E-mail:
Jack Balkin: jackbalkin at yahoo.com
Bruce Ackerman bruce.ackerman at yale.edu
Ian Ayres ian.ayres at yale.edu
Corey Brettschneider corey_brettschneider at brown.edu
Mary Dudziak mary.l.dudziak at emory.edu
Joey Fishkin joey.fishkin at gmail.com
Heather Gerken heather.gerken at yale.edu
Abbe Gluck abbe.gluck at yale.edu
Mark Graber mgraber at law.umaryland.edu
Stephen Griffin sgriffin at tulane.edu
Jonathan Hafetz jonathan.hafetz at shu.edu
Jeremy Kessler jkessler at law.columbia.edu
Andrew Koppelman akoppelman at law.northwestern.edu
Marty Lederman msl46 at law.georgetown.edu
Sanford Levinson slevinson at law.utexas.edu
David Luban david.luban at gmail.com
Gerard Magliocca gmaglioc at iupui.edu
Jason Mazzone mazzonej at illinois.edu
Linda McClain lmcclain at bu.edu
John Mikhail mikhail at law.georgetown.edu
Frank Pasquale pasquale.frank at gmail.com
Nate Persily npersily at gmail.com
Michael Stokes Paulsen michaelstokespaulsen at gmail.com
Deborah Pearlstein dpearlst at yu.edu
Rick Pildes rick.pildes at nyu.edu
David Pozen dpozen at law.columbia.edu
Richard Primus raprimus at umich.edu
K. Sabeel Rahmansabeel.rahman at brooklaw.edu
Alice Ristroph alice.ristroph at shu.edu
Neil Siegel siegel at law.duke.edu
David Super david.super at law.georgetown.edu
Brian Tamanaha btamanaha at wulaw.wustl.edu
Nelson Tebbe nelson.tebbe at brooklaw.edu
Mark Tushnet mtushnet at law.harvard.edu
Adam Winkler winkler at ucla.edu
Census Data Show the Pandemic Child Tax Credit Dramatically Cut Child Poverty
David Super
A common refrain
about child poverty, hunger, homelessness and other severe hardships that seem
incongruous with this country’s affluence is that the problems are “complicated”
and “there are no simple solutions.”Dramatic data the Census Bureau released today shows that that is quite
wrong.Giving low-income families with
children money through an expanded Child Tax Credit slashed
the child poverty rate to the lowest level in the more than half a century for
which data is available.
The big news comes
in the Supplemental Poverty Measure that the Census Bureau created a few
decades ago.This differs from the
Official Poverty Measure in that it includes the effects of major non-cash
public benefits (such as food assistance and housing vouchers) and of the tax system
(including refundable tax credits such as the Earned Income Tax Credit and the Child
Tax Credit).When the Census Bureau
created the Official Poverty Measure in the early 1960s, most anti-poverty spending
was in the form of direct cash payments to low-income individuals through
programs such as Aid to Families with Dependent Children, Aid to the Aged, and
Aid to the Blind.
To facilitate
historical comparisons, the Census Bureau has resisted suggestions to update
the Official Poverty Measure to reflect the country’s sharp shift towards
non-cash aid beginning in the 1970s and anti-poverty tax policy beginning in
the 1980s.But in 2014, responding to a
congressionally-commissioned National Research Council report, it began
publishing the Supplemental Poverty Measure each year.Researchers at Columbia University
subsequently estimated what the Supplemental Poverty Measure thresholds would
have been and how many people would have fallen beneath them back to 1967.
Most serious
researchers interested in the effectiveness of anti-poverty policies focus on
the Supplemental Poverty Measure.Relying
on the Official Poverty Measure, which excludes almost all of our largest anti-poverty
programs, would be like measuring the U.S. transportation infrastructure in the
1950s and 1960s with a metric that excluded interstate highways.Naïve reporters would say “we are spending
massive amounts on transportation infrastructure and yet seeing only marginal
gains.”
For 2021, the child
poverty rate was 5.2% under the Supplemental Poverty Measure.By comparison, as recently as 2018. The child
poverty rate was 13.7%.(The pandemic sufficiently
impaired data collection about what happened in 2019 that that data is less
reliable.)The child poverty rate in
2020 was 9.7%.That reflected both the
coronavirus recession and expanded unemployment compensation, food assistance,
and stimulus payments in the bipartisan coronavirus relief legislation.
The expanded Child
Tax Credit established by the American Rescue Plan Act accounted for more than
half of the drop in child poverty from the previous year.This credit monthly per-child payments to
qualifying low-income families in the second half of the year.Despite not being in effect for the whole
year, it lifted 2.1 million children out of poverty for the year while reducing
the depth of poverty for millions more.
The gains were
spread across all racial and ethnic groups identified but particularly striking
among non-Hispanic African-American children.Their poverty rate was 23.7% in 2018 but just 8.3% in 2021.Latino/a children’s poverty rate, also
consistently above the national average, fell to 8.4% in 2021.Poverty among Native American and Alaskan Native
children fell to 7.4% in 2021.White and
Asian-American child poverty also declined substantially.
A wealth of otherdata
has already shown that the income supports in the bipartisan coronavirus relief
legislation and the American Rescue Plan Act had concrete effects on how
low-income families live, including less hunger and more stable housing
situations.
These gains,
however, are likely to be transitory.When the Build Back Better reconciliation bill collapsed in Congress last
fall, it took with it an extension of the expanded Child Tax Credit.The residual CTC continues to play a
substantial, positive role in reducing child poverty and in augmenting the well-being
of children in families modestly above the poverty line.Its design, however, renders ineligible many
of the poorest children, greatly limiting its anti-poverty effectiveness.
The 2021 expansion
showed what a difference a robust credit designed to reach the vast majority of
low-income children can do. Whether the
country wishes to replicate the success of 2021 remains to be seen.