46 posts categorized "Tax Credits"

Have you ever been hungry? I mean, really hungry? As in no-food-in-the-house-and-no-resources-for-getting-more hungry?

I haven’t. Oh, sure, there’ve been some months when expenses were bigger than income and I didn’t know how to pay some bills. But I’ve always had support -- financial and otherwise -- from my family when needed.

We all know that’s not the case for everyone. Right now:

• 48.8 million Americans are at risk of hunger.
• 15 percent of Americans -- including more than one-in-five children -- live in poverty.

Tragically, the House recently passed a budget that could make more Americans hungry.

This is unacceptable to me.

And this is why the church I serve, Woodridge United Methodist, recently sent 100 letters to Senator Mark Kirk and Senator Dick Durbin urging them create a circle of protection around domestic nutrition programs vital to hungry and poor Americans -- programs such as SNAP and WIC.

I signed Bread’s petition urging Congress not to cut SNAP for the same reason: Deliberately making more people hungry -- and making already hungry people even hungrier -- is unacceptable. It is unacceptable to me as a father, as a pastor, as a Christian, and as a human being, and I need my members of Congress to know that.

So Senator Durbin, Senator Kirk, and Representative Judy Biggert will see my name on Bread’s petition, and I hope your members of Congress will see your name as well. (Sign the petition here.)

To make up the gap created by those proposed cuts to SNAP churches and charities would need to do everything they’re currently doing to fight hunger ... and come up with an average of an additional $50,000 each year!

$50,000!? I know our church does not have that kind of spare change sitting around, and I know that our friends at the West Suburban Community Pantry have already seen demand for their services increase sharply -- from serving 750 families per month to 1200. The pantry does incredible work in our community, feeding more than 35,000 people last year, including more than 15,000 children. They are maxed out too.

I agree that budget deficits, especially at our current level, are unsustainable. But reducing our deficit by making hungry people hungrier is immoral.

The biblical witness is clear: As followers of God in the way of Jesus we are called to protect hungry and vulnerable people. We are called to speak with them. Signing this petition is a terrific, and, let’s be honest, easy way to do exactly that.

Photo caption: Rev. Dave Buerstetta dedicates letters written during an Offering of Letters on April 22, 2012, at Woodridge United Methodist Church in Woodridge, IL. 

Rev. Dave Buerstetta is Koinonia Pastor at Woodridge United Methodist Church, Woodridge, IL. Follow him on Twitter @davebuer. He also blogs occasionally at All That I Can’t Leave Unsaid.

+Learn more about budget proposals and Bread's online petition telling Congress that churches can’t be the only ones responsible for feeding hungry people, on Thursday, May 17.  Join Bread National Grassroots Conference Call and Webinar and hear more from Rev. Dave Buerstetta, the organizing staff, and one of our government relations policy analysts. Follow the webinar on Twitter with the hashtag #breadweb.

[This article was originally posted on The Huffington Post.]

When I open my Bible, it isn't hard to find a verse that underscores our responsibility as Christians to care for the least among us. Proverbs 19:17 tells us, "Whoever is generous to the poor lends to the Lord, and he will repay him for his deed." Unfortunately, some members of Congress don't buy into this notion. They believe instead that taking care of the most vulnerable people in our society is for the church to do alone.

Recently the U.S. House of Representatives passed a budget resolution for fiscal year 2013 that places a heavy burden on poor Americans who rely on the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP, formerly food stamps) to feed their families. The House recommended cutting more than $169 billion from SNAP. Some representatives even argued that feeding hungry people is really the work of churches, not government.

But churches can't be solely responsible for feeding poor women, children, seniors and disabled people. We also need strong government programs. In fact, all of the food churches and charities provide to hungry and poor people in the United States amounts to only about 6 percent of what the federal government spends on programs such as SNAP and school meals for students.

The Hartford Institute for Religion and Research estimates there are 335,000 religious congregations in the United States. If the House's proposals to cut SNAP by $133.5 billion and $36 billion are enacted, each congregation will have to spend about $50,000 more annually to feed those who would see a reduction or loss of benefits. Some congressional leaders are essentially saying that every church in America -- big or tiny -- needs to come up with an extra $50,000 to feed people every year for the next 10 years to make up for these cuts.

