North Dakota adds incentive for businesses to subsidize child care
North Dakota lawmakers just approved a new tax credit to incentivize businesses to offer child care stipends for their employees. (Getty Images)
With the goal of supporting working families, state lawmakers this session passed a new tax credit that subsidizes child care for North Dakota businesses.
Senate Bill 2282 applies specifically to child care stipends. The tax credit allows employers that offer this benefit to write off 50% of their child care contributions off their income taxes. Businesses can claim up to $1,000 in child care subsidies per employee toward this total.
Andrea Pfennig, vice president of government affairs for the Greater North Dakota Chamber, called the tax credit a 'step in the right direction.'
In written testimony submitted in favor of the bill, Pfennig said in a 2024 survey of chamber members nearly 70% of respondents saw child care as an issue.
Some feel the tax credit doesn't do enough. North Dakota Human Rights Coalition Executive Director Dalton Erickson said it will leave out many North Dakota families.
'A modest tax credit was passed, but it only applies to businesses that offer child care stipends, a luxury workplace benefit that the majority of workers don't receive,' Erickson said at a Thursday morning event outside the Capitol.
Gov. Kelly Armstrong signed the bill into law May 1. Businesses can start using the credit for their 2025 taxes.
Pfennig called the new tax credit an improvement over a previous child care program passed by the Legislature in 2023.
Under that program, businesses can apply for a state match for either $300 a month or $150 a month for child care subsidies.
Some businesses found the matching program bureaucratically complex as well as limited in scope, Pfennig said. It is also only available for kids ages 5 and under, and has income limits, according to the program's website.
Pfennig said she's glad that both programs are still an option for businesses so that they can choose what's best for them.
The Legislature this session also passed House Bill 1119, which directs the Department of Health and Human Services to form a child care services advisory committee to study child care licensing.
The bill also invites Legislative Council to conduct a program evaluation of the Department of the Health and Human Services' child care services.
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
9 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Cuts to Medicaid for Ohioans with disabilities could take away home care and job help
(iStock / Getty Images Plus) As the Ohio Senate moves forward with its budget proposal, advocates for Medicaid are hoping changes can be made to avoid significant impacts to low income residents, elderly Ohioans, and people with disabilities. Funding from Medicaid allows 3 million Ohioans access to health care services, including more than 770,000 who receive them through the Medicaid expansion program instituted in 2014. That expansion program allows people who weren't eligible for the traditional Medicaid programs but were still in categories of need to access health care. The existence of that program dropped the uninsured rate in Ohio to historic levels, according to the Health Policy Institute of Ohio. Along with health care, Medicaid dollars help with services that aren't necessarily connected to medical treatment, like home care, employment help, transportation, and a direct care provider who helps with all of those things. 'In many cases, if there wasn't Medicaid dollars behind it, I know of many people whose ability to live outside of a hospital or in the community would be threatened,' said Jules Patalita, a disability rights advocate for Sylvania-based The Ability Center. So advocates were disappointed to see the Ohio Senate maintain a provision from both the Ohio House's and Gov. Mike DeWine's budget proposals that would eliminate the Medicaid expansion group if the federal government reduces their level of support (currently at 90%) by even 1%. 'This would be a substantial loss for many working Ohioans,' said Kathryn Poe, researcher for the think tank Policy Matters Ohio. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX Also included in the Senate's budget proposal is the elimination of a Medicaid waiver that 'would have provided continuous coverage for kids up to age 3,' Poe said, and a separate section of the budget that would 'allow the state to pause, eliminate or change other funds related to all other federal grants, should Congress adjust or eliminate funding for that program.' Poe did praise the Senate proposal for removing a House-submitted provision limiting Medicaid reimbursement for doulas to only six Ohio counties. 'This will ensure that Ohio parents continue to have access to culturally appropriate birthing resources and management,' Poe said. Concerns about loss of access don't just extend to physical health concerns or daily home services, but also to behavioral health services, on which 47% of Ohio adults on Medicaid rely, according to Kerstin Sjoberg, president and CEO of Disability Rights Ohio. 'If you don't have access to some sort of insurance like Medicaid, it's going to be almost impossible to get those services,' Sjoberg said. The state-level discussions come as federal budget reconciliation also touches on Medicaid funding as the Trump administration and Republicans in Congress attempt to slash federal spending by $880 billion over the next decade, particularly from public assistance programs like the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) and Medicaid. U.S. House Speaker Mike Johnson and other leaders have talked about 'abuse' or 'fraud' as sources of revenue loss for the country in public programs, something those who engage with users of programs like Medicaid push back on. 'In reality, Medicaid is one of the most cost-effective and widely used safety nets in the country,' said the advocacy group Innovation Ohio in a call-to-action email over the congressional budget proposals. 