it201-4000233

Governor Cuomo and the Legislature are about to add another gnarly twist to the state’s heavily cluttered personal income tax code with their agreement to create a new “Family Tax Credit.” The credit, as widely reported, is designed to put a $350 check in about a million mailboxes starting “on or before October 15″ in 2014 — within three weeks of the next statewide election. It would expire after 2016.

The credit is targeted to residents of New York State who have at least one child aged 17 or younger under 17 and adjusted gross income of $40,000 to $300,000.  However, in order to determine who gets a check in the mail, the state Department of Taxation and Finance will need to rely on the latest information it has available — which will come from 2012 tax returns (those IT-201 forms New Yorkers have to file before April 15).

As a result, although this is supposed to be a break against 2014 taxes, the language in the new revenue bill says eligibility will be decided on the basis of family, income and tax status as of “the taxable year two years prior to the taxable year in which the credit is allowed,” which means2012.  For each of two succeeding years, eligibility also will be based on the tax return filed two years earlier.

Inevitably, thousands of those $350 checks will be delivered in the fall of 2014 to people who were eligible for the credit in 2012 but will no longer be eligible in 2014.

Conversely, although the statutory language refers to that $350 as an “advance” on a credit against taxes for years 2014-16, people who only become eligible for the credit in 2013 or 2014won’t be getting the check next year.

The big open question is this: if a family qualifies for the credit in 2014, can they still claim the credit on the final tax return filed in early 2015?  The bill says, in part: “When a taxpayer files his or her return for the taxable year, such taxpayer shall reconcile that (family tax credit) payment on his or her return.” But what “taxable year” does that language refer to — 2012 (the basis for determining eligibility) or 2014 (the year for which the $350 check serves as an advance credit against taxes)?

If families eligible for the credit in 2014 can claim that $350 as part of the refund due for the return they file in early 2015, does that mean the state will also require families who were eligible in 2012, but no longer eligible in 2014, to pay back the $350 in the same fashion?  The Department will need to issue rules to resolve such questions.

Another complication: the new credit is linked to income eligibility thresholds that function like a light switch: “on” at adjusted gross income of $40,000, “off” at adjusted gross income of $300,000.  Why were these numbers chosen?  Well, they do correspond to the top of the state’s current (temporary) fifth highest and third highest taxable income brackets, respectively, for married-joint returns. But taxable income is not the same as adjusted gross income. In fact, a couple with one child and adjusted gross income of $40,000 will have a taxable income no higher than $24,400.  At the other extreme, a family with adjusted gross income of $300,000 will typically have a taxable income of $280,000 or less, after itemized deductions. And for parents who file as individuals or heads of households, the tax brackets begin and end at different levels, although the new tax credit provision doesn’t seem to recognize it. Were the drafters of this bill confused, or just being arbitrary?

Anyway, let’s say you had two small children and income of $42,000 in 2012. Congratulations: you’ll get a check for $350 in the fall of 2014.  But let’s say that in 2013, you get laid off and your adjusted gross income drops to $39,900.  In that case,  you’re out of luck: no check will be in your mailbox in the fall of 2015.

From any ideological perspective — left, right, or in between — adding new income eligibility cliffs and complexity to the tax code is generally considered the opposite of good tax policy. However, such things are inevitable when you design a “tax cut” with purely political purposes in mind.

You may also like

Two Dozen School Districts Are Returning to the Polls for Budget Revotes

Voters in 24 New York school districts return to the polls on Tuesday for school budget revotes. Last month, voters in 96 percent of school districts outside New York City conducting votes approved their school budgets for the upcoming year. The 683 sc Read More

Even With Federal Cuts, New York’s Health Funding Would Remain High

New York's health-care industry stands to lose billions of dollars in federal funding under the major budget bill being debated in Washington – a rare and jarring turn of events for a sector accustomed to steadily increas Read More

Highlights of Albany’s Bloated and Belated Budget

The state Legislature approved the last of nine budget bills Thursday evening, 38 days after the start of the fiscal year. Here are some highlights of the fiscal impact of final spending plan: Top lines Read More

Forcing Homes to Switch to Electric Heat is not a Good Policy

  New York has some of the most ambitious climate goals in the country: electric school buses by 2035, zero emissions electricity by 2040, etc. Why New Yorkers, who already consume less energy per capita than any state (other than Rhode Island), s Read More

After Tariff Shock, Albany Should Face its New Fiscal Reality

This year, for once, state lawmakers' failure to pass a timely budget could prove to be a stroke of luck. When President Trump rolled out his on April 2, Albany leaders had not agreed on a spending plan for the f Read More

New York’s Proposed ‘MCO Tax’ Would Generate a Fraction of What Lawmakers Expected

The Hochul administration's proposed "MCO tax" would generate far less than the $4 billion in extra federal aid anticipated by state lawmakers when they approved the concept this spring, according to documents obtained by t Read More

Hochul Hides the Specifics of a Looming Tax on Health Insurance

The Hochul administration has requested federal approval for a multibillion-dollar "MCO tax" on health plans without announcing the move or providing details to the public. As by l Read More

New Yorkers’ Health Costs Spiral as Officials Take Credit for ‘Savings’

The latest round of health insurance premium hikes announced by New York regulators adds to evidence that state policies are drowning consumers instead of helping them. Late last mo Read More