In response, Bread for the World asked people to tell members of Congress that churches can't be solely responsible for feeding hungry people. Thousands from around the country answered our call, telling us they just can't afford to do more than they're currently doing. Here are a few of their comments:

"As a small church in the middle of the Dallas/Fort Worth metroplex, we are inundated with needs all around us. The proposed cost is more than we pay our full-time minister for compensation, the only full-time staff we have. We contribute to multiple charities that distribute food to those who are in need in order to ensure the best stewardship of our resources. And, yet, we are still not able to meet all of the needs. These cuts will overwhelm us." --Sarah from Arlington, Texas

"Feeding the hungry is not a choice -- it is a moral imperative. But the food pantries and soup kitchens in this area funded by the generosity of church members already are serving those in need at capacity and beyond in these tough economic times. We are doing our part. We expect that our government will do the same." --Alexandra from Troy, N.Y.

"Addressing the needs of the hungry and poor is something that requires BOTH local congregation action and ALSO local and national government support. I urge our legislators at all levels to maintain strong support of government programs that help the poor and needy." --Brian from Fond Du Lac, Wis.

"Already we get innumerable calls for emergency assistance. We have no idea how these families are sufficiently getting the necessary nutrients for their children and family. To increase the number of people would be overwhelming and those churches who try to help with their shrinking congregations might totally give up." -Tempe of Jamestown, N.C.

"We fed over 32,000 people last year and we are tapped! We can barely pay our own bills, and if we are pushed any further we won't be able to keep our doors open, thus NOT being able to feed the ones we already are!! PLEASE DON'T cut any feeding programs." -Kirk of Sparks, Nev.

It's time for members of Congress to tell people -- like Brian from Wisconsin, Alexandra from New York, Tempe from North Carolina and Sarah from Texas -- that they're going to do their part and support legislation that creates a circle of protection around programs that are vital to hungry and poor people.

David Beckmann is president of Bread for the World.

Photo caption: Senior Pastor Judith VanOsdol leads the noon church service at El Milagro (The Miracle) Lutheran Church in Minneapolis, MN. The parish, which is Spanish-English bilingual, is made up of many members who depend on WIC and SNAP to feed their families. VanOsdol spent 17 years as a missionary pastor in South America. Photograph by Laura Elizabeth Pohl

Marie Crise is able to use her SNAP benefits to purchase fresh, healthy fruits and vegetables at the Abingdon Farmers Market in Abingdon, VA. Photo by Laura Elizabeth Pohl.

We need your voice  today! Congress has been proposing more cuts to programs vital to hungry and poor people. The latest is a vote that the House of Representatives will take soon on additional cuts to SNAP and Child Tax Credits.  Call your member of the U.S. House of Representatives today using 1-800-326-4941 and tell them to VOTE NO on the reconciliation bill. Call now or at least, no later than Thursday, May 10.  

The House of Representatives is using a legislative process known as reconciliation for the FY 2013 budget. (Reconciliation reduces the federal deficit by changing mandatory programs such as SNAP. It instructs authorizing committees in Congress to change eligibility requirements or benefit levels to save money.)

This reconciliation bill, which the House of Representatives is about to vote on, will have a devastating impacts on hungry and poor people. Please call your representative now at 1-800-326-4941 and tell them to VOTE NO on the reconciliation bill.

Here are the basic talking points:

• Don’t balance the budget by cutting programs for hungry and poor people.

• SNAP is a lifeline for 46 million vulnerable Americans struggling to put food on the table. Eighty-five percent of SNAP benefits go to families with children, elderly or disabled people.

• The Child Tax Credit effectively lifts millions of children and families out of poverty every year. In 2010, the Child Tax Credit lifted 1.3 million children out of poverty.

If you have more time, you can also use the following points to expand your message:

• Cutting programs that serve poor and vulnerable populations is not the way to reduce our deficits. Congress must take a balanced approach that maintains our commitment to serving those in need. Form a circle of protection around funding for programs for hungry and poor people.

• SNAP efficiently and effectively delivers food assistance to the neediest individuals and families. A recent study confirms that SNAP not only lifts families out of poverty, but also alleviates the depth and severity of poverty.

• The House proposed cuts to SNAP are tantamount to saying that every religious congregation across the United States needs to come up with an estimated extra $50,000 a year for the next 10 years to make up the difference.

• Food banks have seen a nearly 50 percent increase in demand since 2006. Any cuts to nutrition programs will put an even greater strain on charities and churches providing emergency food assistance.

• A parent with two kids working full-time at minimum wage in our country doesn’t earn enough to keep the family above the poverty line. Refundable tax credits, like the Child Tax Credit, boost earnings so working parents don’t have to raise their children in poverty.

