advertisement
RSS
More Feeds












God's Politics

Child Tax Credit: Better Late Than Never

by Jim Wallis 01-07-2009

In 2003, Call to Renewal was deeply engaged in working to have a refundable child tax credit included in that year’s tax cut legislation. Ultimately, the credit was dropped from the final legislation.  In response, I wrote a column, explaining that we had supported it as a way to “put money directly into the hands of our poorest mothers and fathers who are trying desperately to raise their children,” and saying that

The decision to drop child tax credits for America’s poorest families and children in favor of further tax cuts for the rich is morally offensive. It is blatant disregard for the poor, and an outrageous bias toward the rich. In religious terms, the exclusion of any benefits for poor children in the new tax bill should be named as a political sin. And those politicians who utter the words of religion and faith, yet who supported this exclusion of the poor, deserve to be called hypocrites.

In the news this week are the emerging details of President-elect Obama’s economic stimulus package, including a substantial amount of tax cuts.  And this time, the Wall Street Journal reported yesterday, the Stimulus Plan Would Expand Tax Credit for Poor:

Mr. Obama’s advisers on Monday outlined a potential new feature of the plan to congressional aides, saying they would press for a tax change that would allow more families that earn too little to pay income taxes to claim at least some of the $1,000-per-child tax credit. That would amount to an income subsidy, since it would refund taxes they are too poor to pay.

The plan would grant an estimated 5.5 million poor children access to the credit for the first time, and expand the tax benefit for millions more poor children who currently qualify for only a partial credit, according to its advocates. The change has been sought by Democrats and some moderate Republicans for years.

It’s an encouraging sign that in the midst of necessary programs to benefit small business and the middle class, the poorest among us are not once again being excluded.

Categories: Economics, Poverty
Share or bookmark this post:
  • email
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • del.icio.us
  • Digg
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Mixx
  • NewsVine
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  • Technorati
  • Yahoo! Bookmarks
advertisement


Comment Code of Conduct

I will express myself with civility, courtesy, and respect for every member of the Sojourners online community, especially toward those with whom I disagree—even if I feel disrespected by them. (Romans 12:17-21)

I will express my disagreements with other community members' ideas without insulting, mocking, or slandering them personally. (Matthew 5:22)

I will not exaggerate others' beliefs nor make unfounded prejudicial assumptions based on labels, categories, or stereotypes. I will always extend the benefit of the doubt. (Ephesians 4:29)

I will hold others accountable by clicking "report" on comments that violate these principles, based not on what ideas are expressed but on how they're expressed. (2 Thessalonians 3:13-15)

I understand that comments reported as abusive are reviewed by Sojourners staff and are subject to removal. Repeat offenders will be blocked from making further comments. (Proverbs 18:7)

  • joiningtheconversation
    yay!!!
  • jesse3
    We'll reach some degree of moral clarity on this once we explore the distinction between tax cut (letting people keep their money) and tax credit (giving people someone else's money). Discussing these distinctions might keep us from making hyperbolic declarations of "political sin," but at least it would be a more honest conversation.

    If I preferred to give tax cuts to the rich so they'd provide more jobs for the poor, would that make me a "political sinner"?
  • littleroundtop
    "We'll reach some degree of moral clarity on this once we explore the distinction between tax cut (letting people keep their money) and tax credit (giving people someone else's money"

    Thank you , this is so very important in such discussions . Especially when we are suppose to be speaking from a Christian position . Perhaps a better way to discuss this would be if we are for vouchers to the poorest familes in order to help them out . But you can not refund what was not given in the first place .
  • It's amazing how Jim gets away with calling a transfer of wealth a "tax credit." Seriously, Jim, how do you sleep at night? It's dishonest.

    As for the poorest of the poor and the mothers who need assistance, I'm not against that per se. I'm very much against Jim Wallis praising Obama on giving money away to people it did not initially belong to and not calling it what it is. You may disagree with the ethics involved, but let's call a spade a spade.
  • ando
    "Seriously, Jim, how do you sleep at night? It's dishonest."

    And YOU recently admonished me to be ASHAMED!? Please, xfree.

    I'm glad, though, that your not against the "poorest of the poor and the mothers" getting assistance. Even though the money doesn't "belong" to them. Very compassionate. And the wealthy obviously worked so hard to get that right to a tax break, right?

    Now get away, Caesar!
  • Touché!

    But simply because your opinion is that the wealthy didn't "work hard enough" for it does not mean it does not belong to them. My wife's car I worked zero for, but it is still legally my property as well as hers.
  • desiringtogrow
    I am uncomfortable with thinking our money"belongs to us" because we work for it????? If a person is a Christian, are we not vessels for God to work in and through? while also receiving a fee for services rendered? If we believe what scripture says, that "all good things come from God", including our gifts, talents, skills and abilities, if we make money using the blessings received from God, wouldn't it make sense to let God disperse that money , for His Glory and our good. As we serve God, and are monetarily compensated for it, I believe the money earned belongs to HIM, not me. And if I am serious about my faith, I will want to share what I have, and or sacrifice in areas for others to have what they need. I think we need to consider the Biblical principals regarding sharing one another's burdens, and giving to those who need help, while loving and accepting them for who they are - created in the image of God....I believe God demands impartiality, for all people are equally valuable in His eyes. He wants us to respect all people and treat them equally, regardless of their background or economic status. Each person is God's creation.
  • I completely agree that the money I earn is not mine, in that it truly belongs to God, and I am God's steward on earth. But not everybody believes this, so telling others to do what we think godly people would do with their money is simply forcing our own beliefs and ethics on others. I don't find that palatable, either. It's the same argument pro-life people use to tell women it's not their body, it really belongs to God.

