The following is public comment submitted by the National Microschooling Center regarding microschools and their eligibility for federal tax credit scholarships.
The following public comment submission is in response to Notice 2025-70.
The notice states, “Comments detailing factual situations that differ from those addressed in this notice, and the application of the statute to these factual situations, would be especially helpful…” The following comments are intended for this purpose.
The authorizing statute’ssection 25F(c)(4) defines a qualified elementary or secondary education expense as any expense described in § 530(b)(3)(A), by reference defining these expenses as, “to include certain expenses incurred at, required by, or provided by a public, private, or religious school.”
Further, the applicable statutory definition in the referenced legislation stipulates, “The term ‘school’ means any school which provides elementary education or secondary education (kindergarten through grade 12), as determined under state law.”
About Microschools
Microschools are widely understood to be innovative small learning environments which serve school-aged children from more than one family or household. They currently operate in all fifty states in full compliance with federal and state laws.
Only a small number of states, including West Virginia and Utah, have passed such definitions for purposes of identifying allowable uses for state funds or for providing local officials with guidance for zoning, business licenses or other functions.
Because education is generally governed at the state level in this country, each state’s statutory and regulatory frameworks, within which microschools must fit to be able to operate, contain different requirements for different categories of school. These frameworks vary widely to the point that no two are quite the same.
Microschooling is also widely recognized as a fast-evolving sector, with innovative new models regularly emerging which represent entirely new possibilities for the teaching and learning available within the communities they operate.
Today’s microschooling movement is highly diversified in the many different, often unique, models they operate. Many of these models are innovative and nontraditional small learning environments, which have proven quite popular with families of widely varying circumstances themselves, would not be viable and could likely not be possible or affordable for working families within the communities they operate without the important flexibilities afforded them within their state. These would seem to fall squarely within the kinds of educational options Congressional lawmakers intended to include in creating this program, as do the following examples:
In many states, including Mississippi and Arizona, operating as a private school does not require any official state approval or licensing. Sometimes these states offer private schools an option to apply for approval as a “chartered” or “accredited” private school, but this is entirely optional and many excellent small private schools have operated successfully for many years without seeking state approval.
West Virginia microschools, for instance, can fall within several categories in state law under which their families are still eligible to use state Hope Scholarship funds for tuition in their microschool.
In many states, including Arizona and Florida, it is common for microschools to serve families who follow their states’ homeschooling requirements, families utilizing their microschool as a private school, and various types of hybrid arrangements blending different elements and modalities of the teaching and learning experience.
According to 2025 research published by the National Microschooling Center, more than half (54 percent) of microschool founders nationally are currently or formerly licensed public school educators. These founders establish their microschools using models and structures, guided by their assessment as experienced professionals, they feel best serve the needs of the children and families they serve. I would strongly suggest that these microschools fall within the statutory definition selected by lawmakers for this program.
Additionally, in light of the factual situations presented above, it seems it would be inappropriate, and outside the parameters of the federal law currently being considered, to use its authority to create new barriers for participation in this federal scholarship tax credit program, or that might constrain microschools’ ability to serve children within or outside of this program. This includes the introduction of such barriers at either the federal level or by government officials in state opting to participate.
It would also be highly inappropriate and contrary to legislative intent to seek to establish definitions for microschools, and for what does or does not constitute a microschool, for which the industry itself has no consensus, as part of the executive branch’s implementation of this legislation.
Thank you for your consideration.