• The bill proposes to cut state funding for services that play a critical role in preventing child abuse, increasing the availability of child care, and providing community-based care for elderly and disabled individuals. In 2009, just some of these funds provided adult protective services for well over 500,000 seniors.

Every time Congress proposes these types of harmful cuts to programs for hungry and poor people, we must loudly oppose it. These types of cuts are unacceptable. We need to continue to put the pressure on the House of Representatives.  So please call today.  

Call your representative at 1-800-326-4941 and tell him or her to VOTE NO on the reconciliation bill today!

David Beckmann is president of Bread for the World.

A migrant worker piles cucumbers in Blackwater, Virginia, on the farm of Ricky Horton and Sherilyn Shepard on Monday, July 25, 2011. Photo by Laura Elizabeth Pohl/Bread for the World.

[This blog post originally appeared on Bread New Mexico.]

Some politicians in Washington are talking about reducing the budget deficit by cutting big holes in our safety net.  So what happens if Congress gets its way and many eligible people are dropped from the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP, formerly Food Stamps)?  And as an activist in New Mexico, I wonder, how would this affect New Mexicans? It turns out that a significant percent of New Mexicans are experiencing food insecurity, which, according to the USDA, means a lack of access to enough food for an active healthy life for all household members and limited or uncertain availability of nutritionally adequate food.

Food insecure households are not necessarily food insecure all the time. Food insecurity may reflect a household's need to make trade-offs between important basic needs, such as housing or medical bills, and purchasing nutritionally adequate foods.

In Luna County (Deming), food insecurity is a whopping 28.5 percent. And in neighboring Grant County (and Silver City),  where food insecurity is 20 percent.  The rate is close to  18 percent in Catron County and Hidalgo County. Food insecurity is high in southwestern New Mexico.  And it does not get any better as you go east.  The 18 percent rate applies to Sierra, Doña Ana (Las Cruces), Otero Counties.  So we can say food insecurity is high in southern New Mexico.  

But wait a minute. Guadalupe County (Santa Rosa) in eastern New Mexico also has a food insecurity rate of 20 percent, and McKinley county (Gallup) almost 23 percent. And in San Miguel (Las Vegas), Taos, and San Juan (Farmington) Counties, the rate is at about  18 percent.  The rate is only slightly better in Bernalillo County at 16 percent and in Santa Fe County at about 15 percent.  In fact,  the only county in New Mexico where food insecurity is not above 14 percent is Los Alamos County, home to the city in the U.S. with the most millionaires per capita. (Even so, Los Alamos County has a food insecurity rate of 9 percent).

These percentages come from the Map the Meal Gap project conducted by Feeding America, an organization that supports a nationwide network of food banks, including Roadrunner Food Bank.  The map reflects 2009 and 2010 data for every county in the United States, including child food insecurity.  The map will be updated every year with new data.

So how are we to address these dire needs during a time of economic slowdown? Please ask our elected representatives in Washington and Santa Fe and those who seek to represent us to strengthen, not reduce, the safety net. 

Carlos Navarro is an activist with Bread for the World based in New Mexico. He blogs at Bread New Mexcio.

+Sign a petition against cuts to SNAP!

Federal nutrition programs have continued to be targeted for cuts this Congress.

In March, the House of Representatives voted on a budget resolution that cut the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP, formerly Food Stamps) by $133.5 billion – nearly 20 percent over 10 years – and recommended turning the program into a block grant. Today, SNAP automatically covers all eligible families, responding as need rises and falls. Under a block grant, SNAP would give a set amount of money to states every year, which would limit the state’s ability to respond quickly to increases in need.

In addition to the House passed budget cuts, the House Agriculture Committee was instructed to find $33.2 billion in savings from agriculture programs by April 27. They found $36 billion in cuts solely from SNAP. If enacted, this proposal would kick approximately 2 million people off the program, reduce monthly benefits for all participants, and most certainly increase hunger and poverty.

On the Senate side, the Senate Agriculture Committee continued efforts this spring to renew the farm bill. The farm bill, which governs federal farm and food policy – including SNAP – presents an opportunity to continue, alter, or discontinue federal farm and nutrition programs. As the largest share of agricultural spending, SNAP has been targeted for cuts in this process. The Senate version of the Farm Bill – the Agriculture Reform, Food and Jobs Act of 2012 – was passed out of committee by a bipartisan vote of 16-5 on April 26. It included $4.3 billion in cuts to nutrition programs. This cut would lead to a drop in SNAP benefits for at least 500,000 SNAP households in 14 states and the District of Columbia.

