Senate Bill 106
Allowing an individual income tax deduction for certain amounts contributed by a divorced or legally separated parent to his or her child's college savings account or college tuition and expenses program and limiting the deduction that may be claimed by a married person who files separately
Topics: Divorce, Income tax: Deduction, Legislature: Tax Exemptions, Joint Survey Committee on, Marriage, Scholarships and loans
Stopped before the full Senate voted
The recommended passing it, but the full Senate never voted on it. To try again, a lawmaker would have to start a new bill.
-
Introduced, passed
Mar 11, 2009
-
Committee, passed
Approved
-
Senate vote, stopped here
Stopped here. The full Senate never voted on it.
-
Assembly vote, not reached
-
Governor, not reached
-
Law, not reached
Latest entry in the official record, Apr 28, 2010: “Failed to pass pursuant to ”
Following saves it on this device. New actions show on your Following page. You can also get updates in a feed reader.
Terms on this page
Committee
A small group of lawmakers that looks at a bill first. Most bills never leave committee.
Senate Joint Resolution 1
The session's calendar. Any bill not passed by its last voting day dies.
Official term: Failed to pass pursuant to SJR 1. More in the glossary
Legislative Reference Bureau
The Legislature's nonpartisan office that drafts bills and writes the summary at the top of each one.
Official term: LRB analysis. More in the glossary
Author
A lawmaker who formally puts a bill forward. The text itself is drafted by the Legislative Reference Bureau.
Official term: Author, coauthor. More in the glossary
Signed on in support
Lawmakers who back a bill without being one of its authors, often from the other chamber.
Official term: Cosponsor. More in the glossary
Cost estimate
A state agency's estimate of what a bill would cost or save.
Official term: Fiscal estimate. More in the glossary
Roll call
A vote where each lawmaker's yes or no is recorded by name.
Official term: Roll call vote. More in the glossary
What it would have done
Summary by the , the Legislature's nonpartisan drafting office. It's their wording, not ours.
Under current law, there is a college tuition and expenses program, commonly referred to as "EdVest I," under which a contributor may purchase "tuition units" that can be used to pay qualified educational costs on behalf of a beneficiary. The purchase of the units is limited to parents, grandparents, aunts, uncles, legal guardians, trusts created on behalf of a beneficiary, or individuals purchasing units for their own use. Contributions made to an account set up under the program, up to a limit of $3,000 each year for each beneficiary, may be deducted from a contributor's income in the calculation of his or her income taxes if the beneficiary of the account is one of the following: the claimant; the claimant's child and the claimant's dependent under the Internal Revenue Code; the claimant's grandchild;
the claimant's great-grandchild; or the claimant's niece or nephew.
Read the full summary Show less
Also, under current law, there exists a college savings program, commonly referred to as "EdVest II," under which anyone may open an account for a prospective student, regardless of the contributor's relationship to the beneficiary. Individuals may open accounts for themselves, and a prospective student may be the beneficiary of more than one college savings account. Contributions made to an account set up under the program, up to a limit of $3,000 each year for each beneficiary, may be deducted from a contributor's income in the calculation of his or her income taxes if the beneficiary of the account is one of the following: the claimant; the claimant's child and the claimant's dependent under the Internal Revenue Code; the claimant's grandchild; the claimant's great-grandchild; or the claimant's niece or nephew.
Under this bill, an income tax deduction for amounts contributed to both EdVest I and EdVest II may be claimed by a divorced or legally separated parent of a child. The deduction may be claimed without regard to whether the child is his or her dependent.
Currently, the total amount for which a deduction may be claimed under EdVest I and EdVest II, per beneficiary, by any claimant, may not exceed $3,000 each year and, in the case of a married couple filing a joint return, the total annual deduction under these two programs, per beneficiary, claimed by the married couple may not exceed $3,000.
Under the bill, the total annual deduction under these two programs, per beneficiary, claimed by married parents who file jointly or separately, or by the divorced or legally separated parents of a child, may not exceed $3,000. The total annual deduction under the bill, under these two programs, per beneficiary, claimed by a married person who files separately may not exceed $1,500 per claimant. The total annual deduction under the bill, under these two programs, per beneficiary, claimed by a formerly married couple may not exceed a total of $3,000, or $1,500 per claimant, except that the former couple's divorce judgment may specify a different division of the $3,000 maximum that may be claimed by each former spouse.
Because this bill relates to an exemption from state or local taxes, it may be referred to the Joint Survey Committee on Tax Exemptions for a report to be printed as an appendix to the bill.
Who's behind it
11 senators are its . 7 are Democrats and 4 are Republicans.
12 more lawmakers .
See all 23 names Hide the names
Authors (11)
- Alberta Darling · Republican, Senate
- Jon Erpenbach · Democrat, Senate
- Glenn Grothman · Republican, Senate
- Jim Holperin · Democrat, Senate
- Neal Kedzie · Republican, Senate
- Pat Kreitlow · Democrat, Senate
- Julie M. Lassa · Democrat, Senate
- John Lehman · Democrat, Senate
- Luther S. Olsen · Republican, Senate
- Jeffrey Plale · Democrat, Senate
- Lena Taylor · Democrat, Senate
Signed on in support (12)
- Terese Berceau · Democrat, Assembly
- Garey Bies · Republican, Assembly
- David Cullen · Democrat, Assembly
- Jason Fields · Democrat, Assembly
- Steve Kestell · Republican, Assembly
- Louis Molepske Jr. · Democrat, Assembly
- Steve Nass · Republican, Senate
- Sondy Pope · Democrat, Assembly
- Kelda Roys · Democrat, Senate
- Scott Suder · Republican, Assembly
- Robin Vos · Republican, Assembly
- Josh Zepnick · Democrat, Assembly
What it would cost
State agencies filed a . Each opens as a PDF from the Legislature.
