Pros & Cons

Based on material presented in 2003 to the GSC by Alice Lincoln, Surya Singh, and Moriah Thomason. Please note that this is intended as an overview of the opinions raised by GSC members and by national tax relief lobbyists and is not meant to be a complete discussion of this issue. Rather, consider these as starting points for your own consideration of the tax relief issue.

Some Arguments That Could Be Made For Tax Relief for Graduate Students

1. The proposal would help some graduate students who struggle financially.

2. The proposal sends the message that higher education is a priority for the federal government and provides impetus for more students to pursue research.

3. For the government, loss of tax revenue from the proposal would be minimal because there are fewer than 500,000 doctoral students nationwide. For the student, however, that tax money saved makes a big difference.

4. Some view stipends as scholarships rather than as income from employment so, like scholarships, stipends should not be taxed.

5. Deductions, in principal, are proportional to one's own living expense, and thus, as equitable as possible.

6. While the GSC does not confine itself to agreeing with NAGPS, the GSC's continued support of this initiative would demonstrate solidarity with NAGPS.

7. The estimated savings from the proposed tax relief (up to $1000 per student) are greater than the impact the GSC can expect to have when advocating for stipend increases (~ $300 per year).

Some Arguments That Could Be Made Against Tax Relief for Graduate Students

1. The amount of taxes paid by graduate students is already very small.

2. Graduate students have a social responsibility to pay the same tax rates as everyone else.

3. Attaining an advanced degree enhances our ultimate earnings potential. This places us in a better position than other members of society who earn similar wages but do not benefit from the tax relief.

4. Asking for money from the federal government is misdirected. If students at a particular university struggle financially, the university should be responsible for making necessary adjustments.

5. The small monthly savings would not impact an individual's decision to pursue a graduate degree and hence will not increase graduate student enrollment as has been suggested.

6. A large portion of scholarship money comes from federal grants and programs. It is inefficient to tax these awards.

7. The complexity of filing taxes for graduate students would increase.