No, it is not! The Education Choice Credit Act (ECCA) is a federal tax credit available to any taxpayer who donates to a nonprofit scholarship-granting organization (SGO). The program is administered by the United States Department of the Treasury, as is any tax credit or deduction benefit available for contributions to a non-profit, tax-exempt 501(c)(3) organization that funds services such as Alzheimer’s research, supports museums, or provides meals at a foodbank. The U.S. Department of Education has no role in the regulation or administration of the tax credit.
ECCA provides a federal income tax credit of up to $1,700 to a taxpayer for a donation to an SGO that the state in which it is located has informed Treasury that it is eligible to participate in the program. The state opt-in requirement will be the next battle in the ongoing struggle for parental choice of their children’s educational options.
The work of supporting the right of any taxpayer to claim the credit will depend on the action of the state. Here is where supporters will be challenged to “control the narrative” as various groups seek to influence state action. Supporters must be prepared to shape the conversations by proactively presenting accurate information and countering misinformation to influence public perceptions and state action. That will involve understanding the legislation and presenting evidence to control some of the false narratives used to undermine it.
False Narrative #1:ECCA is a scheme to give rich families with kids in private schools more money at the expense of the poor.
Here we need to distinguish between the donor and the beneficiary—they are not the same. The taxpayer receives the credit, while a scholarship recipient must be from a family that earns less than 300 percent of the local area poverty level. A scholarship may be used for more than tuition. Allowable uses support tutoring, counseling, computers, and other educational needs of public school students, as well as those in private schools. If a state considers homeschooling as a private school, those students are eligible if they meet income guidelines.
False Narrative #2: ECCA takes money away from public schools.
There is no money that would be otherwise available to public schools at play here. While some state programs may use public funds for scholarships and vouchers, ECCA doesn’t involve state budgets. Would a reasonable person argue that donations to the American associations and other charities should instead belong to public schools? True, public schools may lose students, but the law is intended to foster parents’ rights to control their children’s education, not protect teacher employment in a school parents deem unfit for their children.
False Narrative #3: Scholarships will support schools that discriminate against students with special needs or behaviors that violate the religiously based mission policies or practices of the school that receives the scholarships.
There is still the misperception that private schools don’t have to accept students with disabilities. Such schools are required to consider any otherwise handicapped children who can be served, so long as their admission does not require accommodations that would cause schools undue financial burden or significant modification of their program. Catholic schools have made great progress accepting students with moderate needs. Nationally, 75.5 percent of schools enroll students with disabilities, which is 9.1 percent of total enrollment. Schools report that they would do more if there were a more equitable disbursement of funding available under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). The U.S. Supreme Court has upheld the right of religious organizations to claim a religious exemption to hire for mission and enforce policies that protect the religious tenets of the organization.
ECCA does not go into effect until 2027. In the coming months, the U.S. Treasury will begin to develop regulations regarding the implementation of ECCA and how taxpayers file to claim the credit. The law spells out what eligible SGOs must do to be eligible to accept a scholarship, and that a state official must submit a list of eligible schools to Treasury. Treasury does not have any control over what else a state may require of an SGO. State advocacy groups will need to be vigilant so that the governor does not put onerous conditions on certain schools to discourage their participation.
NCEA will be working with other private school organizations to influence the adoption of regulations that will reflect the intent of the law and ensure that all schools can participate fairly. Advocates will press for guidance that specifies that eligible SGOs cannot be excluded because of their religious nature, character, or affiliation, including the religious mission-based policies or practices of the school or student that receives the scholarship.
What can all in the school community do to shape the narrative during the debates about state opt-in decisions? Focusing on the benefits and addressing false narratives is crucial.
Focus on family empowerment and financial relief: Discuss ECCA as a tool that empowers parents with choices to find the best educational fit for their children, regardless of zip code or type of school they attend. Stress the potential for ECCA to ease the financial burden of various educational expenses for all eligible families.
Stress the wide availability of the program, emphasiz- ing that it is not only for the wealthy or those in private schools: The income threshold of 300 percent of the area median gross income would include a significant portion of households with students in public as well as private schools.
Highlight student benefits: Emphasize that scholarships can cover a range of educational expenses, including private school tuition, tutoring, counseling, technology, and other resources tailored to individual student needs and learning styles.
Differentiate between vouchers and other publicly funded choice programs: Clarify that ECCA is a federal tax credit, distinct from direct government vouchers, and does not divert funds from public schools.
Discount charges of lack of accountability for funds: Highlight that SGOs are subject to oversight and must meet specific financial accounting practices and audits, ensuring responsible allocation of funds.
Counter arguments about discrimination: Point to antidiscrimination safeguards that are in place for all students, focusing on exemptions for religious practice while complying with other civil protections for students. Cite examples of students with disabilities in your local schools.
Be strategic in using communication channels and advocacy opportunities: Engage state leaders and policymakers directly and communicate with governors and state legislators about the program’s benefits for their constituents. Collaborate with organizations that support school choice and parental empowerment and build advocacy coalitions. Use multiple media platforms to disseminate information and engage in discussions about ECCA’s potential benefits. Share the good news of success stories of scholarship recipients who have benefited from choice options in their states.
A question to pose to frame the narrative might be this: Why would a state deny any citizen a legitimate federal income tax credit that is widely available to all taxpayers in the United States?
Sister Dale McDonald, PBVM, Ph.D.is the vice president of public policy for NCEA.McDonald@ncea.org