Independent journalist Jeff Bryant points out that there’s one more wrinkle in the federal voucher program– the possible directing of money to groups like Primavera Capital, a group with ties to the Chinese government.
While concerns about Primavera’s ties to the Chinese Communist Party prompted conservatives to curtail the firm’s access to funds for public education, the Trump administration has opened the door to another potential pot of public money.
Included in the One Big Beautiful Bill that Trump called for, and Republican lawmakers in Congress passed in 2025, was a provision establishing the first-ever federal school voucher program, known as the Educational Choice for Children Act(ECCA). Beginning in 2027, this tax-credit program allows individuals to receive up to a $1,700 annual, dollar-for-dollar, federal tax credit for donations to state-licensed school voucher providers, called scholarship granting organizations (SGOs).
After SGOs receive donor funds, they cream some money off the top for administration and then give what’s left to families to pay for education expenses. Although formal guidelines are yet to be finalized, the law as written gives families broad leeway about what constitutes education expenses, which may include private school tuition, homeschool expenses, tutoring, transportation services, before- and after-school programs, and summer camp. Trump’s Department of Education calls this initiative “Education Freedom Tax Credit (EFTC).”
Florida was among the first states to opt into the voucher program, declaring, in a January 2026 announcement from the governor’s office, “The newly enacted federal Education Freedom Tax Credit is an opportunity to further support education freedom.”
Other Republican-led states joined Florida in opting into the program, and even some blue states have signed up, including Colorado and Virginia. Other states have been more skeptical of the program. In North Carolina, for instance, the state legislature voted to opt in, but the state’s democratic governor vetoed the legislation. Governors in both red and blue states in favor of adopting the program, such as outgoing Colorado Governor Jared Polis, have argued that the federal vouchers are “free money” that shouldn’t be turned down.
What’s largely been left out of the discussion is how the new federal voucher program may undermine state control over existing voucher funding. In states that have rejected voucher programs, the federal program provides another way for school choice advocates to pry open the market. Meanwhile, for states with current voucher programs that include some regulatory control, the new federal voucher program may provide a workaround for education merchants to find new inroads to public money.
“We know that not only is this a voucher scheme,” said Education Law Center’s litigation director Jessica Levin in an email, “but the aim of it is to expand vouchers nationwide, including into states that have repeatedly rejected voucher programs.”
For instance, while North Carolina’s state regulations block Spring Education Group’s private preschools from receiving public money, the federal voucher program offers a workaround because the voucher money it dispenses can be used to pay for things like after-school programs and summer camps that Spring Education Group preschools operate in the Tar Heel State.
In Texas and Florida, lawmakers who are kicking Islamic schools out of their state voucher programs over claims that the schools are linked to “terrorists” may find that opting into the federal voucher program will help these schools access public tax dollars.
Because companies that provide tutoring services, like Tutor.com, may also be allowed to receive money from the federal voucher program, conservatives who have railed against Tutor.com’s connection to Primavera Capital and the Chinese government may see even more public funds going to these enterprises via the federal program. Yet, after Arkansas Senator Cotton raised an alarm about Tutor.com, there’s no evidence on record that he has objected to his state’s decision to take part in the federal voucher program.
“Until the Treasury Department issues regulations,” said Levin, “we don’t know what leeway states will have to regulate the federal voucher program. So it doesn’t make sense for states wondering about that to opt in before the federal regulations are even proposed. However, based on the late 2025 request for comment documents from IRS/Treasury and the policies of the Trump administration regarding education privatization, it’s likely those regulations will be designed to provide little or no leeway for states to place restrictions on the SGOs that will hand out the vouchers.”