EDMONTON - A federal tax credit aimed at getting children off the couch and into organized sports is mainly benefiting families who can already afford to sign their kids up, says a study from the University of Alberta.
The children's fitness tax credit does little to remove barriers for children from lower-income homes and the government should instead consider subsidizing community groups that have fitness programs aimed at children from poorer neighbourhoods, the study argues.
Parents who claim the tax credit can receive annual savings of up to $75 per child.
But few low-income families have the money to put their children in activities such as hockey or dance classes, which would allow parents to claim the credit, said John Spence, an associate professor and associate dean of research in the university's Faculty of Education.
"This credit right now we're arguing is not equitable," Spence said in an interview Wednesday. "Some segments of society do not benefit or can't claim this credit or they can't afford to spend the money which then allows them to benefit from the credit."
Between March 3 and March 6, 2009, Spence and co-authors Dr. Nicholas Holt, Julia Dutove and Valerie Carson used an online survey of 2,135 respondents to reach their conclusions. Out of those, 1,004 were parents with children between two and 18 years old.
The study, published last month in the journal BMC Public Health, found that more than 28 per cent of parents with lowest incomes said they claimed the tax credit for the 2007 tax year, compared with 55 per cent of those with highest incomes.
About 63 per cent of parents from low-income households reported spending less than $100 on registration for physical activity programs, while 76 per cent of parents with high incomes reported spending at least $500.
The survey of 1,004 parents is considered accurate to within 3.1 percentage points, 19 times out of 20.
"These findings are in contrast to the Government of Canada's objective that parents from 'different circumstances' have equitable opportunity to benefit from the (credit)," the authors wrote.
More needs to be done to promote physical fitness in children from poorer families because they have higher rates of obesity and that can affect overall health costs to the rest of society, Spence said.
Federal studies have demonstrated that children from lower-income homes are less likely to be involved in organized sports, mainly because their families don't have the kind of disposable cash that middle and upper-income homes do, he said.
"If the tax credit is being presented as one solution to address that, to narrow that gap, then it's not going to be effective ... especially for those who need it the most."
No one in the federal Finance Department was immediately available for comment, but an official in Finance Minister, Jim Flaherty's office, wrote in an email that the study's results don't match up with figures from Canada Revenue Agency.
According to the federal agency, about 1.4 million families claim the tax credit each year and 40 per cent of those had incomes below $50,000 per year, wrote Annette Robertson.
Only about 18 per cent of the claims were made by families with incomes over $100,000, she said. Between 2007 and 2008, the first two years the tax credit was offered, the number of claims went up by 13 per cent. That suggests there is a learning curve as families become aware of new measures, she said.
Nova Scotia, which offers a $500 tax credit for each child up to 17 involved in a fitness program offered by a community organization, could serve as a model for a revamped federal program, Spence argued.
Those organizations could be subsidized by the federal government, depending on how many children are active in each group. Municipalities, and organizations such as the Boys and Girls Club of Canada and KidSport Canada could benefit from that approach, Spence said.
"Those are not sponsored by the federal government. If (Ottawa) could throw them a bone, so to speak, then it would be more equitable."
Tax credits and subsidies alone won't remove all the barriers to physical activity for lower-income families because there are other costs, such as equipment and transportation, that prevent them from taking part, Spence noted.
But that shouldn't remove the federal government's responsibility to make such programs more equitable and effective, he said.
"If you're giving any break at all to families, why are you only giving that break to families who may not even need that break?"