'If this bill becomes law, the result will be fewer people with health care, more families pushed into poverty and deeper inequality. Rural hospitals could shut down.' According to a study by the Commonwealth Fund, Ohio could be one of the hardest hit economies if Medicaid cuts at the federal level come to fruition, cuts that could mean 29% more Medicaid spending by states or cuts to other programs, like education, to offset the Medicaid losses. One thing that will have to be addressed whether or not the cuts are realized in the state and federal budgets is the workforce that helps those who use Medicaid for home care and other services. Patalita said the word 'crisis' has been used in talking about the shortage of direct care providers, similar to the shortage of child care workers needed to provide adequate access to that service. 'We've talked to people who have had to wait weeks to be able to receive services in the home, because there just aren't enough providers out there,' Patalita said. The Ability Center did a study after the previous state budget increased the reimbursement rate for direct care providers under the state Medicaid program. That study showed that while reimbursements rates and, for that matter, provider wages should go up, the solution to the shortage problem wouldn't come with just one answer. 'The direct care crisis is too complex of an issue for a single action to remedy,' The Ability Center found. The study identified three 'major elements' of the shortage: high turnover rates, low hourly wages (lower than 'many entry level positions in retail and food service,' according to the study), and a lack of consistency in benefits. 'This failure by agencies to provide benefits adds to the worker shortage and forces those requiring home care to carry the burden of decreased access to care, especially those in rural areas,' the study found. Eliminating Medicaid funding, including the expansion group, will make life harder for those Ohioans who need the services, Sjoberg said, 'but it will also make it necessary that the direct care workforce is supported in other ways.' SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Yahoo
14 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Illinois Senate President Don Harmon faces potential $9.8 million fine for improperly accepting campaign cash
State election officials have informed Senate President Don Harmon that he will face more than $9.8 million in penalties pending an appeal of a case alleging he broke an Illinois election law designed to rein in big money in political campaigns. The calculation of the potential penalty emerged only days after the Oak Park Democrat attempted to pass legislation designed to wipe away the election board case and the potential penalties, a maneuver stymied amid bipartisan backlash only hours before the spring session adjourned early June 1. The developments take on an added political dimension because of the looming federal sentencing on Friday of former Democratic House Speaker Michael Madigan in the bribery-related ComEd scandal. In a letter dated June 5, the Illinois State Board of Elections told Harmon's campaign committee it must pay more than $9.8 million within 30 days unless an appeal is filed. The Harmon campaign has already filed a notification that it plans to appeal, and Harmon has said he 'fully complied with the law.' On Tuesday, Harmon's political spokesman, Tom Bowen, said Harmon has supported every campaign finance reform that has passed the legislature and has 'always prioritized the highest ethical standards.' 'Our committee has filed a response to the Board of Elections that we do not agree with their assessment,' Bowen said in an emailed statement. 'We look forward to our opportunity to resolve this matter.' Following a Tribune inquiry about Harmon's fundraising, election board officials notified Harmon in March that he had accepted more than $4 million in campaign contributions over the amount allowed under campaign finance restrictions he championed years ago that limit the size of political contributions. The board arrived at the $9.8 million figure based on two provisions in the law. The first would require Harmon's political fund to send to the state's operating fund an amount equal to the more than $4 million his campaign fund collected over the limit. The board also computed a nearly $5.8 million fine based on 150% of the amount the board determined Harmon overcollected. The board said it took into account a provision in the law that allowed for a couple of reductions for the first two violations among the dozens of excessive contributions in question. It's still uncertain how precarious this situation is for Harmon and his campaign fund. Politicians frequently challenge the board, and negotiations can result in final fines that are a fraction of the potential fine. If Harmon wins the appeal, he could wind up paying nothing. In a Tribune interview last week, Harmon also defended his eleventh-hour attempt to change state law with a clause that could have eliminated his elections board dispute and potential fine. He said the language he sought to insert in the statute was 'existing law' and his measure was an effort to clarify the issue. But that is Harmon's interpretation of 'existing law,' not that of elections board officials. At the heart of the disagreement between Harmon and election officials is a loophole in state campaign finance law. It allows politicians to collect contributions above state limits if any candidate in the race in which they are running — themselves or an opponent — reports reaching a 'self-funding threshold' in which they have given or loaned their campaign funds more than $250,000 for statewide races and more than $100,000 in races for the state legislature or local offices. In 2023, Harmon gave his state Senate campaign committee more than $100,000 to open the loophole for the 2024 campaign season, even though he was not running for office last year. In campaign paperwork, Harmon indicated he thought the move allowed him to collect unlimited cash through the November 2024 election cycle. But board officials informed him that the loophole would only be open through the March 2024 primary, meaning they viewed the campaign cash Harmon collected above campaign restrictions between March and the end of the year was not allowed.
