The refundable tax credit bills

SB 195-SB 53 would send up to roughly $7,000 to the parents of nonpublic school students. The bill defines “nonpublic school” in such as a way to include both home schools and FPE schools. SB 53 and SB 193 were previously separate bills, but they were combined in committee so they will be treated as one going forward. (A highly inappropriate definition of “home school” was removed at the same time.)

HB 77 would accomplish the same thing.  It lists home schools, FPE schools, and several other types of schools as schools to be benefitted.

A refundable tax credit works like this. For families who owe more than around $7,000 in state taxes, it would reduce what they owe by $7,000. They would keep more of their own money. If a family owes less than roughly $7,000 in state taxes, however, the state would send the family a check to cover the difference between what they would have owed and $7,000. They would receive money that came from other taxpayers.

There are many questions about how such government financing might cause downstream collateral damage. There are questions about how the injection of government money at this scale would prompt large price increases for everyone. But there can be no doubt that it would exact a cost in the form of the reduction of our independence. Freedom and independence go together.

The ESA Bills

So-called “education savings account” (ESA) bills create accounts into which public money goes that families can use throughout the year to finance education. This involves collecting taxes from all taxpayers in general and sending it to the favored families. There is actually no “saving” going on.

ESA bills have become very popular among lawmakers nationwide who want to maximize opportunities for families to educate their children outside the public school system. Unfortunately, these lawmakers brush aside the possibility—or we could essentially call it a fact—that one day they will be succeeded in office by others who see things differently. 

Those different-thinking lawmakers are likely to wake at some point and realize that it’s their job to make sure this government money is spent “properly.” There will be an almost irresistible temptation to micromanage the education those families provide to their children.  And it’s not a large leap from micromanaging families who take the money to micromanaging those who don’t take the money but are merely eligible (or could easily become eligible) to get the money.

SB 24

The MO Scholars scholarship program is currently funded exclusively by private donations. SB 24, however, would change that by tacking an ESA program onto MO Scholars.  If private donations are not sufficient, the bill would send government money to FPE families.

The Well-Focused ESA Bill

SB 572 is an ESA bill, but it has been drafted carefully to exclude home schools and FPE schools.  We are not asking for action on this bill, but we want you to be aware of it.

A Beautiful Thing

We recognize that families sometimes encounter very difficult financial challenges. In 2024, HSLDA’s Compassion program, which is funded by private donations, sent grants to 944 homeschool families in need totaling more than $850,000.Freely giving donations to help a family in distress is a beautiful thing.  If this resonates with you, we invite you to join us. 

The money that would finance any of the bills above that we are asking you to oppose cannot be characterized as “freely given”.

Take Action

The tools in the adjacent form will allow you to quickly send a message to your Missouri senator and representative and ask them to oppose these bills.  

• Use the “First Message” form to email your representative about HB 77.  Put “Vote NO on HB 77” in the subject line. 
• Use the “Second Message” form to email your senator about SB 195-53 and SB 24.  Put “NO on SB 195-53 and SB 24” in the subject line.

Thank you for standing with us for freedom!

Sincerely,  

Scott A. Woodruff, Director of Legal and Legislative Advocacy