The House Agriculture Committee continues with farm bill hearings in preparation for releasing their own bill this year. SNAP is expected to continue being targeted for cuts.

Furthermore, the House and Senate Appropriations Committee have begun work on their annual spending bills. The Special Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) is funded through this process. While the Senate Appropriations Committee has provided WIC with $7.041 billion – enough to cover current and projected caseload – this is only the first step in the funding process. As Congress continues searching for savings, WIC remains at risk.

 Photo caption: (From left) Kate Hagen, Beth and John Lepinski, Laura Gerstl, Todd Post prepare to visit Congressional representatives during Lobby Day at Bread for the World's Gathering 2011 Tuesday, June 14. Photo by William Johnson.

Christine Meléndez Ashley is policy analyst at Bread for the World.

+Tell your member of Congress to protect funding for programs that help poor and hungry people!

Photo by Flickr user silent shot

The dramatic cuts of $169 billion to SNAP proposed this year in the U.S. House would have a devastating impact on all of our congregations’ efforts to address increasing need. 

Every church across America would need to come up with, on average, an extra $50,000 dedicated to feeding people — every year for the next 10 years — to make up for these cuts.

Sign our petition now to say feeding hungry people is not the sole responsibility of churches.  Here’s what a few people who have already signed the petition shared with us:

• “My church is situated in a community of high need in Los Angeles County. Our church's Food Pantry already serves over 400 people per week out of a garage. We are already at the breaking point! The need is real and raw. We absolutely cannot do this without the help of our elected leaders!”
      — Daniel in Bellflower, CA

• “Our area churches are already collecting and handing out food in massive amounts simply to SUPPLEMENT those on SNAP and yet the shelves run empty time and time again. This is not a time for cutting programs that affect our most vulnerable, but a time to stand in solidarity with them.”
      — Katherine in Arlington, VA

• "2,000 folks per month pass through one of our ministries in Gary, IN, homeless and without food. This would be devastating both to them and to us. We are barely making it now.”
      — Bob in Donaldson, IN

We have to tell Congress — and tell them again and again — that they must create a circle of protection around programs that are vital to hungry and poor people. And then we must pray hard that they will listen to their conscience as upright, moral persons of faith.

Thank you for your voice!

Margaret M. Kimmins, OSF is a Catholic Sister working at Bread for the World, and president of the Franciscan Action Network.

+Tell Congress to protect funding for programs such as SNAP. Sign the petition today!

Photo by Flickr user by visual.dichotomy

Last week, we shared with you that the House of Representatives just proposed to cut more than $169 billion from SNAP, formerly the food stamps program. Some representatives argued that feeding hungry people is really the work of the churches.

These representatives are essentially saying that on average every church across America — big, small, and tiny — needs to come up with an extra $50,000 dedicated to feeding people — every year for the next 10 years — to make up for these cuts. Bread for the World launched a petition and asked everyone to sign on and tell Congress that churches cannot be the only ones responsible for feeding hungry people.

Thousands of people signed the petition, and many shared their own stories and comments. Here are comments that some of you left:

"A good number of our students at Ancilla College have an expected family contribution (EFC) of $0.00.  Some of them rely on SNAP for food for themselves and sometimes for their families (non-traditional students).  In their effort to better themselves and thus be better prepared to make contributions to society [they] need the support of SNAP." --Carleen from Donadlson, IN

"Alfred Parish UCC is already sending a lot of food through 2 different feeding programs and providing a monthly free meal to people who come through the doors.  We don't have the means to 'pick up' and do the kind of work that our Federal Government can do.  The SNAP Program must be continued." --Bruce from Alfred, ME

"As a small church in the middle of the Dallas/Fort Worth metroplex, we are inundated with needs all around us. The proposed cost is more than we pay our full-time minister for compensation, the only full-time staff we have. We contribute to multiple charities that distribute food to those who are in need in order to insure the best stewardship of our resources. And, yet, we are still not able to meet all of the needs, these cuts will overwhelm us." --Sarah from Arlington, TX

"As program manager of the Northeast Emergency Food Program of the Ecumenical Ministries of Oregon, we serve 11,000 unduplicated individuals each year.  We do so through a wonderful partnership of congregations, businesses, individuals, other nonprofits, and the government.  In the past three years, the number of our clients has increased by over 40%.  There is no way we can make up for either the loss of food provided by the USDA or the influx of clients who would lose benefits such as SNAP.  And there is no way our church partners could fill the gap." --Howard from Portland, OR

