and decision-making patterns, which we do not have. The same applies to income data from EU-SILC. Therefore, allocating at the individual level requires significant assumptions. In our case, we assume adult equivalence scales. Given the strong assumption, we also conduct the analysis at the household level. We transition our focus away from exclusively examining child poverty to encompass a broader perspective that considers poverty within households where children reside. This shift allows us to explore and understand the dynamics of poverty within the context of families and households, taking into account not only the well-being of children but also the overall economic and social circumstances of the entire household unit. By adopting this broader perspective, we aim to gain a more comprehensive understanding of the complexities and interdependencies that shape poverty experiences in households with children.

**This paper contributes to the existing literature on fiscal incidence for children by proposing an approach where households are categorized based on their demographic characteristics; these household profiles allow us to assess the unique challenges and vulnerabilities faced by this demographic group before and after fiscal policy, and design targeted policies or interventions to address their specific needs.** We extend the standard CEQ methodology by constructing household typologies based on sociodemographic profiles. These household typologies and information on quintiles provide a helpful picture of the differential impact of tax/transfer systems on poverty among households with different sociodemographic profiles.  For example, we can identify that some groups of Bulgarian households with children remain vulnerable and do not necessarily receive sufficient support from fiscal policy. These are households that deserve more attention from a social policy standpoint. This fundamental policy question cannot be answered, lacking typologies. Finally, because the household categories are shared across a broad range of countries, this methodology can be easily replicated by analysts and policymakers interested in gaining a more accurate picture of tax incidence. This approach has been recently used in the recent gendered fiscal incidence literature (Robayo-Abril et al., 2023; Greenspun, 2019; Grown and Valodia, 2010).

**We created four household profiles to analyze the impact of fiscal policy on poverty.** We create household profiles for those categories showing higher child poverty vulnerability in Bulgaria and other countries  (See Hallaert, J. et al., 2023). The first profile compares households with children to households without children, with an additional category interacting with households with and without the elderly. This particular category is of significant importance due to the heightened vulnerability of older adults to the risk of poverty and the increasingly aging population. The second profile compares households with different number of children. The third profile compares households with single parents to households with two parents, including a distinction between lone female and male parents. The fourth profile compares households with children of different ages.

**This paper starts revisiting the overall impact of the fiscal system on poverty and inequality in 2020 and the progressivity and poverty and inequality reduction of each fiscal intervention. Then, it will examine the role of age in fiscal incidence using children as a unit of analysis, reflecting the different income and expenditure needs of a household of different sizes and compositions.** This provides a useful childspecific lens on the equity analysis of public finance to understand the impact of fiscal policy on child poverty. This section of the analysis aims to answer the following questions:

- (i) How progressive/regressive is the current tax and transfer system, and how can they contribute to reducing child poverty?

17