Adoption incentive programs.
HB 1503 creates the Indiana adoption services authority as a new public body corporate and politic to administer a new zero cost adoption fund. The authority would be governed by a board made up of four state officials and five governor-appointed members with experience in adoption, foster care, health and human services, business, or finance. The bill gives the board broad powers to set eligibility criteria, contract for services, hire staff or a manager, accept gifts and donations, issue reports and audits, and otherwise operate the fund and related programs.
The zero cost adoption fund is intended to support foster care prevention, adoption recruitment, postadoption services, adoption-sensitive health care grants, and education-related assistance for adopted children. The bill specifically authorizes assistance such as reimbursement of up-front adoption costs, counseling, a $10,000 contribution per adopted child to a 529 college savings plan, and negotiations for reduced tuition at Indiana colleges. Fund dollars may be used only for these assistance purposes and not for the authority’s operating costs, which would be paid from a separate general operating fund. The bill also makes assistance from the new fund supplemental to existing federal adoption assistance and state adoption subsidies.
HB 1503 also creates a new state income tax credit for contributions to the zero cost adoption fund equal to 50% of the contribution, subject to an annual statewide cap of $18.5 million. In addition, it amends Indiana’s existing 529 college savings tax credit rules to exclude transfers from the zero cost adoption fund from the definition of taxable contributions and to coordinate the new adoption-related 529 deposits with existing education savings law. The bill includes conforming changes to adoption assistance statutes and appropriates $25 million from the state general fund for the 2025-2027 biennium to seed the fund.
The overall sentiment in committee appears strongly favorable: the House Family, Children and Human Affairs Committee reported the bill out with a 10-0 vote and a do-pass recommendation. No opposing testimony or recorded dissent is included in the provided materials, suggesting broad support at the committee stage.
The main points of contention, based on the bill text itself, are likely fiscal and administrative rather than philosophical. The bill creates a new quasi-public authority, dedicates state money to a new fund, and authorizes a sizable tax credit cap, which could raise questions about revenue impact, oversight, and whether the program duplicates or supplements existing adoption assistance. The bill also centralizes significant discretion in the board to set criteria and administer benefits, which may prompt scrutiny over eligibility standards, accountability, and how the new program interacts with current child welfare and adoption subsidy systems.
HB 1503 adds a new article to the Indiana Code establishing the Indiana adoption services authority and the zero cost adoption fund, while also creating a new tax credit for donations to the fund and modifying existing 529 education savings and adoption assistance statutes. It affects IC 5-35.5, IC 6-3, IC 6-3.1, and IC 31-19, and it appropriates $25 million from the state general fund for the 2025-2027 biennium. The bill would expand state involvement in adoption-related financial assistance, education savings support, and postadoption services, while also creating new reporting, audit, and governance requirements for the authority and its board.
The committee record shows unanimous support, with the House Family, Children and Human Affairs Committee voting 10-0 to report the bill do pass. The available materials do not include recorded debate or testimony, but the bill’s advancement without dissent suggests positive sentiment toward its adoption-support goals. The measure appears framed as a child- and family-support initiative, which likely contributed to the favorable reception.
The likely areas of contention are the bill’s fiscal commitments and structure. Critics could question the $25 million general fund appropriation, the $18.5 million annual cap on tax credits for fund contributions, and the creation of a new authority with broad administrative powers. There may also be concern about whether the new fund and benefits duplicate existing adoption assistance programs, how eligibility will be set, and whether the authority’s discretion is sufficiently constrained. Supporters, by contrast, appear focused on expanding adoption incentives, postadoption support, and educational benefits for adopted children.