The tax loophole benefited mainly white workers while legal discrimination persisted.

Evidence

Nevertheless, when Mr. Snyder made his remarks before Congress, it was still legal to discriminate against black Americans in education, housing, public spaces, and many jobs. We did not have Brown v. Board of Education, the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Voting Rights Act of 1965, or the Fair Housing Act of 1968. The workers who needed to sell their homes and follow defense industry jobs—the workers who were being hired and would benefit from this new tax loophole—were mainly white and able to build more wealth as a result of this new policy. — Dorothy A. Brown, Getting to Reparations, 1249

Categorization

• XREF: Shows temporal overlap between a race-neutral-looking subsidy and legally sanctioned exclusion—a key rebuttal point for defenders who argue the subsidy itself wasn’t racist on its face.