Yahoo
15 minutes ago
- Yahoo
With FIFA World Cup one year away, fans and politicians still aren't sure what to expect
Soccer fans watch a friendly match between Manchester United and Arsenal at SoFi Stadium in July 2024. SoFi Stadium is scheduled to host eight matches during the 2026 FIFA World Cup. (Ronald Martinez / Getty Images) Think of the World Cup as a big dinner party. Only instead of asking over family, neighbors and some folks from the office, the whole planet has been invited. Many of those people will be coming to Southern California, and with Wednesday marking the one-year countdown to the tournament's kickoff, Larry Freedman, co-chair of the Los Angeles World Cup host committee, acknowledges there's still a lot of tidying up that has to be done before the guests arrive. Advertisement 'As with any event of this magnitude, there are a tremendous number of moving pieces,' he said. 'Nobody is ready, 100%, a year out. When we signed up for this, we knew we would be working to the end to get ready.' The 2026 World Cup will be the largest and most complex sporting event in history, with 48 national teams playing 104 games in 16 cities spread across the U.S., Mexico and Canada over 39 days. Eight games will be played at SoFi Stadium in Inglewood. Read more: Visa approval crisis threatens to cost 2026 World Cup and L.A. Olympics millions With more than 6 million fans expected to attend matches and another 6 billion engaging globally, FIFA, the World Cup's organizer, says the economic impact to the three countries could top $40 billion. But the number of obstacles host cities will have to negotiate are almost as large and complex as the tournament itself. Advertisement 'Transportation, communications, ticketing, security, the fan fest,' Freedman said. 'You name it.' Hovering over it all like a black cloud are uncertainties over visas, which about half the fans coming to the U.S. for the tournament will need in order to enter the country. Last week, the Trump administration reneged on a pledge to host an open World Cup by issuing a travel ban on people from 12 countries, including Iran, which has already qualified for the World Cup. Citizens of seven other countries face severe restrictions in obtaining visas. Before that, the State Department, which is charge of visa issuance, announced plans to close 10 embassies and 17 consulates and reduce its work force by 3,400 at a time when the average wait for a visa application appointment in some countries is more than a year. Advertisement And Southern California, which will host the U.S. national team's first game, has experienced days of civil unrest sparked by widespread immigration raids. After protesters shut down freeways, burned cars and vandalized businesses, the national guard was deployed. The turmoil could threaten the success of an event that Kathryn Schloessman, president and chief executive of the L.A. Sports & Entertainment Commission, considers both a unique opportunity and a major responsibility. 'The thing that keeps me awake at night is how quickly this has been,' she said. 'We started in 2017 on this bid and it just always seemed like it was a long way away. Then, all of sudden, poof, we're at one year out.' 'I want to make a positive impact on people and their memories,' she continued. 'That, to me, is the biggest responsibility here because we're not going to have this event here again in my lifetime. So this is the one opportunity of the world's biggest event to really do some good in L.A.' Advertisement This is already the second World Cup played in the U.S. in Schloessman's lifetime. The first, in 1994, was the most successful in history, setting records for average and overall attendance and returning a record $50-million profit to its organizing committee, headed by Alan Rothenberg. Read more: SoFi Stadium's hybrid soccer pitch exceeds expectations during Nations League A year out from that tournament, Rothenberg had far different concerns. The U.S. didn't have a first-division soccer league then and its national team had played in just one World Cup since 1950. As a result, soccer was so foreign to most Americans, many of the nine stadiums selected to host games didn't have fields wide enough to meet FIFA standards. 'We had a keen sense of confidence and yet, at the same time, total apprehension. Because nobody had ever done it before,' Rothenberg said. Advertisement 'We were reasonably confident about how ticket sales were going to go. A lot was riding on the success of the [U.S.] team. If the team was an embarrassment it would be a real downcast over the entire operation.' Instead, the U.S. drew Switzerland, beat Colombia and advanced to the knockout round, where it played eventual champion Brazil even for 70 minutes. That World Cup also introduced a number of features that have since become common, such as fan fests and group-play victories counting for three points instead of two. It was also the first World Cup in which a temporary grass carpet was laid over an artificial-turf field; next summer eight of the 16 stadiums will do that. Rothenberg even planned a halftime show for the final at the Rose Bowl, signing Whitney Houston to perform. FIFA nixed the idea then but has revived it for 2026. Advertisement 'Everything we did was like a first, other than the actual playing of the matches,' Rothenberg said. 