The payments, which began in July and were hundreds of dollars a month for most families, have assisted many American families in covering expenses such as food, rent, and child care. These payments have prevented millions of children from living in poverty and have boosted the US economy. However, this benefit, an extension of the child tax credit, is coming to an end just as a new wave of coronavirus cases is forcing people to stay home from work and potentially leading to more layoffs. Economists are concerned that the combination of expiring aid and increasing cases could slow down the economic recovery and cause significant hardship for families already struggling near the poverty line. Anna Lara, a mother of two in Huntington, West Virginia, expressed her anxiety about the situation, stating that it will be difficult next month and she is fearful of what lies ahead. Lara, 32, who lost her job during the pandemic, is finding it difficult to adjust to not having the extra assistance that helped her family make ends meet. She mentioned that the child benefit was crucial in reducing financial worries and providing a cushion for her family. The expiration of this assistance is just one of many benefits "cliffs" that Americans have faced as pandemic aid programs have come to an end, such as the Paycheck Protection Program which ended in March. Unemployment benefits stopped being provided in September, and in some states even earlier. The federal eviction moratorium came to an end over the summer. The final installment of stimulus payments was distributed to Americans in the spring. In comparison to those initiatives, the reduction in the child tax credit is relatively minor. The Treasury Department dispersed approximately $80 billion in payments over a six-month period through checks and direct deposits, providing up to $300 per child each month. The child benefit program, unlike many other pandemic response programs, was not meant to be temporary according to its supporters. It was approved by Congress as part of the American Rescue Plan for a single year, but many hoped it would continue due to its popularity. However, polls show a split public opinion on whether the program should be extended, with differences along party and age lines. The expanded tax credit did not convince Senator Joe Manchin, whose opinion was crucial, as he had concerns about the cost and structure of President Biden's climate, tax, and social policy bill. Without Manchin's support, the Build Back Better Act cannot move forward in the Senate. Supporters of the child benefit are disappointed by this setback, as the program has been shown to be highly successful in reducing child poverty and improving overall well-being. In the spring, Congress made three changes to the existing child tax credit. Firstly, they increased the maximum benefit to $3,600 per child from $2,000. Secondly, they started distributing the credit in monthly payments directly to recipients' bank accounts, making it more similar to children's allowances in Europe. Lastly, they extended the full benefit to millions who were previously ineligible due to low income, a change known as "full refundability." Poverty experts believe this change is crucial, as without it, a significant portion of children, including many Black, Hispanic, and children raised by single mothers, did not receive the full credit. Biden's proposal aimed to make the child tax credit provision permanent, as highlighted by Megan Curran from Columbia's Center on Poverty and Social Policy. The evidence shows that the policy is effectively reducing child poverty and food insufficiency. The expanded tax credit benefits not only low-income families but also those earning up to $150,000 annually, with even wealthier families eligible for the original $2,000 credit. Critics of the policy, such as Manchin, have argued that it doesn't make sense to provide assistance to families who are already financially stable. Some supporters of the credit would be willing to restrict it to wealthier households in order to continue providing it to those in need. Manchin has expressed doubts about giving cash payments without conditions and has raised concerns about recipients potentially using the money for drugs, as reported by The Wall Street Journal and confirmed by a source familiar with the conversation. However, a survey by the Census Bureau revealed that most recipients used the funds for necessities like food and clothing, with many also saving or paying off debt. Other surveys have shown similar outcomes. One of Manchin's constituents, Lara, received her first monthly check last year at the perfect time when her dishwasher had recently broken. The $550 a month from the federal government allowed her family to replace it. Lara, who has a 6-year-old daughter and a 3-year-old son, and whose partner earns around $40,000 annually, expressed that the family has always lived on the brink of need, never able to save enough for emergencies. The monthly child benefit helped them step back from the edge, enabling Lara to buy new shoes and a car seat for her daughter, stock up on sale laundry detergent, and fix her car's brakes. She commented on the lack of dash lights being on, which she found impressive. Some experts have raised concerns about the effectiveness of the policy, especially in the long run. Bruce D Meyer, an economist at the University of Chicago who focuses on poverty, suggested that while direct cash payments during the height of the pandemic were beneficial, a permanent policy of giving unconditional cash to parents could have unintended consequences. He and his colleagues recently released a working paper that suggests the child benefit may discourage work due to the elimination of work incentives that were previously part of the tax credit. Meyer explained that the initial goal was to provide cash to people in need during the pandemic, but now there are concerns about potential impacts on employment. According to him, it is important to focus on the long-term effects of the new child benefit, specifically its impact on labor supply. Some studies have shown that the benefit has not discouraged people from working and may actually encourage more people to work by making child care more affordable. Samuel Hammond from the Niskanen Center believes that the child benefit enables work and could have broader economic benefits, such as increasing consumer spending and creating jobs. This expansion is expected to have a greater impact in rural states with larger families and lower incomes. Some Republicans, like Sen. Roy Blunt of Missouri, believe that the expanded child tax credit has led to increased spending, contributing to inflation by giving people more money to spend during a strained supply chain. However, many economists do not think the tax credit has significantly impacted high inflation, as it is relatively small compared to the economy and previous pandemic aid. Chief economist Joe Brusuelas argues that the program is noninflationary as it is focused on necessities, not luxuries. Those benefitting from the tax credit argue that it helps them cope with rising prices for essentials like groceries, utilities, and gas, which strain their budgets. She mentioned that at the moment, both of her cars require fuel but she is unable to refuel them. However, she is not worried as she has groceries at home and her children can enjoy playing outdoors.