Committee hears divided testimony on HB 209, a state tax credit for nonpublic school expenses

Representative Greg Overstreet, sponsor of House Bill 209, opened the hearing Wednesday in the Montana House Taxation Committee, saying the measure would create a voluntary state income tax credit for nonpublic school education expenses such as private school tuition and homeschool curriculum and would be capped at 44.7% of the state27s A and B per-pupil amount ("which is approximately $6,000"), according to his remarks.

The bill would let parents claim a credit for qualifying expenses; Overstreet said the proposal "absolutely does not allow the state to prohibit, control, or regulate homeschooling." He told the committee that a proposed amendment would remove Office of Public Instruction rulemaking language and otherwise clarify definitions.

Proponents described practical burdens that led them to seek the credit. Christine Agin, a 12-year homeschool mother and a CPA who described herself as chairman of the board of a private Stevensville school, said homeschool curriculum and some private-school expenses are not currently deductible and that the bill is intended to "give people choices" and avoid "paying twice" for education.

Other proponents included homeschooling parents and students who said costs vary widely by program. Lindsey Doyle, another Ravalli County homeschooling mother, told the committee that online high-end dual-enrollment programs can run into the hundreds or thousands per month while many elementary curricula cost far less, and asked lawmakers to view the bill as promoting "educational freedom." Lily Agin, a 16-year-old student who testified, said the credit would make higher-cost dual-enrollment opportunities more accessible.

Opponents ranged from homeschool advocates who fear new oversight to public-education groups opposing the diversion of public funds. Steve White, legislative liaison for the Montana Coalition of Home Educators, said the bill contains "technical problems" and warned that referencing federal code in state statutory text could create unintended consequences; he also urged removal of homeschool references from certain sections to avoid future regulation. White identified Montana statutory sections 20-5-109 and 20-5-111 when describing how compulsory attendance and homeschool rights intersect with the proposal.

Lance Melton, speaking for the Montana School Boards Association and the Coalition of Advocates for Montana27s Public Schools, objected to the bill27s current definition of "taxpayer," which he said could allow an unrelated wealthy taxpayer to claim credits for expenses paid on behalf of students they do not parent or legally claim as dependents. "If it's not the sponsor's intent," Melton said, "you need an amendment to the bill." He also emphasized that the bill as drafted does not limit claimants to parents or guardians and asked for clarification or narrower definitions.

Other opponents included the Montana Quality Education Coalition, the Montana Federation of Public Employees and the League of Women Voters of Montana. Amanda Curtis, president of the Montana Federation of Public Employees, said the organization supports homeschooling freedom but not government aid to nonpublic schooling: "With no regulation or oversight comes no aid," she told the committee.

Department of Revenue staff participated as informational witnesses. Aaron McNay, of the department27s Tax Policy and Research unit, told the committee that the bill as drafted does not explicitly require a taxpayer claiming the credit to be a Montana resident; he said he would provide follow-up on whether other credits could be used to claim equipment or activity fees for public school students. Bureau Chief David Merrien said the department could answer administrative questions but did not offer an implementation plan during oral testimony.

Sponsor Overstreet closed by saying the amendment discussed in committee would strike the OPI rulemaking language, clarify that only the family member paying expenses should receive the credit, and that HSLDA27s support is contingent on those amendments. Overstreet asked for a yes vote with the proposed changes.

The committee did not take executive action or vote on HB 209 during the hearing.

Ending: The committee recorded extensive public comment for the hearing and requested follow-up information from Department of Revenue staff on administrative questions and the fiscal note. No motion to advance the bill was taken at the hearing27s close.