Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2022 Aug 1.
Published in final edited form as: Child Maltreat. 2021 Jan 19;27(3):325–333. doi: 10.1177/1077559520987302

Figure 1.

Figure 1.

State EITC generosity 2004–2017. Source: National Bureau of Economic Research’s TAXSIM program (www.nber.org/taxsim) Note. States not included in this figure never had a refundable EITC during the study period but were still included in the analysis. Data display the percentage of the federal EITC offered as a supplementary credit in each state and correspond to the year in which taxpayers received EITC benefits. Wisconsin’s EITC follows the federal structure but the percentage of the federal credit offered is based on number of children (e.g. one child: 4%; two children: 11%; or three children: 34%). For Wisconsin, we used the supplement for families with two children since an average family has approximately two children. Minnesota’s EITC depends on household income and ranges from 25% to 45%. For Minnesota, we used the average benefit according to the Tax Policy Center: 33% of the federal credit. Rhode Island offered a partially refundable EITC, for which we calculated the refundable portion as a percentage of the federal EITC. California’s EITC, which was first offered in tax year 2015, phased-out completely at 31% of the federal EITC’s earnings threshold. For California, we multiplied the percentage of the federal credit offered to eligible households by 31%.