Minnesota

The Senate tax bill released last week would raise taxes on some families while bestowing immense benefits on wealthy Americans and foreign investors. In Minnesota, 47 percent of the federal tax cuts would go to the richest 5 percent of residents, and 15 percent of households would face a tax increase, once the bill is fully implemented.

The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, which was introduced on November 2 in the House of Representatives, includes some provisions that raise taxes and some that cut taxes, so the net effect for any particular family’s federal tax bill depends on their situation. Some of the provisions that benefit the middle class — like lower tax rates, an increased standard deduction, and a $300 tax credit for each adult in a household — are designed to expire or become less generous over time. Some of the provisions that benefit the wealthy, such as the reduction and eventual repeal of the estate…

The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, which was introduced on Nov. 2 in the House of Representatives, would raise taxes on some Americans and cut taxes on others while also providing significant savings to foreign investors.

Lawmakers who support reducing or eliminating state personal income taxes typically claim that doing so will spur economic growth. Often, this claim is accompanied by the assertion that states without income taxes are booming, and that their success could be replicated by any state that abandons its income tax. To help evaluate these arguments, this study compares the economic performance of the nine states without broad-based personal income taxes to their mirror opposites—the nine states levying the highest top marginal personal income tax rates throughout the last decade.

Ballot initiatives relating to taxes made news around the country this week, with Oregon voters to consider reversing new health care taxes, Washingtonians to vote on improving education funding, and Nebraskans to potentially vote on a state tax credit for school property taxes. Meanwhile, multiple states are finalizing their proposals to lure Amazon to build a new headquarters in their state, often through the use of massive tax subsidies. And in our "What We're Reading" section we have sobering news from Moody's Investors Service on states' struggles to fund their infrastructure and save for the next recession.

This week, Kansas's school funding was again ruled unconstitutionally low and unfair, while Montana lawmakers indicated they'd rather let historic wildfires burn a hole through their budget than raise revenues to meet their funding needs. Meanwhile, a struggling agricultural sector continues to cause problems for Iowa and Nebraska, but legalized recreational marijuana is bringing good economic news to both California and Nevada.

The “tax reform framework” released by the Trump administration and Congressional Republican leaders on September 27 would affect states differently, but every state would see its richest residents grow richer if it is enacted. In all but a handful of states, at least half of the tax cuts would flow to the richest one percent of residents if the framework took effect.

The “tax reform framework” released by the Trump administration and congressional Republican leaders on September 27 would not benefit everyone in Minnesota equally. The richest one percent of Minnesota residents would receive 62.2 percent of the tax cuts within the state under the framework in 2018. These households are projected to have an income of at least $632,000 next year. The framework would provide them an average tax cut of $65,780 in 2018, which would increase their income by an average of 2.5 percent.

The U.S. Census Bureau released its annual data on income, poverty and health insurance coverage this week. For the second consecutive year, the national poverty rate declined and the well-being of America’s most economically vulnerable has generally improved. In 2016, the year of the latest available data, 40.6 million (or nearly 1 in 8) Americans were living in poverty.

Astonishingly, tax policies in virtually every state make it harder for those living in poverty to make ends meet. When all the taxes imposed by state and local governments are taken into account, every state imposes higher effective tax rates on poor families than on the richest taxpayers.

This week, Pennsylvania lawmakers risk defaulting on payments due to their extremely overdue budget and Illinois legislators will borrow billions to start paying their backlog of unpaid bills. Governing delves into why there were more such budget impasses this year than in any year in recent memory. And Oklahoma got closure from its Supreme Court on whether closing special tax exemptions counts as "raising taxes" (it doesn't).

State lawmakers seeking to make residential property taxes more affordable have two broad options: across-the-board tax cuts for taxpayers at all income levels, such as a homestead exemption or a tax cap, and targeted tax breaks that are given only to particular groups of low- and middle-income taxpayers. One such targeted program to reduce property taxes is called a “circuit breaker” because it protects taxpayers from a property tax “overload” just like an electric circuit breaker: when a property tax bill exceeds a certain percentage of a taxpayer’s income, the circuit breaker reduces property taxes in excess of this “overload”…

A tiny fraction of the Minnesota population (0.7 percent) earns more than $1 million annually. But this elite group would receive 46.6 percent of the tax cuts that go to Minnesota residents under the tax proposals from the Trump administration. A much larger group, 36.9 percent of the state, earns less than $45,000, but would receive just 5.0 percent of the tax cuts.

A tiny fraction of the U.S. population (one-half of one percent) earns more than $1 million annually. But in 2018 this elite group would receive 48.8 percent of the tax cuts proposed by the Trump administration. A much larger group, 44.6 percent of Americans, earn less than $45,000, but would receive just 4.4 percent of the tax cuts.

Unless the administration takes a radically different direction on tax reform from what it has already proposed, its tax plan would be a monumental giveaway to the top 1 percent. The wealthiest one percent of households would receive 61 percent of all the Trump tax breaks, and would receive an average of $145,400 in 2018 alone.

Earlier this year, the Trump administration released some broadly outlined proposals to overhaul the federal tax code. Households in Minnesota would not benefit equally from these proposals. The richest one percent of the state’s taxpayers are projected to make an average income of $2,589,800 in 2018. They would receive 50.8 percent of the tax cuts that go to Minnesota’s residents and would enjoy an average cut of $120,420 in 2018 alone.

The broadly outlined tax proposals released by the Trump administration would not benefit all taxpayers equally and they would not benefit all states equally either. Several states would receive a share of the total resulting tax cuts that is less than their share of the U.S. population. Of the dozen states receiving the least by this measure, seven are in the South. The others are New Mexico, Oregon, Maine, Idaho and Hawaii.

Supporters of creating a local personal income tax in Seattle are rightly concerned about the lopsided nature of their state’s tax code. In a 50-state study titled Who Pays?, produced using our microsimulation tax model, we found that Washington State’s tax system is the most regressive in the nation.

This week, special legislative sessions featuring tax and budget debates are underway or in the works in Kentucky, Minnesota, New Mexico, and West Virginia, as lawmakers are also running up against regular session deadlines in Illinois, Kansas, and Oklahoma. Meanwhile, a legislative study in Wyoming and an independent analysis in New Jersey are both calling for tax increases to overcome budget shortfalls.

This week, Kansas lawmakers continued work on fixing the fiscal mess created by tax cuts in recent years, as legislators in Louisiana, Minnesota, Oklahoma, and West Virginia attempted to wrap up difficult budget negotiations before their sessions come to an end, and Delaware lawmakers advanced a corporate tax increase as one piece of a plan to close that state's budget shortfall. Our "what we're reading" section this week is also packed with articles about state and local effects of the Trump budget, new 50-state research on property taxes, and more.

This week saw tax debates heat up in many states. Late-session discovered revenue shortfalls, for example, are creating friction in Delaware, New Jersey, and Oklahoma, while special sessions featuring tax debates continue in Louisiana, New Mexico, and West Virginia. Meanwhile the effort to revive Alaska's personal income tax has cooled off.

This week Alaska‘s House advanced a historic bill to reinstate an income tax in the state, Oklahoma‘s House voted to cancel a misguided tax cut “trigger,” West Virginia‘s governor colorfully vetoed his state’s budget, tax reform debate kicked off in Louisiana, and gas tax updates were considered in South Carolina and Tennessee, among other tax-related news […]