House Revenue and Taxation introduces bill to extend adoption tax deduction to donated embryos

The House Revenue and Taxation Committee on March 27 introduced RS 32,732, a proposed change to Idaho’s adoption tax deduction that would allow families to claim up to $10,000 in legal and medical expenses related to the acquisition and transfer of a donated embryo that results in a live birth.

Representative Brook Green, R-Boise, said she proposed the change to expand an underused tax deduction to “highlight this little known program” and reduce the cost barrier for families seeking to adopt donated embryos. "We want to expand the existing Idaho adoption tax credit to all the legal fees and medical expense ... up to $10,000 legal fees and medical expenses related to the acquisition and transfer of a donated embryo that results in a live birth," Green said during the committee introduction.

Representative Jeff Ehlers, R-Meridian, who joined as a sponsor for the RS, told the committee a fiscal note tied to the change is “approximately $60,000.” He said the actual tax benefit per filer—under Idaho’s flat 5.3 percent rate—would be roughly $530 if the full $10,000 deduction were claimed. "The benefit here of a $10,000 deduction is ... about $530 of lower taxes, per filer that gets this," Ehlers said, adding his estimate that “maybe about a hundred or so” filers would use the deduction in a given year under full utilization assumptions.

Committee members asked for clarifications about which expenses and outcomes would be eligible. Representative Ehlers said the intent is for the $10,000 cap to apply broadly to both traditional adoptions and embryo adoption, but agreed the bill language could be clarified. "The intent was the $10,000 cap broadly applied both to traditional adoption and embryo adoption. And if the language is unclear, that's something we could fix and clarify," Ehlers told the committee.

Members also pressed on typical costs and success rates. Representative Ayers described medical and ancillary costs associated with embryo transfer and storage—shots, medications, doctor visits and storage fees—and estimated per-cycle costs "probably minimum, more like $12,000, per cycle," while acknowledging substantial variation. Representative Green said her own IVF-related costs were $32,000 and reiterated that donated embryos typically do not carry a donation fee. On success rates, Ehlers said fresh/younger embryos and maternal age affect outcomes and suggested a roughly 50 percent success rate in some circumstances.

Representatives asked whether the deduction would apply if implantation failed or if a surrogate were used. Committee members were told the bill as presented links eligibility to a live birth and that refinements—such as whether failed-cycle expenses should be included or whether surrogacy-related costs qualify—would need clearer language in future drafts.

Representative Raymond moved the committee motion to introduce RS 32,732; the committee approved the motion by voice vote and the RS was introduced. The sponsors said they do not intend to carry the bill forward this session but wanted an RS on record to solicit public feedback and begin interim discussion.

Votes at a glance

- Motion to introduce RS 32,732 (sponsor: Representative Brook Green; mover to introduce: Representative Raymond): approved by voice vote. Individual recorded tallies were not provided in the transcript; the committee chair announced the motion carries.

Why it matters

The proposal would extend an existing Idaho tax deduction used for traditional adoptions to include costs tied to adopting donated embryos, a process sponsors said is little-known but can be costly. Sponsors described the change as primarily a way to reduce out-of-pocket costs for families pursuing embryo adoption and to encourage donated embryos to be placed with families.

What remains unresolved

Committee discussion identified several drafting questions to be resolved before the proposal would be ready for formal consideration: whether the $10,000 cap applies across both traditional and embryo adoption (sponsors said that was the intent but the language may need clarification); whether failed-cycle expenses should count or the deduction should apply only when a live birth occurs (current RS links the deduction to live birth); and whether surrogacy costs should be explicitly included (committee members asked for a follow-up review). Sponsors also noted the fiscal note and estimated number of potential claimants would need verification.

The committee recorded no formal amendment or referral at the March 27 meeting; sponsors indicated they plan to solicit public feedback before considering further action.