Citations

The study finds that those in the bottom fifth of the income spectrum in Hawaii pay 15 percent of their income in state and local taxes, while those in the top 1 percent pay only 8.9 percent, “which exacerbates inequality in our state,” according to a press release about the study.

Guess what? Washington state’s taxation system continues to be one of the most regressive in the country. This news comes from the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy (ITEP), which did a deep dive into the taxation policies of all 50 states.

A modestly progressive income tax slightly offsets our regressive sales taxes. But Oklahoma lawmakers cut our top income tax rate by nearly 25 percent since 2004, further tipping the scales to the wealthiest households. Then while grappling with massive budget shortfalls caused in part by these tax cuts, lawmakers took aim at measures that primarily benefit low- and middle-income working families by making the state Earned Income Tax Credit non-refundable and freezing the state standard deduction, while leaving cuts to the top income tax rate in place.

Low-income residents in Hawaii are paying a higher share of their income in taxes than higher level earners. That is the conclusion of a recent report from the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy titled Who Pays? The Hawaii tax system is considered highly regressive, due to heavy reliance on the General Excise Tax, or GET. This is despite a progressive, graded state income tax and the lowest property taxes in the nation.

The Commonwealth once again claims its spot in the “Terrible 10” most unfair tax structures in the nation. The lowest 20% of income earners in the state pays more than double (2.3 times) their share of family income on state and local taxes than the top 1%.

A new report out from the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy (ITEP) provides the vital statistics for each state’s tax system. It lays out, in clear and compelling numbers, the sobering message that Hawaiʻi taxes—and those in the United States on average—increase inequality between rich and poor.

Florida’s unfair tax system, which forces low-income residents to contribute the most as a share of their household incomes, along with the state’s worst-in-the-nation per-person investment in public services, would be locked in under Amendment 5.

While Oklahoma has a reputation as a low tax state, poor and middle-income Oklahomans are actually paying a greater share of their income in taxes than the national average, while the richest 5 percent of households — with annual incomes of $194,500 or more — pay less.

Carl Davis for the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy: [ M]any states traditionally considered to be “low-tax states” are actually high-tax for their poorest residents. The “low tax” label is typically assigned to states that either lack a personal income tax or that collect a comparatively low amount of tax revenue overall. But a focus on these measures can cause lawmakers to overlook the fact that state tax systems impact different taxpayers in very different ways, and that low-income taxpayers in particular often do not experience these states as being even remotely “low tax.”

It follows that low- and middle-income Ohioans pay a higher share than the national average, and wealthy Ohioans pay a lower share. To a degree, that is expected in view of the vastly larger incomes of wealthy Ohioans. At the same time, the state would be well served by altering the shares to make the state and local system more fair, to reflect how new income in recent years, even decades, has flowed largely to households at the highest income rungs.

A study by the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy, a non-partisan think tank, found that a majority of New Jersey taxpayers in every income group will pay less taxes next year than they did in 2017 as a result of last year’s federal tax-code overhaul. The cap is expected to affect those in high-income brackets the most. Thousands of New Jersey homeowners rushed to prepay their 2018 taxes in December to take advantage of bigger deductions on their 2017 returns before the cap took effect.

Despite claims by the architects of North Carolina’s failed tax-cut experiment, policy choices since 2013 have not ensured that middle and low-income taxpayers are paying lower shares of their income in state and local taxes. Instead the richest taxpayers—whose average income is more than $1 million—continue to pay 33 percent less in state and local taxes as a share of their income than taxpayers who have averages incomes annually of $11,000, a threshold that aligns with deep poverty.

Low-income Idahoans were hit hardest by property and sales taxes, ITEP reported. The lowest-earning segment spent 3.3 percent of income on property tax and 6 percent of income on sales and excise taxes (the latter are sometimes known as “sin taxes”).

Oklahoma’s state and local taxes are among the most regressive in the country, according to a report released last week by the Institute on Taxation and Policy.

Study finds lower income Idahoans paying higher tax rates than those with higher incomes.

Here’s one way to think about it: Families at the top of the income ladder receive 20 percent of all personal income in Texas, but pay only 8.5 percent of all state and local taxes. Families at the bottom of the scale receive only three percent of all income, but pay 5.7 percent of all taxes.

Virginians who make the least amount of money pay 40 percent more taxes as a percent of their income than the wealthiest Virginians. That’s according to a new report from the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy, which says Virginia’s tax code is upside down.

WOWK TV - Sean O'Leary, of the West Virginia Center on Budget and Policy, talks to Mark Curtis about a new report that shows there's room improve West Virginia's upside-down tax system.

The Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy released a report showing how every state and the District of Columbia use tax policy in regressive and progressive ways. Their conclusion: all but five states and the District of Columbia have regressive systems, meaning they favor the wealthy over middle and/or low-income earners.