Ohio Can Design a Leading Prepaid Debit Card for State Tax Refunds: New Approach Can Save Millions, Help Under-Banked Families

Over the last few years, state governments have begun issuing prepaid debit cards rather than paper checks for government payments to individuals. Unemployment compensation, supplemental food assistance (referred to as SNAP or food stamps), and most recently, tax refunds, are being provided by direct deposit or loaded onto prepaid debit cards.1 These electronic transfers and debit cards increase efficiency of payment and decrease state costs compared to paper checks, which fewer states are providing. The first type of transfer, direct deposit, provides a safe, reliable and convenient method of payment for taxpayers with bank accounts. The other electronic option, prepaid debit cards, can help unbanked clients if states get the fees and accessibility right.Ohio is considering legislation, Senate Bill 365, that would allow the state to issue a prepaid debit card as an option for those who do not receive direct deposit for their state tax refund. The state can save money by issuing the cards, but it is essential that Ohio set up a smart structure and appropriately regulate fees associated with the card.2 Getting these details right will ensure that Ohio families and communities fully benefit from tax refunds. This brief provides lessons Ohio can learn from experiences in other states and with existing cards here. According to the Department of Taxation, nearly 40 percent of those receiving state tax refunds -- 1.4 million Ohioans -- opted for a paper check and not direct deposit. Given the numbers of paper check filers, it is imperative that Ohio offers a prepaid debit card that is safe, transparent, and easy to use

Home Insecurity 2012: Foreclosures and Housing in Ohio

Analyzes trends in the number of new foreclosure filings, developments in prevention efforts, and data on mortgage defaults and negative equity. Makes policy recommendations for strengthening stability among individuals, families, and communities

Keys for Collateral: How Auto-Title Loans Have Become Another Vehicle for Payday Lending in Ohio

Policy Matters has conducted research on payday lending in Ohio for the last five years. Most recently, two new forms of payday lending have taken hold in Ohio, which involve using a title for an automobile as collateral and lending under a statute meant for credit repair

Small Investment, Big Difference: How an Ohio Earned Income Tax Credit Would Help Working Families

Gov. John Kasich has proposed major changes in Ohio's tax system, including broadening the sales tax to cover most services, cutting the sales-tax rate, slashing income taxes and giving business owners a big tax break. Together, the impact of these changes will be to cut needed revenues, while transferring income from poor and middle-income Ohioans to the affluent.Broadening the sales tax base while cutting the state rate to 5 percent would produce significant needed revenue and make the sales tax more viable long-term, since more and more of the Ohio economy is based on services.The problem: Low- and moderate-income Ohioans would be most affected, as they would pay the most as a share of their income. And low-income Ohioans already pay more of their income in state and local taxes than rich Ohioans do. If Ohio is going to broaden the tax base, the state should adopt a state Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC), as 25 states (including the District of Columbia) have done. It is good policy at any time, especially when legislators are considering raising taxes on those least able to pay. An EITC not only helps create a more fair tax structure, it provides a boost to local economies, as EITC dollars are often spent and saved locally. This multiplier effect creates local and state tax revenue based on goods and services that are sold. Below we review the successes of the federal EITC and how it can be implemented in Ohio

Employment, College Enrollment, and Training of Young Male Veterans and Nonveterans During the Recent Recession

In 2007, nearly 1.5 million veterans had served in the United States Armed Forces since September 2001. By the end of 2007, the United States began a long recession, in which young workers faced particularly large employment losses. This analysis focuses on labor market, educational, and training experiences of young male veterans and nonveterans during the January 2008-to-June 2009 time period. This period coincides with the recent recession that began in December 2007 and continued through June 2009. Data in this article are from the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth 1997 (NLSY97). The NLSY97 is a nationally representative sample of 8,984 men and women, who were born in the years 1980 to 1984 and were living in the United States at the time of the initial survey. Survey participants were first interviewed in 1997 when they were ages 12 to 17 and have been interviewed annually. Survey participants turned 24 to 28 years old in 2008. Veterans in the analysis are defined as those who had served in the military and were not on active duty at any point during the January 2008-to-June 2009 period. Nonveterans are defined as those who never served in the military

The Collision Between New Discovery Amendments and Expert Testimony Rules

The young litigator\u27s nightmare was always the same. He was in medieval Europe, ready to engage in a sword fight with the expert swordsman representing his arch rival. After countless hours of preparation, he felt confident that he would be able to hold his own against the swordsman. But when the swordsman drew his lengthy rapier from its sheath, the young attorney pulled only a short dagger from his scabbard. Realizing that he was doomed to defeat, he tossed his dagger into the air and ran from the scene with the laughter of the onlookers ringing in his ears. The young litigator needed no dream analyst to tell him the nightmare\u27s symbolism. He knew that the sword fight represented cross-examination and that his swordsman opponent was simply an expert witness. As hard as he practiced and studied and researched, he never felt comfortable crossexamining his opponent\u27s expert about the expert\u27s field of expertise. He might as well admit his failure now and become a tax attorney, he thought. Fear of expert witnesses can indeed be disabling. With the increase in litigation about complex business transactions, products liability, and professional malpractice, expert testimony continues to become more important. The modern litigator must learn to deal effectively with opposing experts or be faced with the embarrassment of his worst nightmares. Handling the opponent\u27s expert has become more difficult because the rules of evidence have been liberalized over the years, while the rules of discovery recently have been restricted

The Second Circuit Review--1975-76 Term: Courts-- Evidence & Procedure: Commentary: The Second Circuit and the Federal Rules of Evidence

The most significant development in federal trial procedure in recent years has been the enactment of the Federal Rules of Evidence, effective July 1, 1975. In the intervening two years since the Rules became effective, the courts of the Second Circuit have bad occasion to make several illuminating applications of and references to them. An examination of some of these decisions provides insight into the kinds of questions that are coming up not only in the Second Circuit, but around the country, and the kinds of answers that are being given. It is not the bizarre or unusual case that will tell us whether and how the rules are working, but the mine-run of cases; and this circuit provides a good sampling. The following discussion will also include a few decisions which, although not from the Second Circuit, are sufficiently next door to be of interest to the Second Circuit lawyer