    If God treats and wants us to treat everyone equally, why are we advocating for an unequal tax burden? Why are we allowing only the rich to choose their kids' education by not permitting parents to send kids to the school of their choice?

    I think we agree almost exactly on what Christians should do with God's money stewarded to them. We should be generous, sacrificial, and use God's money as a blessing for others. "Blessed to be a blessing" is a great phrase I use for Christians who are self-absorbed into their own "stuff." Where we differ might be that I do not think that we have any right to force others to do what we would prefer they do with their money. Or, to put it in familiar terms to this discussion, I have no right to demand what you do with God's money that God gave you stewardship over, just because I don't like what you're doing with it.
  • BrentH
    "Refundable" Tax Credits are like a concert that is cancelled at the last minute because the lead singer of the band was sick. They must give the money back to the people who paid the tickets. But then along comes Jim Wallis and says "This is an injustice! The people who didn't buy tickets aren't going to get any of this money."
  • I fear the notion that people will be "keeping their money" is a delusion. The politicians are attempting to resuscitate the economy, however I see no reason to think that they know what they are doing. As far as being incensed at giving ("someone else's") money to the poor, most of "it" would be coming from the Chinese, to be repaid by our grandchildren. A data point of interest might be that the $700 billion gift to Wall street divided by 300 million people is $2000. Further if we were to have a "housing bailout", why didn't New Orleans get "bailed out"? Were they too poor or too black or ... what?
    I don't begrudge the rich "giving" jobs to the poor, even if the poor are in Mexico or Maylasia, but I also believe that if you are going to give a man a fishing pole, there is nothing wrong with giving him a fish for starters.
  • Good points. One thing that should be added is that when the rich are taxed more, they'll simply hide the money or put it offshore, or they'll sit on it and not spend or invest. That hurts the economy as well, and the government actually receives more, further exacerbating the problem.
  • The rich might cheat? Why?
  • It's not cheating unless it's illegal. To not spend your own money is not cheating or immoral (I know you didn't call it immoral).
  • Is "hide their money" tax evasion?
  • There are several ways to "hide" money, one of which is tax evasion. If it is a "loophole," it is not illegal. But I'm not denying the rich won't do bad things, but they are also entitled to legally "hide" their money.
  • Ah, a little tax evasion then.
  • SisterMarie
    There appears to be a lot of piling on by those who deeply resent efforts to help those who are less fortunate among us. I would suggest that you go reread the story of the Good Samaritan. Maybe you'd prefer that he simply perish by the side of the road. may God have mercy on the souls of us who just expended hundreds of dollars to purchase toys for children whose toy boxes are already overflowing and who would begrudge these efforts to help the needy.
  • duhsciple
    Okay, I'm issuing "F's" in biblical theology to anyone who implied that any money we possess is "our" money or that "we" earned it.

    "A's" to anyone who understands that it is ALL God's money-- and that "our" hard work and efforts are also gifts!!! from God.

    Until we get the understanding that God is the Creator and OWNER of everything- we'll continue to be messed up. We are managers of what belongs to God. We are to use creation's gifts according to God's purposes.

    Please keep this understanding in mind when discussing tax credits and tax cuts. Otherwise, to quote the Sarcastic Lutheran, I'll have to throw up in my mouth a little bit.

    Sheesh, Duhsciple
  • jesse3
    You assume it's either A) our money or B) God's money, but those aren't the options. The real options here are whether it is A) our money, or B) someone else's to take by force. Would you have a problem with me taking your money from you (or your neighbor) by force? It's all "God's money" anyway, right? Does theft mean anything at all in this context?
  • duhsciple
    “Failure to share one’s surplus with the needy is like theft.” - St. Augustine

    “The surplus goods of the rich are the necessities of the poor. When you possess surplus goods, you possess the goods of others.” - Saint Augustine

    You shall not murder.
    What does this mean?
    We are to fear and love God, so that we neither endanger nor harm the lives of our neighbors, but instead help and support them in all of life's needs.-- Martin Luther

    You shall not steal.
    What does this mean?
    We are to fear and love God, so that we neither take our neighbor's money or property nor acquire them them by using shoddy merchandise or crooked deals, but instead help them to improve and protect their property and income.-- Martin Luther

    Yes, I believe there are such things as theft and murder.

    No, I do not believe in taking things by force.

    Yes, I do believe that Jesus means it when he says give US this day OUR daily bread. Translation: if anyone is hungry and your belly is full, then what you have left must be used to feed your neighbor.

    Yes, I am a great and mighty sinner by these standards.

    Lord, have mercy upon me,

    Duhsciple
blog comments powered by Disqus
click here for comments tech support
advertisement
  • MOST VIEWED
  • MOST COMMENTED
  • MOST RECENT
advertisement
advertisement
advertisement
advertisement
advertisement


HOME | SUBSCRIBE | DONATE | TAKE ACTION | MAGAZINE  
SOJOMAIL | BLOGS | MEDIA | EVENTS | RESOURCES | ABOUT US  
Sojourners | 3333 14th Street NW, Suite 200 | Washington, DC 20010  
Phone 202.328.8842 | Fax 202.328.8757 | sojourners@sojo.net  
Unless otherwise noted, all material © Sojourners 2008