"Feeding the hungry is not a choice -- it is a moral imperative. But the food pantries and soup kitchens in this area funded by the generosity of church members already are serving those in need at capacity and beyond in these tough economic times.  We are doing our part.  We expect that our government will do the same." --Alexandra from Troy, NY

"It is a sign of a healthy country when the government cares for its poor.  It is a sign of an abuse of power when the government determines that only the religious communities are responsible for caring for its poor.  The move to cut billions from funding that will care for the poor will show the world that the leaders of the US care only about power, dominance and control.  We stand at risk of losing our way, our heart, our very notion that all are created equal and ought to have equal access to meeting basic needs." --Jan from Raleigh, NC

Thanks to everyone who signed this petition -- and if you haven't yet, join your voice with thousands of other people of faith who believe that we must all work together to end hunger.

SIGN THE PETITION TODAY!

Jeannie Choi is associate editor at Bread for the World.

Hunger is a no-brainer. I’d be willing to bet that the majority of Americans believe no child should go to bed hungry. So then why is it the case that nearly one-in-four children go hungry in the United States?

I’m convinced that the reason so many members of Congress are currently proposing to cut programs like SNAP by more than $33 billion is because Americans and their Representatives don’t know enough about these life-saving programs. Instead, they’ve bought into the myths. We’ve all heard the myths: “SNAP is full of fraud," or, “Funding for foreign assistance contributed to our national deficit.” These false statements are spreading like wildfire at a time when Congress is desperate to find places to cut in the budget.  So, one really effective tool for expanding the circle of protection? Set people’s facts straight.

As activists it’s our job to dispel the myths and spread the truth about programs for poor and hungry people. As you engage your local churches, campuses, and communities on speaking up to protect these programs, one of the most effective approaches you can take is to spread awareness that these programs are doing a lot to end hunger.

Take the Tax Credit Mini Campaign, for example. These tax credits lift millions of people out of poverty each year. Yet some people hear “tax credits” and automatically think the worst.

Myth #1: “Tax credits have nothing to do with ending hunger.”

Ending hunger depends on increasing income for families who struggle to cover their household expenses. The tax system can help do just that. The Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) is an efficient, proven, well-targeted way to add resources for low-income working families.

Myth #2: “Taxes are too partisan a topic to be talking about. Tax credit programs will just create more partisan division in Congress.” 

The EITC and CTC have a long history of bipartisan support. The EITC was enacted under President Ford and expanded under Presidents Reagan, Clinton, Bush, and Obama. Conservatives like the EITC and CTC because they provide a clear incentive for people to work. Liberals like it because it is less bureaucratic than other anti-poverty programs, and it restores some fairness to the tax code. In an era of heightened partisanship, these tax credits are something everyone can support.

Myth #3: “Low-income people don’t pay taxes”

I heard this one straight from Senator Scott Brown’s mouth back in 2010 while on a visit to his office to talk about hunger and poverty. First, all Americans pay taxes. While some individuals do not pay income taxes, they still pay plenty in federal payroll taxes, sales tax, and other federal, state, and local taxes. The one-fifth of taxpayers with the lowest incomes pay 12.4 percent of their income in state and local taxes, which is significantly more than the rate that the top 1 percent of taxpayers pay, which is 8.4 percent. The EITC and CTC help offset this burden for many low-income working families.

Myth #4: “Tax credits encourage dependency”

Only people who are working can receive the EITC and CTC. They encourage work because the more money you make, the larger the credit you receive based on marital status and number of children, up to a certain point. A majority of EITC filers receive the credit for only one or two years before moving into jobs with higher earnings. They end up paying back more in federal taxes than they received in benefits over their lifetimes. The EITC is the most effective anti-poverty program in the country, lifting more people out of poverty than any other program.

Myth #5: "Low-income people will just use their tax credit on frivolous purchases."

While it’s true that we can’t control how people spend their tax benefits, the reality is that low-income families run out of money before they’re able to address all of their needs. Research shows that about half of EITC benefits are used for long-term investments such as improving housing, transportation, or paying tuition. The other half is spent on purchases to meet immediate needs such as food, clothing, or catching up on rent and utilities. Bread for the World is looking to increase options for low-income families by increasing their resources.

With so much misinformation out there, it’s no wonder people are skeptical. But as hunger advocates, we know better than to believe these myths. As you and your organization participate in this year’s Offering of Letters, spreading the facts about these anti-hunger programs will be key to getting people engaged. Whether it’s tax credits, domestic nutrition programs, foreign assistance, or international food aid, these programs work. The sooner Americans know that, the sooner we can stop worrying about these programs being cut.

