HB279 would create a new nonrefundable Ohio income tax credit for certain family caregivers who pay out-of-pocket expenses to help an eligible family member remain in a private home. The credit would equal 30% of eligible expenses, up to $2,000 per year, and could be carried forward if it exceeds the taxpayer’s liability. To qualify, the caregiver must be an Ohio resident with income within specified limits and at least $1,000 in eligible caregiving expenses, and the care recipient must be at least 50 years old, need help with at least two activities of daily living, and live outside of institutional care settings.
The bill defines eligible expenses broadly to include home modifications, vehicle modifications, assistive equipment, respite care, adult day care, home care aides, transportation, legal and financial services, health care equipment, and assistive technology, while excluding ordinary household maintenance. It also allows multiple caregivers to claim the credit for the same family member so long as they do not claim the same expenses twice, and directs the tax commissioner to adopt rules for administration. The bill amends the state’s credit-ordering statute to place the new caregiver credit in the sequence of credits applied against Ohio income tax liability.
If enacted, HB279 would amend sections 5747.08 and 5747.98 of the Revised Code and add new section 5747.053. Its practical effect would be to reduce state income tax liability for eligible caregivers and to create a new tax preference tied to family caregiving costs. The credit would apply to taxable years ending on or after the effective date, and the bill would also require changes to tax forms and administrative rules to implement the new credit.
The available legislative record shows the bill was introduced and referred to the House Ways and Means Committee, but there are no recorded committee transcripts or votes in the provided materials. As a result, there is no documented public debate or recorded floor sentiment in the supplied context. Based on the bill’s structure, the measure appears aimed at providing financial relief to caregivers and supporting aging or disabled family members at home.
The main points of potential contention are likely to be the fiscal cost of the credit, the income limits and eligibility thresholds, and how broadly “eligible expenses” should be interpreted and documented. Another possible issue is whether the credit should be refundable rather than nonrefundable, since lower-income caregivers with limited tax liability may not fully benefit. The bill also raises administrative questions about verifying medical need, preventing duplicate claims, and distinguishing qualifying caregiving costs from ordinary household expenses.
HB279 would add a new nonrefundable personal income tax credit in Chapter 5747 for family caregiving expenses and would require conforming changes to the credit-priority rules in section 5747.98. It would create section 5747.053, define eligible caregivers, care recipients, and expenses, and authorize the tax commissioner to adopt implementing rules. The bill would reduce state income tax collections for qualifying taxpayers and would affect caregivers, older adults needing assistance, and family members providing in-home care.
No committee testimony, debate transcript, or vote record was provided, so there is no direct evidence of support or opposition in the available materials. The bill’s introduction and referral to the House Ways and Means Committee suggest it was under early consideration only. Substantively, the proposal is framed as a caregiver relief measure and appears intended to be supportive of families providing in-home care.
Likely areas of contention include the revenue impact of creating a new tax credit, whether the credit should be refundable, and whether the income caps and $1,000 minimum expense threshold are set appropriately. Legislators may also differ on the scope of qualifying expenses, the age and disability-related eligibility rules for the care recipient, and the administrative burden of verifying claims and preventing double-dipping when multiple caregivers are involved.