Latest news with #BabyBonus'
Time of India
24-04-2025
- Business
- Time of India
Baby Bonus in the U.S.: How much could it cost and will eligibility extend beyond new mothers?
A Response to Demographic Decline Live Events Financial Impact: Could Reach Nearly $18 Billion Annually Eligibility Criteria Remain Undefined Broader Policy Push on Family Growth FAQs What is the Baby Bonus proposal? Who would receive the $5,000 bonus? A proposed 'Baby Bonus' of $5,000 per child is under consideration by the administration of U.S. President Donald Trump , as the government explores incentives to counter the country's record-low fertility initiative, though in its preliminary stages, could have significant fiscal implications, potentially costing the federal government billions annually if widely proposed bonus would provide $5,000 to American mothers upon childbirth, functioning either as a direct payment or as a supplement to the existing child tax credit Trump, when asked about the initiative on Tuesday, responded positively, stating, 'It sounds like a good idea to me', as quoted in a report by U.S. recorded just over 3.59 million births in 2023, the lowest number in recent history, as per the Centers for Disease Control and administration sees the proposed incentive as a possible countermeasure to the ongoing demographic decline, particularly among women aged 20 to 39—a group that has seen sharp fertility rate reductions in recent years due to economic pressures, delayed family planning, and healthcare the proposal become law and apply universally, estimates suggest the Baby Bonus could cost the U.S. government approximately $17.9 billion per year, based on the 2023 birth the final cost would vary annually, directly tied to the national birth funding source for the program remains unclear. Officials have floated the idea of reallocating resources from the Department of Government Efficiency, which has enacted deep cuts across federal economic advisers have raised concerns about potential inflationary effects and long-term budgetary present, no formal guidelines have been released detailing eligibility standards for the is presumed that the primary condition would be U.S. citizenship and the act of giving birth, but officials have not confirmed whether there would be income thresholds, residency durations, or citizenship verification protocols Speaker Mike Johnson referred to the concept as a 'creative idea,' emphasizing the need for further legislative President JD Vance, who has long advocated for expanded child tax credits, endorsed the $5,000 amount in principle, stating that Congress would be responsible for determining the final framework, as mentioned in the USA Today isn't the first time the Trump administration has hinted at financial incentives for families. In early 2025, the president backed a proposal to provide $5,000 payments to taxpaying households, though it did not his 2024 campaign, Trump often called for a 'new baby boom,' tying population growth to national advisor Elon Musk, who has voiced concerns about 'civilizational collapse' due to falling birth rates, is believed to be a key influence behind the push. Musk, himself a father of over a dozen children, has framed the bonus as part of a broader cultural and economic Baby Bonus is a proposed initiative by U.S. President Donald Trump's administration that would provide a $5,000 benefit for each newborn child. It's designed as a financial incentive to encourage higher birth rates in response to the country's demographic specific eligibility criteria have not been finalized, it is expected that American mothers who give birth would be the primary recipients. The bonus could be distributed as a direct payment or added to the existing child tax credit.
Yahoo
20-03-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
‘Baby Bonus' is back with a new name after Baltimore mayor, City Council sued to stop it
BALTIMORE — Child wellness advocates are working to revive a proposal that could provide financial incentives for new parents in Baltimore City. The original 'Baltimore Baby Bonus' proposal failed last August when the Maryland Supreme Court ruled an effort to let voters decide whether to amend the Baltimore City Charter by giving at least $1,000 to new parents did not fall under 'proper charter material.' The decision ultimately validated a lawsuit filed by Baltimore Mayor Brandon Scott and the Baltimore City Council, who argued residents lacked the authority to enact an initiative so closely resembling city-sponsored legislation. Now, advocacy groups like the Maryland Child Alliance (MCA) are trying to get a new amendment on the 2026 election ballot. Known as the 'Baltimore Baby Fund,' this effort comes with a stated goal of reducing child poverty and 'enhancing the economic stability of families with newborns in Baltimore City,' according to an MCA news release. According to MCA Outreach Chair Julia Ellis, the organization has intentionally made its proposal more vague — mostly by eliminating explicit support for $1,000 direct cash payments — to ensure further compliance with the law. Ellis said the name change from 'Baby Bonus' to 'Baby Fund' reflects this legal restructuring. ''Baby Bonus' really refers to a cash payment, and at this time, we just wanted to be more accurate about what this really is — it's a fund,' Ellis told The Baltimore Sun. 'We don't know exactly how it will be used and distributed … ultimately that will be decided by City Council.' Ellis said some aspects of the Baby Fund proposal are unchanged from the Baby Bonus, such as the 0.03% 'mandatory annual appropriation' property value funding structure borrowed from the Baltimore Children and Youth Fund. She hopes strong public support for the proposal — last year's push for a ballot amendment received about 14,000 signatures out of a required 10,000 — will drive elected leaders to introduce legislation in support of MCA's efforts. 'We're hoping that because we have addressed the specific [legal] concerns, that the City Council and the mayor's office will not stand in our way,' Ellis said, adding that MCA is 'not backing down.' City Council President Zeke Cohen said he has had 'productive' discussions about the proposal with child health advocates, though he declined to say if the council would join another potential lawsuit against the effort. Mayor Brandon Scott's office did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the proposal. 'I've had some productive conversations with the folks from the Baby Bonus effort, and I really appreciate their intent around reducing childhood poverty … I will just say that we share a goal of reducing childhood poverty,' Cohen said. Estimates on last year's Baby Bonus proposal suggested the initiative would cost about $7 million annually given the appropriation funding structure. The city is looking at a $14.4 million deficit in the first quarter of fiscal year 2025, according to the mayor's office. ---------
CBS News
07-03-2025
- Politics
- CBS News
Baltimore Baby Bonus proposal could make a return
The Baltimore 'Baby Bonus' proposal could return on Maryland's 2026 ballot. The proposed ballot measure supported by the Maryland Child Alliance would provide $1,000 to new parents in Baltimore. While the measure gained traction in 2024, it was ruled unconstitutional by the Maryland Supreme Court. As a result, it was barred from appealing on the ballot. "Last month, the Baltimore Baby Bonus team filed a new petition, now titled the Baltimore Baby Fund, with the City Board Elections. The proposed amendment would establish a dedicated fund used exclusively for enhancing the economic stability of families and newborns in Baltimore City." A social media post by the Baltimore Baby Bonus fund on Thursday read in part. Why was the proposal ruled unconstitutional? The Baltimore City Council ruled the bill unconstitutional before the ruling was appealed, arguing that it circumvented legislators. The council also said the city did not have the funds to support the measure. Under the previous proposal, the Baby Bonus program would be funded by 0.03% of the city's property value, appropriated from the city's general budget. Proponents estimated this would cost $7 million annually. The city, however, argues that the program is unaffordable, adding to the financial strain on the city's budget. The new proposal is set to meet the standards set by the Supreme Court last year, according to the bill's organizers. The Maryland Child Alliance would need 10,000 signatures from registered city voters to place a question on the ballot.