Versions and amendments
Every text the Legislature printed for this bill, including proposed changes. Each opens on the Legislature's site.
How lawmakers voted
There were 2 votes on this bill.
Senate Committee on Veterans and Military Affairs vote on an amendment
Passed, 5 to 0 · May 11, 2009
No member-by-member record exists for this vote. Committee votes and some older sessions record totals only.
Official motion: “Report introduction of Senate Substitute Amendment 1 recommended by committee on Veterans and Military Affairs, Biotechnology, and Financial Institutions, Ayes 5, Noes 0 by committee on Veterans and Military Affairs, Biotechnology, and Financial Institutions”. Official record · This vote on its own page
Senate Committee on Veterans and Military Affairs vote on an amendment
Passed, 5 to 0 · May 11, 2009
No member-by-member record exists for this vote. Committee votes and some older sessions record totals only.
Official motion: “Report adoption of Senate Substitute Amendment 1 recommended by committee on Veterans and Military Affairs, Biotechnology, and Financial Institutions, Ayes 5, Noes 0”. Official record · This vote on its own page
What happened
-
Apr 28, 2010
The session ended, and the bill died with it.
-
May 12, 2009
Sent to the Joint Committee on Finance.
-
May 11, 2009
The committee voted to recommend passing it, 5 to 0.
-
May 11, 2009
“Report adoption of Senate Substitute Amendment 1 recommended by committee on Veterans and Military Affairs, Biotechnology, and Financial Institutions, Ayes 5, Noes 0” (the official wording)
-
May 11, 2009
“Report introduction of Senate Substitute Amendment 1 recommended by committee on Veterans and Military Affairs, Biotechnology, and Financial Institutions, Ayes 5, Noes 0 by committee on Veterans and Military Affairs, Biotechnology, and Financial Institutions” (the official wording)
-
Apr 1, 2009
The committee held a public hearing.
-
Mar 20, 2009
A state agency sent in its estimate of the cost.
-
Mar 11, 2009
Sent to the Senate Committee on Veterans and Military Affairs, Biotechnology, and Financial Institutions.
-
Mar 11, 2009
Introduced in the Senate.
See the official record, word for word Hide the official record
- Mar 11, 2009 · Senate
Introduced by Senators Lassa, Kreitlow, Taylor, Darling, Holperin, Lehman, Erpenbach, Plale, Grothman, Olsen and Kedzie;Cosponsored by Representatives Molepske Jr., Cullen, Roys, Suder, Berceau, Nass, Pope-Roberts, Bies, Vos, Zepnick, Kestell and Fields
- Mar 11, 2009 · Senate
Read first time and referred to committee on Veterans and Military Affairs, Biotechnology, and Financial Institutions
- Mar 20, 2009 · Senate
Fiscal estimate received
- Apr 1, 2009 · Senate
Public hearing held
- May 6, 2009 · Senate
Executive action taken
- May 11, 2009 · Senate
Report introduction of Senate Substitute Amendment 1 recommended by committee on Veterans and Military Affairs, Biotechnology, and Financial Institutions, Ayes 5, Noes 0 by committee on Veterans and Military Affairs, Biotechnology, and Financial Institutions
- May 11, 2009 · Senate
Report adoption of Senate Substitute Amendment 1 recommended by committee on Veterans and Military Affairs, Biotechnology, and Financial Institutions, Ayes 5, Noes 0
- May 11, 2009 · Senate
Report passage as amended recommended by committee on Veterans and Military Affairs, Biotechnology, and Financial Institutions, Ayes 5, Noes 0
- May 11, 2009 · Senate
Available for scheduling
- May 12, 2009 · Senate
Referred to joint committee on Finance by committee on Senate Organization, pursuant to Senate Rule 41 (1)(e), Ayes 5, Noes 0
- Apr 28, 2010 · Senate
Failed to pass pursuant to Senate Joint Resolution 1
Terms on this page
Committee
A small group of lawmakers that looks at a bill first. Most bills never leave committee.
Senate Joint Resolution 1
The session's calendar. Any bill not passed by its last voting day dies.
Official term: Failed to pass pursuant to SJR 1. More in the glossary
Legislative Reference Bureau
The Legislature's nonpartisan office that drafts bills and writes the summary at the top of each one.
Official term: LRB analysis. More in the glossary
Author
A lawmaker who formally puts a bill forward. The text itself is drafted by the Legislative Reference Bureau.
Official term: Author, coauthor. More in the glossary
Signed on in support
Lawmakers who back a bill without being one of its authors, often from the other chamber.
Official term: Cosponsor. More in the glossary
Cost estimate
A state agency's estimate of what a bill would cost or save.
Official term: Fiscal estimate. More in the glossary
Roll call
A vote where each lawmaker's yes or no is recorded by name.
Official term: Roll call vote. More in the glossary
From the Wisconsin Legislature's official record, checked Sep 15, 2026. See the source
Committee
A small group of lawmakers that looks at a bill first. Most bills never leave committee.
Senate Joint Resolution 1
The session's calendar. Any bill not passed by its last voting day dies.
Official term: Failed to pass pursuant to SJR 1
Legislative Reference Bureau
The Legislature's nonpartisan office that drafts bills and writes the summary at the top of each one.
Official term: LRB analysis
Signed on in support
Lawmakers who back a bill without being one of its authors, often from the other chamber.
Official term: Cosponsor
Cost estimate
A state agency's estimate of what a bill would cost or save.
Official term: Fiscal estimate
Roll call
A vote where each lawmaker's yes or no is recorded by name.
Official term: Roll call vote