Stadnick Nicole A, Geremia Carrie, Mauri Amanda I, Swanson Kera, Wynecoop Megan, Purtle Jonathan
University of California, San Diego.
Altman Clinical and Translational Research Institute, Dissemination and Implementation Science Center, University of California, San Diego.
Milbank Q. 2024 Dec;102(4):913-943. doi: 10.1111/1468-0009.12715. Epub 2024 Sep 6.
Policy Points Earmarked tax policies for behavioral health are perceived as having positive impacts related to increasing flexible funding, suggesting benefits to expand this financing approach. Implementation challenges related to these earmarked taxes included tax base volatility that impedes long-term service delivery planning and inequities in the distribution of tax revenue. Recommendations for designing or revising earmarked tax policies include developing clear guidelines and support systems to manage the administrative aspects of earmarked tax programs, cocreating reporting and oversight structures with system and service delivery agents, and selecting revenue streams that are relatively stable across years.
Over 200 cities and counties in the United States have implemented policies earmarking tax revenue for behavioral health services. This mixed-methods study was conducted with the aim of characterizing perceptions of the impacts of these earmarked tax policies, strengths and weaknesses of tax policy designs, and factors that influence decision making about how tax revenue is allocated for services.
Study data came from surveys completed by 274 officials involved in behavioral health earmarked tax policy implementation and 37 interviews with officials in a sample of jurisdictions with these taxes-California (n = 16), Washington (n = 12), Colorado (n = 6), and Iowa (n = 3). Interviews primarily explored perceptions of the advantages and drawbacks of the earmarked tax, perceptions of tax policy design, and factors influencing decisions about revenue allocation.
A total of 83% of respondents strongly agreed that it was better to have the tax than not, 73.2% strongly agreed that the tax increased flexibility to address complex behavioral health needs, and 65.1% strongly agreed that the tax increased the number of people served by evidence-based practices. Only 43.3%, however, strongly agreed that it was easy to satisfy tax-reporting requirements. Interviews revealed that the taxes enabled funding for services and implementation supports, such as training in the delivery of evidence-based practices, and supplemented mainstream funding sources (e.g., Medicaid). However, some interviewees also reported challenges related to volatility of funding, inequities in the distribution of tax revenue, and, in some cases, administratively burdensome tax reporting. Decisions about tax revenue allocation were influenced by goals such as reducing behavioral health care inequities, being responsive to community needs, addressing constraints of mainstream funding sources, and, to a lesser degree, supporting services considered to be evidence based.
Earmarked taxes are a promising financing strategy to improve access to, and quality of, behavioral health services by supplementing mainstream state and federal financing.
指定用于行为健康的税收政策被认为对增加灵活资金具有积极影响,这表明扩大这种融资方式会带来益处。与这些指定用途税收相关的实施挑战包括税基波动,这会阻碍长期服务提供规划,以及税收收入分配不均。设计或修订指定用途税收政策的建议包括制定明确的指导方针和支持系统,以管理指定用途税收项目的行政事务,与系统和服务提供机构共同创建报告和监督结构,以及选择多年来相对稳定的收入来源。
美国200多个城市和郡县已实施将税收收入指定用于行为健康服务的政策。这项混合方法研究旨在描述对这些指定用途税收政策影响的看法、税收政策设计的优缺点,以及影响税收收入如何分配用于服务的决策因素。
研究数据来自274名参与行为健康指定用途税收政策实施的官员完成的调查,以及对有这些税收的管辖区样本中的官员进行的37次访谈——加利福尼亚州(n = 16)、华盛顿州(n = 12)、科罗拉多州(n = 6)和爱荷华州(n = 3)。访谈主要探讨了对指定用途税收优缺点的看法、对税收政策设计的看法,以及影响收入分配决策的因素。
共有83%的受访者强烈同意有这项税收比没有更好,73.2%的受访者强烈同意这项税收增加了应对复杂行为健康需求的灵活性,65.1%的受访者强烈同意这项税收增加了接受循证实践服务的人数。然而,只有43.3%的受访者强烈同意满足纳税申报要求很容易。访谈显示,这些税收为服务和实施支持提供了资金,如循证实践提供方面的培训,并补充了主流资金来源(如医疗补助)。然而,一些受访者也报告了与资金波动、税收收入分配不均以及在某些情况下纳税申报行政负担过重相关的挑战。税收收入分配决策受到诸如减少行为医疗保健不平等、响应社区需求、解决主流资金来源的限制等目标的影响,在较小程度上还受到支持被认为是循证服务的影响。
指定用途税收是一种有前景的融资策略,可通过补充州和联邦主流融资来改善行为健康服务的可及性和质量。