New York

The problem of offshore tax avoidance by American corporations could grow much worse under President Donald Trump’s proposal to adopt a “territorial” tax system, which would exempt the offshore profits of American corporations from U.S. taxes. This change would increase the already substantial benefits American corporations obtain when they use accounting gimmicks to make their profits appear to be earned in a foreign country that has no corporate income tax or has one that is extremely low or easy to avoid.

This week, Oklahoma lawmakers learned they'll need to enter a special session to balance their budget and that they'll likely face a lawsuit over their low funding of public education. Pennsylvania's budget stalemate is also coming to a head as the state literally runs out of funds to pay its bills. And Amazon's tax practices are in the news again as the company has been sued in South Carolina.

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.

A tiny fraction of the New York population (0.6 percent) earns more than $1 million annually. But this elite group would receive 57.9 percent of the tax cuts that go to New York residents under the tax proposals from the Trump administration. A much larger group, 44.8 percent of the state, earns less than $45,000, but would receive just 3.6 percent of the tax cuts.

This week, Rhode Island lawmakers agreed on a budget, leaving only three states – Connecticut, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin – without complete budgets. Texas, however, remains in special session and West Virginia could go back into another special session over tax issues. And in New York City, the mayor proposes a tax on the wealthy to […]

Not only would President Trump’s proposed tax plan fail to deliver on its promise of largely helping middle-class taxpayers, it also would shower a disproportionate share of the total tax cut on taxpayers in some of the richest states while southern and a few other states would receive a smaller share of the tax cut […]

Earlier this year, the Trump administration released some broadly outlined proposals to overhaul the federal tax code. Households in New York would not benefit equally from these proposals. The richest one percent of the state’s taxpayers are projected to make an average income of $3,234,000 in 2018. They would receive 66.9 percent of the tax cuts that go to New York’s residents and would enjoy an average cut of $176,680 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.

Sales taxes are an important revenue source, composing close to half of all state tax revenues. But sales taxes are also inherently regressive because the lower a family’s income, the more the family must spend on goods and services subject to the tax. Lawmakers in many states have enacted “sales tax holidays” (at least 16 states will hold them in 2017), to provide a temporary break on paying the tax on purchases of clothing, school supplies, and other items. While these holidays may seem to lessen the regressive impacts of the sales tax, their benefits are minimal. This policy brief…

The Trump Administration recently released its proposed budget for Fiscal Year 2018. The administration claims that its proposals would reduce the deficit in nearly every year over the next decade before eventually achieving a balanced budget in 2027, but the assumptions it uses to reach this conclusion are deeply flawed. This report explains these flaws and their consequences for the debate over major federal tax changes.

The Congressional Budget Office today released its score of the Senate Health Care proposal and the news is not good. It’s no wonder a narrow group of 13 lawmakers cobbled together the bill behind closed doors. Now that the measure has seen the light of day, we know that it epitomizes Robin Hood in reverse policies by snatching health coverage from 22 million people by 2026 (15 million in 2018) while showering tax cuts on the already wealthy.

Congressional Republicans’ plans to repeal the two largest tax increases on individuals that were enacted as part of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) would disproportionately benefit residents of Connecticut, New York, the District of Columbia and 10 other states. The remaining states would receive a share of the tax cuts that is less than their share of the total U.S. population.

Steve is ITEP’s director of federal tax policy. In this role, he is responsible for setting the organization’s federal research and policy agenda. He is the author of numerous reports and analyses of federal tax policies as well as in-depth policy briefs that outline how the federal income tax and corporate tax code can be overhauled to improve tax fairness.

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 saw a springtime mix of state tax debates in all stages of life. In West Virginia and Louisiana, debates over income tax reductions and comprehensive tax reform are full of vigor. Other debates that bloomed earlier are now settled, such as Florida‘s now-complete budget debate and the more florid debates over gas taxes […]

Nor do they jibe with his and his presidential transition team’s guarantee that there wouldn’t be a big tax cut for wealthy people — now-Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin promised on CNBC in late November that “there will be no absolute tax cut for the upper class” — or how it would be paid for. Trump […]

The trend is clear: states are experiencing a rapid decline in state corporate income tax revenue. Despite rebounding and even booming bottom lines for many corporations, this downward trend has become increasingly apparent in recent years. Since our last analysis of these data, in 2014, the state effective corporate tax rate paid by profitable Fortune 500 corporations has declined, dropping from 3.1 percent to 2.9 percent of their U.S. profits. A number of factors are driving this decline, including: a race to the bottom by states providing significant “incentives” for specific companies to relocate or stay put; blatant manipulation of…