SB370 (Education Freedom Scholarships and Opportunity Act) adds two new federal tax credits: an individual credit for cash donations to qualifying scholarship-granting and workforce training organizations, and a corporate credit for similar contributions. The bill creates eligibility tests for recipient organizations, requires States to identify eligible entities, and establishes a federal web portal to pre-approve contributions and issue receipts.
The bill matters because it uses federal tax policy to steer private philanthropic dollars toward K–12 scholarships (including private and religious schools) and workforce training programs, while capping total credits at $10 billion per year and embedding state-by-state allocation rules. That combination alters incentive structures for donors, nonprofits, and state education systems and creates new federal administrative and oversight roles for Education, Treasury, and Labor.
At a Glance
What It Does
Creates Section 25F (individuals) and Section 45BB (domestic corporations) in the Internal Revenue Code to allow tax credits for cash contributions to eligible scholarship-granting organizations and eligible workforce training organizations, subject to limits, election, and carryforward rules. Establishes a $10 billion annual national cap split $5B/$5B between scholarships and workforce training and a federal web portal for pre-approval and receipts.
Who It Affects
High-net-worth individual donors and corporations considering charitable support for education and training programs, 501(c)(3) nonprofits that provide scholarships or workforce credentials (including community colleges and apprenticeship programs), State education and workforce agencies responsible for listing eligible organizations, and K–12 schools and postsecondary training providers that receive scholarship students.
Why It Matters
This is a federal-level inducement to expand private funding for school choice and workforce development, with built-in allocation and eligibility rules that will shape which States and organizations capture credits. Professionals in finance, nonprofit compliance, and state education policy should expect new reporting, vetting, and allocation mechanics that affect fundraising strategy and state education budgets.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
SB370 establishes two federal tax credits to encourage private funding of scholarships and workforce training. For individuals, the bill allows a credit equal to qualified cash contributions to certified scholarship-granting or workforce training organizations, limited to a percentage of adjusted gross income and usable only if the taxpayer elects the credit; unused credits may be carried forward up to five years.
For domestic corporations, the bill creates a similar credit limited to 5 percent of taxable income, and corporations must also elect to apply the credit for a taxable year.
Recipient organizations must be 501(c)(3) nonprofits (with workforce training organizations additionally barred from being private foundations) and must meet operational tests: they must be reported to the Secretary of Education by the State, direct at least 90 percent of qualified contributions to qualifying scholarships or training, and demonstrate that scholarships serve more than one student, family, and education provider. The bill defines qualifying scholarships broadly to include elementary and secondary expenses recognized by the State, career and technical secondary components, and training that leads to portable credentials or industry certifications.Federal administration is centralized: the Secretary of Education, in coordination with Treasury and Labor, must host a web portal that lists eligible organizations, accepts contributions, issues immediate pre-approval and tax receipts, and collects State-submitted program information for informational purposes.
The law caps the annual credits at $10 billion, split evenly between scholarship organizations and workforce training organizations; it prescribes a default state allocation method that reserves prior-year uptake and then allocates remaining funds by child population and child poverty counts for scholarships, or by a Labor Department–informed demand metric for workforce training. States must provide lists of eligible organizations by January 1 each year or risk reallocation of their allotment.The bill contains several guardrails: scholarships are not treated as taxable income to recipients or their parents; the statute explicitly forbids federal control of private, religious, or home education providers and forbids States from discriminating against providers on the basis of religious character; taxpayers cannot sell or transfer credits and credits cannot exceed tax liability.
The Secretary of the Treasury is directed to issue regulations to prevent double benefits across federal, state, and local tax incentives.
The Five Things You Need to Know
The individual credit lets taxpayers claim contributions to eligible scholarship or workforce training nonprofits up to 10 percent of their adjusted gross income (subject to election and tax liability limits).
The corporate credit allows domestic corporations to claim contributions up to 5 percent of taxable income, and corporations must elect to use the credit for a given year.
There is a $10 billion national annual cap on qualifying contributions that qualify for credits, split $5 billion for scholarship-granting organizations and $5 billion for eligible workforce training organizations.
Eligible organizations must be 501(c)(3) nonprofits, be reported to the Secretary of Education by the State, allocate at least 90% of contributions to scholarships/training, and serve multiple students, families, and providers.
The Secretary of Education must run a web portal that issues immediate pre-approval and receipts for credits; States submit lists of eligible organizations annually or face reallocation of their allotments.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Short title and purpose
These opening provisions name the statute the Education Freedom Scholarships and Opportunity Act and state its objective: to incentivize individual and corporate contributions to scholarships and workforce training organizations identified by States. The explicit purpose clause frames the rest of the law as donor-facing tax policy rather than a direct federal grant program.
Individual tax credit for qualified contributions
This section adds a nonrefundable credit against income tax for individuals who make qualified cash contributions to eligible scholarship-granting organizations or eligible workforce training organizations. It limits the credit to a percentage of adjusted gross income, requires taxpayers to elect the credit for a taxable year, prohibits selling or transferring credits, allows a five-year carryforward for unused credits, and instructs Treasury to prevent stacking of federal, state, and local tax benefits on the same contribution. Practically, individuals must plan around the election, carryforward rules, and the annual national cap when timing gifts.
Corporate tax credit and interaction with the general business credit
This provision creates an analogous corporate credit included in the general business credit regime, with a cap of 5 percent of taxable income for the year. Corporations must elect the credit for a taxable year and are subject to the same eligibility and anti-double-benefit rules as individuals. Treating the credit as part of the general business credit affects carryback/carryforward and limitation mechanics already governing corporate credits.
