occupation.
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 |
School Resource Officer (retired police officer) (Seattle, WA)
Age: 70 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The tax break might make this role more appealing to retirees.
- For me, being a resource officer is more about staying involved than the financial perks.
- I welcome any policy that eases my tax burden.
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 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 3 |
Retired, not working (New York, NY)
Age: 66 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I am too old to consider going back to work, even with tax incentives.
- It's a good idea to help support younger, retired officers looking for work.
- This doesn't change anything for my personal circumstances.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
School Resource Officer (retired detective) (Chicago, IL)
Age: 59 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy is a good step, but the real incentives need to be better job benefits overall.
- Retired officers are great for schools due to their experience, and the incentives help.
- Financially, any little bit helps, especially with taxes.
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 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 3 |
School Resource Officer (retired police officer) (Miami, FL)
Age: 62 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Since taking this job, the policy certainly makes finances more manageable.
- It's great to see some recognition of our uncompensated contributions.
- The policy is particularly helpful for my reduced income post-retirement.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Retired, not working (Phoenix, AZ)
Age: 64 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- My decision to remain retired stands; no policy would change that.
- It's commendable to help those who decide to work again, though.
- I focus more on personal health and family than on financial incentives.
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 |
School Resource Officer (retired deputy sheriff) (Denver, CO)
Age: 67 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The tax exemption is good; it's like a bonus to my pension.
- I think more officers should consider school resource roles—they're fulfilling.
- The initiative makes retiring a bit simpler since I still have income flexibility.
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 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
School Resource Officer (retired sergeant) (Boston, MA)
Age: 60 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy isn't life-changing but it's certainly a helpful financial adjustment.
- I appreciate the effort to recognize the role of school resource officers.
- The policy could encourage more qualified people to explore this kind of work.
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 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 4 | 3 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $150000000 (Low: $100000000, High: $200000000)
Year 2: $152000000 (Low: $101500000, High: $203000000)
Year 3: $154500000 (Low: $103000000, High: $206000000)
Year 5: $158000000 (Low: $106000000, High: $211000000)
Year 10: $165000000 (Low: $111000000, High: $220000000)
Year 100: $300000000 (Low: $200000000, High: $400000000)
Key Considerations
- The bill incentivizes the hiring of retired law enforcement officers as school resource officers by offering tax exclusions.
- The fiscal impact consists primarily of reduced federal revenues due to excluded income and employment taxes.
- The policy could indirectly enhance school safety and reduce school district costs by making it easier to employ resource officers.