The expansion of school "choice" (i.e., voucher) programs, which provide taxpayer-financed subsidies for families enrolling students in private schools, has prompted a debate about their fiscal impact. A recent EdChoice report argues that these subsidies of private school costs save taxpayers money when--as is typically the case--the per-pupil cost of the subsidies is less than the average per-pupil spending of public schools. However, the report's estimation of the number of students likely incentivized by vouchers to switch from public to private--as opposed to students who use the vouchers to subsidize a private-school education that they would avail themselves of even without the voucher--is wholly invalid. The report also fails to apprehend that private and public schools serve different students, with public schools enrolling more students with specific educational needs that drive up costs. In addition, the report's methodological assumptions are fatally flawed; consequently, it almost certainly underestimates the true costs of "choice" programs. Ultimately, the report's lack of empirical evidence, reliance on poorly formed theories, and slapdash methods render it useless to policymakers.