Use tax incentives to increase the birth rate and increase employment of those that are involved.
Any family with 4+ children are exempt from income tax and property tax. Additional stipulations could be added. However at a minimum this would definitely encourage an increased birth rate among Americans.
It could also be scaled with benefits starting at 2 children and increasing with the family size.
Any company that employs someone exempt from income tax is also exempt from payroll tax for that employee.
In Hungary, the government under Prime Minister Viktor Orbán implemented a series of policies aimed at increasing the country’s birth rate. These included financial incentives such as generous parental leave, home purchase subsidies for families, and also broader support measures like family tax benefits and support for car purchases for large families.
However, recognizing that financial incentives alone might not be sufficient to significantly boost birth rates, the Hungarian approach also heavily incorporated societal and cultural elements. This is where the role of the clergy, including influential figures such as Archbishop Gyula Márfi, became significant. The clergy helped endorse and promote these policies within the context of traditional family values, as espoused by the Catholic Church. Their support helped to frame the government’s policies not just as economic measures, but as part of a broader moral and national revitalization project aimed at fostering a pro-family culture.
This alignment of government policies with cultural and religious advocacy created a more holistic approach to addressing the demographic challenges. By addressing not only the financial aspects of having children but also aligning it with cultural values and providing public recognition of family life, Hungary aimed to create a more supportive environment for family growth. The involvement of the clergy added a moral dimension to these policies, reinforcing the message that growing the family is not only a personal choice but also a valued decision on a societal and ethical level.
Several other countries have implemented measures to successfully increase birth rates, though the effectiveness and sustainability of these efforts can vary. Here are a few examples:
France: France has one of the higher birth rates in Europe, which many attribute to an array of supportive family policies. These include extensive maternity and paternity leaves, a comprehensive family benefit program, and widespread availability of child care. The French government has long promoted policies that facilitate work-life balance and make child-rearing financially easier.
Sweden: Known for its robust welfare state, Sweden offers extensive parental leave (up to 480 days that can be shared between both parents), free or subsidized preschool, and substantial child allowances. These policies have contributed to making Sweden one of the countries with higher birth rates in Europe.
Norway: Similar to Sweden, Norway provides substantial parental leave and child care benefits. Norwegian parents are entitled to paid parental leave that encourages even fathers to take substantial time off work to engage in child-rearing, supporting higher fertility rates.
Singapore: Facing a declining birth rate, Singapore has introduced a variety of incentives to encourage families to have more children. These incentives include cash gifts, subsidies for child care, access to housing for young families, and pro-family leave policies. The country continuously adapts its policies to better cater to the changing needs of families.
Russia: In an attempt to combat declining population numbers, Russia has implemented several initiatives, such as the “maternity capital” program, which provides financial incentives to mothers who have more than one child. The government also offers additional supports for education, housing, and family services.
These countries demonstrate that increasing birth rates typically requires an integrated approach that combines financial incentives with broader support structures that address childcare, healthcare, and parental leave while promoting a culture that values and supports family life. The exact mix of policies and their outcomes can vary significantly based on the specific social, economic, and cultural context of each country.
Tax breaks for family size is thinking in the right direction.
Consider some of the economic reasons people used to have larger families:
Children were expected to help with the family’s work; in the fields, in the store, etc. More children meant more dependable help with the family business and a natural introduction to those life skills for the children as they grow. I get that concern over the use of child labor abuses are real, but children were literally raised and educated in vocational settings alongside their parents for thousands of years of human history.
Cultural acceptance of the of vocational aspects of homeschooling is the primary barrier, there seems to be a cultural aversion to this in modern society.
Corporate employment makes including children in vocational training alongside their parents difficult, however, it could be possible with some out-of-the-box thinking; encouraging apprenticeship style programs where a company allows a parent to oversee the direction of their own minor child in the sorts of tasks that they normally perform, so that the children get real-world vocational exposure and the employed parent would be seen as a potential workforce multiplier by training additional apprentices in the field and possibly providing a more proficient future workforce.
If a sort of acceptance of vocational apprenticeship programs were implemented, I could see family size being asked for in job applications, number of children, age of children, and their prior experience or level of interest in addition to the parent’s own so the employer will know how many built-in interns may come with the hire.
I think that this would also potentially help some people be much more ready to enter the work force, as they would have years worth of apprenticeship in a field at the time of their first independent, non-apprenticeship job application.
Children were considered the primary means of providing for elderly parents, not government programs like Social Security; once upon a time, the default retirement plan was to live with one of your children in your old age in a three-generation household, ideally with a child that worked in a similar field as the parent and the retired parent would continue to assist with work and help with the children and other domestic work and the adult child would care for the elderly parent.
I think that it may help in the long run if, in addition to parents being incentivized to have more children, if children with dependent elderly parents also get tax breaks if their parent lives in the same home as their primary residence.
In addition to helping to strengthen family bonds, this would also soften the blow when the Social Security program inevitably collapses.
We would also need a cultural shift to show the good aspects of a three-generation household.
Another aspect impacting birth rate is the prevalence of dual-income families (both parents working). Now, having said that, I do NOT think it is an appropriate solution to in any way inhibit women from entering the labor force, however, it may be worth considering how the main argument against UBI (Universal Basic Income) could be used to natually address this problem. What if we had a version of UBI that is given to stay-at-home parents, possibly with a bonus for homeschooling parents who do not work outside the home? The primary argument against UBI is that it incentivizes people to not find work, but in this case, that may be quite good for birth rates. It would apply to either mothers or fathers who do not work outside the home so long as the other parent does work outside the home; in practice, this would usually apply to mothers, since culturally, more women have strong desires to be the primary care-giver to their children. Incentivizing single-working households over dual-working households will have the downstream effect of increasing demand for labor, which will drive up wages so that the working parent will be able to provide for the family on their income alone. It will take time for that to come to fruition, but, in the meantime, the UBI-style incentive for being a non-working parent married to a working parent will soften the economic blow.
There may be a be other good ways to incentivize single-working households, but I think that this has potential.