Committee on Judiciary reviews HB 2062 changes on child support and tax exemptions for unborn and stillborn children

At its March 24 meeting, the Committee on Judiciary heard a briefing on House Bill 2062, which would allow courts to consider unborn children in child-support orders and would create a state income tax exemption tied to a child's birth or to a documented stillbirth.

The measure, explained by Jason Thompson of the Revisor's Office, "is the bill that provides for child support orders for unborn children." Thompson said the bill as passed by the Senate included three sections expanding definitions in child-support and divorce statutes to include unborn children, and a fourth section, added in the Senate, that would create an income tax exemption for an unborn child.

The committee considered alternative language offered by the House. Adam Seabers of the Revisor's Office summarized the House's proposed change: "The new language would allow for an exemption for a child born in the tax year, instead of assigning an unborn child a taxpayer identification number." Under the House's approach, rather than assigning taxpayer identification numbers to an unborn child, parents would claim an additional personal exemption in the tax year the child is born. Seabers also said the amendment would create a separate personal exemption for parents of a stillborn child who receive a certificate of stillbirth; that exemption would be the current personal exemption amount of $2,320.

Committee members asked procedural and administrative questions. The chair (unnamed) noted that the Senate passed the amended bill on the floor, 30-9, but said the House did not consider the balloon amendment on the floor or in committee. The chair said a fiscal note on the Senate approach ' assigning taxpayer identification numbers to unborn children ' "seemed a little bit unworkable," and that the House proposal to allow the exemption in the year of birth appeared simpler in administration.

Members raised questions for follow-up. One committee member asked whether the proposal leaves a "gray area" for pregnancy losses that do not meet the legal definition of stillbirth; the chair and staff said the bill relies on the existing stillbirth certification process and that, under current practice cited by the members, a certificate of stillbirth is available for fetal losses at or after about 20 weeks. Staff said they would confirm the details and what proof would be required under the Vital Statistics Act (KSA 65-2401). Another member asked how the exemption would be claimed when parents file separately; staff said the Department of Revenue would need to provide guidance because the proposal does not track federal dependent rules.

The committee discussed next steps: staff will follow up with the Department of Revenue and Vital Statistics to clarify administrative procedures and documentation, and the committee will reconvene to consider the Senate's counteroffer. Committee members named to the conference committee were listed as Humphreys, Williams and Osmond.

No formal committee vote on the conference language was recorded in the transcript. The Senate's floor vote on the amended version was reported in the meeting as 30-9. The committee set a follow-up meeting to review revised language and outstanding implementation questions.