'I think it really took '94 to let the rest of the soccer world accept the fact that 'OK, the U.S. can be part of our club.' We were doing some unusual things. We were using celebrities and doing all kinds of entertainment events to build public interest. We had our legacy tour where we were going to city after city, basically traveling the country to get people interested.' Fans pack the Rose Bowl during a World Cup match between Brazil and Italy on July 17, 1994. (Lois Bernstein / Associated Press) And Rothenberg could do that because, as president of U.S. Soccer and chairman of the World Cup organizing committee, he was in charge of the entire tournament. That has changed. FIFA now runs the show, overseeing each of the 16 World Cup cities, who are acting independently of one another. Advertisement The financial agreements between FIFA and the World Cup hosts have also changed, which is why it's highly unlikely any future tournament will be as profitable for the host country as Rothenberg's was for the U.S. In 1994, FIFA shared some of its earnings with local organizers, who were also allowed to cut their own sponsorship deals. That led to a $50 million surplus that funded the U.S. Soccer Foundation. This time around FIFA is taking virtually all tournament-related revenue from ticket sales, sponsorships and broadcasting, even at the local level, while leaving host cities on the hook for public services, security and stadium operations. The relationship is so one-sided that Chicago, where the World Cup opened in 1994, backed out of the 2026 tournament citing the costs to the public. Los Angeles threatened to pass on the tournament as well until a privately funded host committee made up of nearly a dozen local sports and civic organizations agreed to cover much of the risks to taxpayers. In return, a report by Micronomics Economic Research and Consulting estimates Southern California will receive $594 million in economic impact from the tournament, including $343 million in direct spending on hotels, meals, transportation and other services from the estimated 180,000 out-of-town World Cup visitors. Advertisement But that's assuming those visitors show up. According to the State Department website, wait times for a non-immigrant B1/B2 visa — the one World Cup visitors who do not qualify for a visa waiver will need to enter the U.S. — topped a year in Colombia, Honduras and several cities in Mexico. And things may be getting worse. 'Based on our experience, the approval rate for B1/B2 tourist and/or temporary business visas in Colombia has changed,' said Pamela Monroy, a paralegal who helps prospective U.S. visitors through the immigration process. 'There has been a considerable increase in the denial rate for this visa category. We believe this is a result of the ongoing policies and changes in immigration matters being implemented by the Donald Trump administration.' Those kinds of stories worry Rep. Sydney Kamlager-Dove (D-Los Angeles), whose district borders SoFi Stadium. Last month Kamlager-Dove sent a letter, signed by a bipartisan group of more than 50 congressional representatives, to Secretary of State Marco Rubio asking him to 'ensure expeditious and secure visa processing' for the World Cup. Advertisement In testimony before the House Foreign Affairs Committee, of which Kamlager-Dove is a member, Rubio promised he would. But the congresswoman has yet to see proof. 'Show me what that looks like,' she said Monday. 'We're not going to wait too long. We're all unified, Republicans and Democrats. We want these games to be successful, want them to get their act together and are willing to work with one another to push the State Department to follow through on their commitment.' The White House, meanwhile, has sent mixed messages. Last month, President Trump opened the first meeting of a task force on the World Cup by saying that 'everyone who wants to come here to enjoy, to have fun and to celebrate the game will be able to do that.' A month later he signed the travel ban, effectively limiting the definition of 'everyone.' President Trump signs a soccer ball as Qatar's Emir Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani, right, and FIFA President Gianni Infantino look on at Lusail Palace in Doha, Qatar, on May 14. (Alex Brandon / Associated Press) At that same White House meeting in May, Vice President JD Vance, the co-chair of the task force, warned World Cup visitors that they would have to leave immediately after the tournament. 