Federal portal, pre-approval, and State reporting obligations
The Secretary of Education must build and maintain a web portal (in coordination with Treasury and Labor) that lists eligible organizations, enables immediate pre-approval and issuance of receipts, and collects State-supplied program information. Contributions may be routed through the portal or made directly if a non-portal pre-approval is obtained. For compliance and auditability this centralization is important, but the portal also creates an operational bottleneck and requires interagency IT, privacy, and verification capabilities.
National and State allocation formula for the $10 billion cap
The statute caps credits at $10 billion annually ($5B for scholarships, $5B for workforce training) and prescribes allocations to States: reserve prior-year uptake, then split remaining scholarship funds 20% by child population and 80% by children in poverty; workforce funds use a Labor Department–informed demand metric for apprenticeships and training. It also guarantees a minimum 0.5% share per State and allows multistate partnerships and reallocation of unclaimed allotments after specified dates. The allocation machinery creates winners and losers depending on prior-year take-up and the data States provide.
Who qualifies as a scholarship-granting or workforce training organization
The bill defines eligible scholarship-granting organizations as 501(c)(3) nonprofits that are reported by a State and that allocate at least 90% of contributions to scholarships, serve multiple students/families/providers, and may include entities previously eligible for State tax-credit donations. Eligible workforce training organizations are similarly 501(c)(3) nonprofits (not private foundations) that provide vocational education, apprenticeships, community-college programs, or credentialing—explicitly including collective-bargaining or industry credential programs. These functional tests matter for compliance, fundraising, and organizational structure.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on Education across all five countries.
Explore Education in Codify Search →Who Benefits and Who Bears the Cost
Every bill creates winners and losers. Here's who stands to gain and who bears the cost.
Who Benefits
- Individual donors with taxable liability — The credit reduces federal tax liability (subject to the AGI cap), making donations to eligible organizations more attractive and potentially increasing philanthropic funding targeted at schooling and credentials.
- Domestic corporations — The 5% taxable-income cap creates an incentive for corporate giving toward scholarships and workforce training as part of corporate philanthropy or workforce development strategies.
- Certified scholarship-granting and workforce training nonprofits — Organizations that meet the 90% pass-through and reporting tests stand to gain new revenue streams from donors seeking tax-preferred ways to support students or trainees.
- Private and religious K–12 schools and nontraditional providers — The bill explicitly permits scholarships to be used at private, religious, and home education providers and bars State discrimination against such providers, increasing enrollment options funded by scholarships.
- Students from low-income families and workforce trainees — The allocation formula and definition of qualifying scholarships explicitly include low-income children and credential-focused training, which could expand access to alternative schooling and career pathways.
Who Bears the Cost
- Federal budget (tax expenditure) — The credits represent a foregone revenue item; even though annual credits are capped, up to $10 billion per year shifts revenue away from other federal priorities.
- State education systems and school districts — If scholarship dollars translate into student transfers from public schools, local enrollment and funding formulas could be affected, creating fiscal pressure at the state or local level.
- Nonprofits that cannot meet the 90% allocation test — Organizations that rely on higher overhead or program administration may be excluded or forced to restructure, which increases compliance and operating pressure.
- Department of Education, Treasury, and Labor — These agencies face new administrative, IT, and oversight burdens to run the portal, vet State submissions, coordinate pre-approvals, and enforce anti-abuse rules with only an appropriations authorization for admin costs.
- Donors facing timing and allocation risk — Because of the national cap and state allotments, donors may find contributions unapproved if a State's allocation is exhausted or if the State fails to list eligible organizations timely.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The central dilemma is whether federal tax incentives should be used to mobilize private dollars to expand parental choice and workforce credentialing—potentially increasing access to private and career-focused options—while exposing public education funding, state program design, and federal oversight capacity to disruption; the bill solves the problem of donor incentives but shifts unresolved choices about accountability, allocation fairness, and fiscal impact to regulators and States.
The bill routes federal incentives through a state-identified list of nonprofits but leaves much of program design to States for informational submission only; that creates a hybrid governance model where federal tax policy shapes private funding flows while relying on States to define eligibility. The allocation formula favors States with prior program uptake and those that can document poverty and apprenticeship demand, so States with established tax-credit scholarship ecosystems are likely to capture disproportionate shares early on.
The requirement that organizations direct at least 90% of contributions to scholarships tightens the flow of funds to direct student support but raises practical issues for administration, auditing, reserves, and capacity-building, particularly for smaller or emerging training providers.
Operationally, the web portal centralizes pre-approval and receipts but also concentrates risk: the portal must authenticate donors and organizations, prevent double-claiming across federal and state tax benefits (the statute instructs Treasury to regulate this), and manage first-come, first-served pressures against the annual cap. The bill's protections for private, religious, and home education providers reduce constitutional and free-exercise risks but also limit States' ability to impose programmatic standards; that trade-off will matter for consumers and regulators seeking both school choice and minimum quality assurances.
Finally, the interplay between federal credits and existing State tax-credit programs could complicate compliance and raise questions about double benefits, refundable-like outcomes, and revenue forecasting. The statute requires Treasury to prevent double benefits but gives no detailed mechanism for reconciling overlapping state credits, refundable features, or carryforwards, leaving substantial rulemaking to address important practical questions.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.