Research Findings: Research with older children and adults reliably demonstrates that individuals raised in poverty tend to evaluate concerns related to moral concerns (i.e., related to harm, welfare, and justice) differently than do wealthier individuals. However, little work has examined these patterns in young children. Children (N=214, Mage = 53.30 months, SD = 18.3 months) completed tasks regarding accidental and prototypic moral transgressions, and a standard verbal assessment. Parents reported family size and household income, which were used to compute individuals' income-to-needs ratio (INR) compared to federal standards. Using generalized linear mixed modeling (GLMM), a repeated-measure analysis, results indicate that children in low-income families (INR < 2.0) were more lenient in how they evaluate both accidental and prototypic issues, compared to more affluent children. Moreover, they were more likely to evaluate issues based on communal welfare (e.g., equitable resource distribution), whereas more affluent children were more likely to reference psychological harm. Practice or Policy: Practitioners and researchers of early childhood should be cognizant and sensitive to differences in children's social understanding. We encourage scholars to use a strength-based, adaptive approach in future research on children's cognition, particularly involving SES, class, and the like.