Conference committee questions amendment to HB 2062 to tie stillbirth certificates to tax exemption

Members of the Committee on Judiciary’s conference committee spent more than an hour questioning an amendment to House Bill 2062 that would allow taxpayers to use a stillbirth certificate to claim a short-term personal tax exemption.

The committee’s reviser, Jason Thompson, told members the stillbirth definition in state law requires a gestational age of at least 20 completed weeks and that a medical professional must issue and file the certificate with the state registrar. “So that the main thing is that this definition has to be met, and then there's a certificate that has to be issued by a medical professional,” Thompson said, then read the statutory definition: “stillbirth means any complete expulsion or extraction from its mother of a human child, the gestational age of which is not less than 20 completed weeks, resulting in other than a live birth as defined in this section, and which is not an induced termination of pregnancy.”

Why it matters: the amendment links that certificate to a temporary tax exemption that some members described as effectively creating a double exemption for a child in the first year. That raised questions about administrative checks, whether issuance of certificates is voluntary, and the potential for fraud.

Representative Osman said the amendment substantially changes the bill’s practical effect and expressed concern about possible misuse. “What we are attempting to change in here is to get it for financial reasons, and that is a huge modification,” Osman said. “If somebody wanted to commit fraud, they could try to get a certificate of stillbirth 2 times a year for the foreseeable future, and that would be allowed under law. And how do we stop them?”

Thompson and staff told the committee that the stillbirth certificate process is governed by the state’s vital-statistics provisions and that when a stillbirth is acknowledged by a medical professional in a medical setting, a certificate is required to be created and filed with the registrar. Thompson summarized their research: “it looks like if you are in a medical setting and the medical professional acknowledges that a stillbirth has occurred, they are required to create the certificate file with the registrar.”

Questions from the committee included whether obtaining a certificate had been voluntary under prior law and what documentation would be required if the amendment is adopted. One member noted existing limits and professional penalties that would attach to a medical professional who fraudulently completed a certificate. A committee member also noted the tax benefit being discussed, referencing the personal-exemption amount used in current law (stated in committee discussion as $2,320) and asking whether the amendment would create a one-year “bonus” exemption in addition to the normal dependent exemption.

Senator Korsen framed the change as a shift in focus: the bill was reported as child-support legislation but the amendment makes it functionally more like a tax measure. Committee members asked revisers to consult with legislative revenue staff and the chamber leadership before offering a position. A member of the committee said leadership needed time to consider the amendment and answers to definitional questions before the committee could respond.

Outcome and next steps: committee members did not take a vote. The group directed staff to seek clarification from revenue and leadership and scheduled another conference meeting for later the same day to continue work. The committee did not adopt language on the record during this session.

Context: committee discussion cited the statutes governing stillbirth certificates (noted in committee as part of the state’s vital-statistics provisions) and referenced a 2014 statutory change that required the state to establish stillbirth certificates. The committee discussed both procedural safeguards tied to the certificate (medical-professional signature and filing with the registrar) and broader policy implications about creating a tax-linked benefit based on a vital-statistics document.

Ending: The conference committee paused further action on HB 2062 pending follow-up with revenue staff and leadership; members set a later meeting time to continue deliberations.