Jen Fraser is a Regional Organizer at Bread for the World.

+Learn more about our mini-campaign on tax credits for low-income families.

A small desk with a laptop, books, and a chair sits in Heather Rude-Turner’s living room in northern Virginia.

Her two young children and even her two dogs know not to touch anything on that desk, no matter how rowdy they get around the house. “That’s mommy’s desk,” says Heather’s 5-year-old daughter, Naomi.

Why the caution? Because Rude-Turner, 31, has spent the last few years working toward her bachelor’s degree. She graduated in December 2011 with a degree in child psychology, a cause for celebration for her entire family. They know the road to graduation has been longer and more difficult than most.

+Learn more about our mini-campaign on tax credits for low-income families.

Families rely on important tax credits to pull themselves out of poverty and put food on the table. The EITC is America’s largest anti-poverty program. In 2010, the EITC lifted 5.4 million people above the poverty line, including 3 million children. In 2009, the CTC lifted 2.3 million people, including 1.3 million children, out of poverty. However, without congressional action, important improvements made to these credits over the last decade will expire at the end of 2012, and millions of low-income working families will find themselves ineligible for these credits or see their benefits fall significantly. 

Here is a valuable Q&A about tax credits that you can use as a resource to answer frequently asked questions you might hear from people.

1. What do changes in tax laws have to do with ending hunger?

While ending hunger requires stronger nutrition programs, food assistance alone is not enough. Ending hunger also depends on increasing income for families who struggle to cover their household expenses. The tax system can help do just that. The Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) is an efficient, proven, well-targeted way to add resources for low-income working families. With this credit, low-income families are better able to meet essential needs, including nutritious food and quality child care.

The poverty that causes hunger is largely due to a lack of money and resources. Food is one of the most flexible items in a low-income family’s budget. Rent, transportation, child care, utilities—these are fixed expenses. As a result, food is often one of the first things cut when low-income families have to tighten their belts. Poverty forces drastic choices, like watering down a baby’s formula to make it last longer. These tax changes would put more money in the pockets of low-income families, making it easier for them to make ends meet.

2. Why do low-income people get tax breaks like the EITC and I don’t get similar credits or deductions on my taxes?

The tax code has many incentives that encourage taxpayers to make certain fiscal choices, like saving for retirement, attending college, or owning a home. But many of those tax credits are out of reach for low-income earners who often do not have the same tools for those kinds of expenditures or for long-term financial investments. Moreover, most tax deductions and exclusions are regressive, meaning they provide a larger benefit for wealthier individuals.

By expanding the benefits low-income workers receive, including making benefits refundable, tax credits encourage work and open up more financial choices. Programs like the EITC that benefit low-income working people represent only a fraction of the amount spent through the tax code. The EITC and Child Tax Credit (CTC) accounted for a little over $111 billion, or about 10.3 percent, of the more than $1 trillion spent through the tax code for all taxpayers in 2010.

3. Many people pay no taxes at all in this country. Why is it fair for people like that to still have access to many  government programs without helping to pay for them, and get a refund check from the government on top of that?

First, all Americans pay taxes. While some individuals do not pay income taxes, they still pay plenty in federal payroll taxes, sales tax, and other federal, state, and local taxes. Most of these other taxes are regressive, taking a larger share of a poor or middle-class family’s income than wealthier families. In fact, most Americans pay more in payroll taxes than federal income taxes. The one-fifth of taxpayers with the lowest incomes pay 12.4 percent of their income in state and local taxes, which is significantly more than the rate that the top 1 percent of taxpayers pay, which is 8.4 percent. The EITC and CTC help offset this burden for many low-income working families.

The federal tax code includes provisions that reduce or eliminate tax liabilities for many individuals, at all income levels, and for corporations. But let’s get back to the real question: shouldn’t parents who work full time be able to support their families? The tax policies Bread supports help parents who work hard—who are trying to be responsible—achieve a basic standard of living and support their families. If Congress fails to continue the current CTC benefit levels, a single parent with two children working full time at minimum wage (earning about $14,500 a year) will lose nearly $1,500.

Keep reading our full Q&A about tax credits for low-income families on the 2012 Ofering of Letters website.

Molly Marsh is managing editor at Bread for the World.

+Learn more about our mini-campaign on tax credits for low-income families.