Make no mistake, tuition tax credits will have a significant effect on us all.

The current incarnation of the bill looks as though it will:

l Allow Utahns earning substantially more than the state's median family income to completely avoid paying taxes to support public education, and, at the same time,

l Open the floodgates for state tax money - potentially tens of millions of dollars annually - to flow into the very loosely regulated private school industry;

l Have minimal to no effect on the anticipated surge in public school enrollment;

l Not offer Utah taxpayers any savings.

To demonstrate these effects, let's turn to the Utah Taxpayers Association. The association created a statistically average family of five to illustrate the typical annual tax burden of Utah families. They reported that in 2002 this family had an adjusted gross income of $55,043, paid $2,019 in state income tax (which is dedicated to higher and public education by the state Constitution) and paid $557 in property tax earmarked for education.

In total, this family paid $2,576 in taxes for the public education of their three children.

What if this family now wants to send their three children to a private parochial school? Under the most recent tuition tax credit proposal, the state of Utah - that's all of us - would pay them $9,750 (or $7,174 after deducting what they paid in school taxes). In reality, tuition tax credit supporters are proposing to pay for their private school choice with our money.

One tempting assertion in this debate is that taxpayers should be free, in matters of education, to choose whether "their" dollars should buy a Chevrolet or a Ford - as though education is just another consumer choice.

That's a bogus argument. Public education - a school system open to all - is a constitutionally mandated government responsibility. An alarming byproduct of the tuition tax credit proposal is that our statistical family also ends up contributing nothing to the actual support of the public education of Utah's children.

Public education is a public good. It benefits all of society, including those who do not have children and those who educate their children privately. Tuition tax credits allow people to shirk this vital civic obligation.

The Utah Taxpayers Association's "statistical family" data inarguably shows tuition tax credits will reduce the amount of money available to the state to pay for public education. Rural districts will be particularly hard hit because they will see little or no reduction in numbers of students or expenditures. Growing districts may see less growth as some students choose private schools over public schools.

However, unless large numbers of students conveniently located in small geographic areas are enticed to private schools, districts will need to hire the same number of teachers and build the same number of buildings, but with even less money.

The current version of tuition tax credits claims to be aimed at low-income families, but the fact is that 80 percent of the families in Utah would be eligible for the bill's tax credit of $1,000 or more per child. The "statistically average family" with an adjusted gross income of $55,000 would be eligible for a tax credit of $3,250 per child. Knowing the median family income in Utah is $48,537, how many of us would consider a family of five with an annual income of $55,000 to be poor?

Refundable tuition tax credits are a form of wealth redistribution. They either take money from the wealthy to give to the poor (who might send their children to private school), or they take from the poor (those who still won't be able to afford private schools) to give to the wealthy (who already can afford them). Does this Robin Hood approach to public policy really reflect Utah values?

Ironically, the Ferrin bill is exactly a form of the income redistribution Gov. Jon Huntsman Jr. opposed as a candidate for office, making his support for the bill hard to reconcile.

Proponents insist that tuition tax credits will ultimately save Utah money. They claim that we'll never really know the financial impact of tuition tax credits until we implement them. They say that if it turns out that tax credits harm public education, they can always be repealed.

Great theory, but a disaster in practice. A study of Arizona's tax credit (which maxes out at $500, while Utah's tax credit floor would be $500 with a $3,750 ceiling) found that it was both expensive and inefficient at reaching low-income students. But, despite costing Arizonans $74 million in its first three years of implementation, the tax credit remains.

Given the inevitable and unappealing outcomes of the passage of this bill, all Utahns must ask themselves: Why on Earth would I or my elected officials support tuition tax credits in the face of indisputable evidence that the quality of Utah's excellent public schools will be placed in serious jeopardy?

---

David R. Irvine is a Salt Lake City lawyer, a former commissioner on the Utah Public Service Commission and a former four-term Republican member of the Utah House of Representatives