To amend sections 5739.02, 5747.01, and 5747.025 of the Revised Code to authorize tax incentives for conceived children and certain child care items and to name this act the Strategic Tax Opportunities for Raising Kids (STORK) Act.
HB87, titled the Strategic Tax Opportunities for Raising Kids (STORK) Act, would amend Ohio’s sales tax and individual income tax statutes to create new tax preferences related to children and child care. On the sales tax side, the bill adds exemptions for a list of child care items, including infant clothing, children’s diapers, therapeutic or preventative creams and wipes marketed for children, pacifiers, teething rings, child restraint devices and booster seats, cribs and bassinets, play yards, strollers, breastfeeding supplies, baby monitors, and infant toys. It also exempts the documentary services charges imposed in connection with certain motor vehicle and manufactured home transactions, and it preserves the bill’s effective date for sales tax changes beginning January 1, 2026.
On the income tax side, the bill changes the definition of “dependent” for Ohio income tax purposes to include a conceived child, including a child conceived by assisted reproduction that has been placed in the uterus or lost to spontaneous miscarriage, so long as the child was not also a qualifying child for federal tax purposes and the pregnancy did not end in an abortion, including selective reduction. It also amends the personal exemption statute so that, if spouses file separate returns, only the expecting mother may claim the exemption for a conceived child. These changes would apply to taxable years ending on or after January 1, 2026.
The bill would affect Ohio’s Revised Code sections 5739.02, 5747.01, and 5747.025 by expanding tax exemptions and redefining who may be counted as a dependent for state income tax purposes. In practical terms, it would reduce sales tax collected on specified child-related purchases and could reduce income tax liability for taxpayers who qualify to claim a conceived child as a dependent or personal exemption. The measure is framed as a family-support tax policy and would likely have a modest revenue impact through reduced state and local tax collections on the exempted items and exemptions.
Public sentiment in the available record is limited because the bill was only introduced and referred to the House Ways and Means Committee, with no recorded votes or committee testimony provided. Based on the bill text alone, the proposal appears to be positively oriented toward families and child-related expenses, but the absence of discussion makes broader support or opposition difficult to assess. The naming of the act and the breadth of the child-related exemptions suggest an intent to present the bill as pro-family and pro-parent.
The main point of contention is likely to be the bill’s treatment of a “conceived child” as a dependent for tax purposes, especially the requirement that the child not have been terminated by abortion and the special rule limiting the exemption to the expecting mother when spouses file separately. Those provisions raise legal, policy, and administrative questions about pregnancy verification, eligibility, and the interaction between state tax law and reproductive health issues. Another likely area of debate is whether the new sales tax exemptions should be targeted to these specific child care items and whether the revenue loss is justified.
HB87 would amend Ohio sales tax law to exempt a defined set of child care and infant-related items from the state sales tax, and it would amend Ohio income tax law to allow a conceived child to be treated as a dependent for state tax purposes and, in some cases, to qualify for the personal exemption. It would also make a narrow change to the tax treatment of documentary services charges. The bill would therefore alter the tax base under sections 5739.02, 5747.01, and 5747.025 of the Revised Code, affecting taxpayers purchasing child care goods and taxpayers claiming dependents or personal exemptions beginning with the 2026 tax year/effective date.
The available record shows no committee testimony, floor debate, or votes, so there is no documented legislative sentiment beyond introduction and referral. The bill’s framing and title indicate a favorable posture toward families, children, and child-related tax relief, but the lack of recorded discussion means support and opposition cannot be measured from the provided materials. The measure appears to be introduced as a policy proposal rather than a negotiated compromise.
The most notable contention is the bill’s definition of dependent to include a conceived child and its exclusion of pregnancies ending in abortion, which is likely to draw legal and ideological debate. The rule that only the expecting mother may claim the exemption when spouses file separately may also raise fairness and administration questions. In addition, the new sales tax exemptions for infant and child care items could prompt fiscal concerns about lost revenue and questions about whether the exemptions are narrowly tailored or should be broader or differently structured.