Replace the Child Tax Credit with a Child Tax Adjustment.

I have a lot of ideas that would be considered by most to fall into the category of “thinking out of the box”. This is one of them. While its implementation would be difficult to say the least, I believe in the premise if not the plan, and hope it provides something to ponder for those with open minds.

When I was in college, and coming into my own as a deep thinking adult, I devised a concise synopsis of my views of one of the most important issues facing mankind. Here is my quotable statement:

“The number one root cause of all of the major problems in the world today is global human overpopulation” -Brett Cherrington circa 1978.

While I have written of the problem of overpopulation before and will again, this time I am putting out an idea that I came up with years ago that may be something that it is time to promote. With the “fiscal cliff” (no sidebars on that name) looming, and the parties posturing in predictable ways, taxes are a big issue. While there are many specifics to consider, I am here focusing on taxes as a method of incentivising personal decision making. In particular, regarding overpopulation, the tax incentives for procreation. The current tax incentive is actualized by the child tax credit. Let me state; it is a self-evident truth that we need children and families. The size of those families, however, needs to be limited. It is unacceptable to tell anyone that they may not have offspring. It is much more acceptable to consider the limitations of our planet, the enormity of the human population, the certainty that it will become more enormous, and our need to limit that increase as much as possible.

My idea is one that deals with this in a way that provides pro-family incentives for small families. This proposal would be address several factors in the debates on family planning, taxes, and entitlements.

So, here it is:

Replace the Child Tax Credit with a Child Tax Adjustment.

My idea for a Child Tax Adjustment (CTA) would double the current Child Tax Credit (CTC) for the first child. Very pro-family, this would help young families by providing additional resources for them to spend on bringing up their child. The CTA for the second child would be zero, with no additional tax adjustment. The family is now in a position exactly where they would have been under the CTC (2 children and CTCx2). This is pro-family too, but provides no change in incentivization from our current system. The CTA for the third child would be a tax equal to the CTC[at this point (CTCx2)-CTC=CTC so this third child decreases the tax adjustment from CTCx3 under the current system to CTCx1 under my proposal]. The CTA for the fourth child would be a tax double the CTC [(CTCx2)-(CTCx2)=0 providing no tax benefits or penalties for this family's procreation choices], the fifth triple the CTC [(CTCx2)-(CTCx3)=(-1CTC) providing a procreational disincentive, and so on with increaseing disincentives for each additional child. This is a disincentive to excess procreation. It in no way prohibits this additional procreation, but does provide an incentive to limit family size, and in the collective, limit population growth.

I am aware that there are plenty of circumstances that would need to be addressed. Here is a sampling:

• Grandfathering (statutory continued acceptance of) of all children born prior to/within a year of adoption (of the law). There is no intention to penalize people for decisions made prior to this tax provision.

• Multiple births would be exempt and count as a single birth. For those conceived with medical reproductive enhancement, perhaps a compromise figure would be appropriate to mitigate any attempt to use medical technology to outflank this loophole.

• Availability of contraceptives would need to be essentially universal. Just as abortion needs to be available because mistakes and accidents do happen, to penalize the poor who may not have a realistic availability of contraceptives would be unacceptable.

• Safety nets for the poor would need to provide for the children while maintaining the disincentive against continued procreation aimed at the parents.

• Some provision for penalizing the wealthy for excessive procreation must be included to prevent a situation where the wealthy can have large families just because they can afford it. Their offspring would likely be greater consumers of our earth's resources, and inequities must be avoided where possible.

• There are religious ramifications of this idea that many will find objectionable.

I am sure there are many more issues that could be brought into the discussion, but I hope I have provided some food for thought. The impracticality of ideas such as these may seem to condemn them to the dust bin of crazy ideas, but as our planet strains under the load of our human population, and our economy strains under the load of providing services to that population, these ideas may seem less extreme.

One of the benefits of my idea that may be easily overlooked is the financial boost that a couple (or even a single parent, though that is another topic and in this case perhaps a disincentive to planned single parenthood could or should be considered) would receive on the birth of their first child. This boost could improve the early childhood health and education of our children, and help young families handle the new financial burden that having a child bestows upon them.

We as humans many times ignore the tough issues until they become critical. The issue of climate change is a prime example of that tendency. The problem of global human overpopulation is huge and growing larger. All arguments that it is a problem under control or that deride the seriousness of the situation or that beg for more children for purposes of workforce enhancement, or for providing a demographic bailout for an indebted society, must be exposed as the irrelevant, weak, and counterproductive arguments that they are. We must address overpopulation. After all....

“The number one root cause of all of the major problems in the world today is global human overpopulation”.