'Otherwise,' he said 'they will have to talk to Secretary Noem,' referring to Homeland Security secretary Kristi Noem, whose agency has detained and interrogated people with approved immigration documents at U.S. points of entry. Advertisement The last two World Cup hosts — Russia in 2018 and Qatar in 2022 — allowed visitors to enter their countries with a game ticket essentially doubling as their visa. Both governments also performed background checks on all visitors coming to the tournament. Trump's travel ban, which took effect Monday, bars travel to the U.S. for people in 12 countries and severely limits access to people from seven others. In addition to Iran, which has already assured itself a place in the 2026 tournament, those 19 countries include Sudan, Haiti, Cuba and Venezuela, whose teams still have a chance to earn World Cup bids via regional qualifying tournaments. An exception to the travel ban will allow athletes, coaches and support staff into the U.S. but not fans, directly contradicting FIFA president Gianni Infantino, who told delegates at last month's FIFA Congress that 'the world is welcome in America ... but definitely also all the fans.' Infantino has built a relationship with Trump, attending the president's inauguration in January. If the administration's seemingly contradictory actions caught the FIFA leader by surprise, it also might have convinced some foreign soccer fans to not attend games in the U.S. Advertisement Read more: L.A. Olympic organizers confident they will cover estimated $7.1 billion cost of Games Marcel Ott, a 30-year-old software consultant from Leipzig, Germany, has long been saving for a trip to the World Cup but reports of German tourists being detained, some for weeks, at U.S. airports has led him to reconsider. 'Now I'm not so sure because of the political developments in the U.S.,' he said in German. 'I don't know if it's worth the risk of getting stopped and detained at the airport and risk being deporting back to Germany.' Germany is one of 42 countries whose citizens are eligible for the visa waiver program, which generally allows them to enter the U.S. for visits of up to 90 days without a visa. However, they must obtain Electronic System for Travel Authorization (ESTA) approval prior to travel and can be turned away at any point of entry by Customs and Border Protection officers. Advertisement Ott, who has attended two World Cups, said he may fly to Canada and try to enter the U.S. from there. 'If I get sent back at the border crossing to Canada, I won't have to fly back to Germany right away,' he said. 'I'm thinking the guards at the border to Canada might be a little more relaxed. And there are World Cup games in Canada, too, so it wouldn't be so bad if I get sent back at the Canadian border. 'To be honest, I am still not sure what to do next year.' Marlene, 33, who declined to give her last name, is also uncertain. A city government employee in Berlin, she attended the last two World Cups in Russia and Qatar and planned to travel to the U.S. next summer 'but the general events and U.S. politics put me off. I think it would be better for me not to travel to the USA.' Advertisement But Volker Heun, who worked as a bank executive in the U.S. and once golfed with Trump, said those fears are misplaced, citing the nearly two million Germans who visited America without issue last year. 'This whole issue is being totally overblown in the German media,' said Heun, who plans to enter a World Cup lottery for tickets to multiple games. 'The atmosphere is going to be great.' In South Korea, Jo Ho-tae, who helps manage the Red Devils, a supporter group that recently followed the country's national team to a qualifying match in Jordan, said he will rely on government officials to warn of potential problems. 'I haven't thought too much about Trump's immigration policy yet,' he said. 'But who even knows if our matches will be held in the U.S. and not in Canada or Mexico?' Advertisement The White House could always reverse its immigration policy, as it has done repeatedly with tariffs, and prioritize visa requests for World Cup travelers. That's the solution Freedman, L.A. organizing committee co-chair, is betting on. 'They are looking at this as a showcase event for the country and the host cities. And they understand, it seems, how important it is to welcome the world,' he said. 'I am hopeful that it all gets sorted out in a good way.' Read more: News Analysis: Why are big-name U.S. players passing on World Cup tuneup? Many close observers of World Cup preparations share Freedman's optimism. Advertisement Whether that cautious optimism is justified may soon be known. Tickets for the tournament are expected to go on sale this summer and the draw to determine matchups and venues for the group-play stage of the tournament will be held this winter. Those two events could go a long way toward determining how the World Cup plays out, said Travis Murphy, a former U.S. diplomat who is founder and chief executive of Jetr Global Sports + Entertainment, a Washington-based firm that works to solve visa and immigrant issues for athletes and sports franchises. 'There's kind of this stopwatch that begins the moment the draw is complete to figure out [training] camps and logistics and visas and travel arrangements,' he said. 'I do think they'll make it happen. Is that to say there won't be any issues? Of course not. There was never going to be a scenario where there's not significant challenges to get all these people into the country. 'There are times when the rhetoric seems to run contrary to what's happening on the ground. But it does, at least for the moment, seem like they're implementing changes that are ultimately going to be helpful.' Advertisement Baxter reported from Los Angeles, special correspondent Kirschbaum from Berlin and staff writer Max Kim from Seoul. Get the best, most interesting and strangest stories of the day from the L.A. sports scene and beyond from our newsletter The Sports Report. This story originally appeared in Los Angeles Times.
