This week was very active for state tax debates. Georgia, Idaho, and Oregon passed bills reacting to the federal tax cut, as Maryland and other states made headway on their own responses. Florida lawmakers sent a harmful "supermajority" constitutional amendment to voters. New Jersey now has two progressive revenue raising proposals on the table (and a need for both). Louisiana ended one special session with talks of yet another. And online sales taxes continued to make news nationally and in Kansas, Nebraska, and Pennsylvania.
March 5, 2018 • By Dylan Grundman O'Neill
Over the next few weeks we will be blogging about what we’re watching in state tax policy during 2018 legislative sessions. And there is no trend more pervasive in states this year than the need to sort through and react to the state-level impact of federal tax changes enacted late last year.
March 2, 2018 • By Aidan Davis
Corporate America is doing alright. Corporate profits soared last year, and 2018 has already brought a major windfall in the form of the Trump-GOP tax law, which dramatically cut the federal corporate tax rate from 35 percent to 21 percent and shifted to a territorial tax system, giving income earned offshore by U.S. companies a free pass by no longer making it subject to U.S. taxes.
February 28, 2018 • By ITEP Staff
February may be the shortest month but it has been a long one for state lawmakers. This week saw Arizona, Idaho, Oregon, and Utah seemingly approaching final decisions on how to respond to the federal tax-cut bill, while a bill that appeared cleared for take-off in Georgia hit some unexpected turbulence. Other states are still studying what the federal bill means for them, and many more continue to debate tax and budget proposals independently of the federal changes. And be sure to check our "What We're Reading" section for news on corporate tax credits from multiple states.
February 23, 2018 • By Ronald Mak
When Republican leaders rushed through an overhaul to the federal tax code over a seven-week legislative period, they failed to acknowledge that many provisions in their bill would have negative consequences for states. One such provision of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act that undermines state laws is the expansion of federal tax breaks that now allows taxpayers to use 529 savings plans to pay for private K-12 education.
February 23, 2018 • By Ronald Mak
This policy brief explains the federal and various state-level breaks for 529 plans and explores the potential impact that the change in federal treatment of 529 plans will have on state revenues.
This week, major tax packages relating to the federal tax-cut bill made news in Georgia, Iowa, and Louisiana, as Minnesota and Oregon lawmakers also continue to work out how their states will be affected. New Mexico's legislative session has finished without significant tax changes, while Idaho and Illinois's sessions are beginning to heat up, and Vermont's school funding system is under the microscope.
Any politician can score points by railing against President Trump and his wildly unfair, loophole-ridden tax law. But if New York’s working people find out they will be subjected to a new and complicated set of state tax rules all to help the richest 5 percent, they’ll wonder why a better solution that targets corporations and high-income earners who just received a sizable federal tax break, was not found. In the wake of the Trump-GOP tax law, this is a missed opportunity for lawmakers in New York to increase taxes on those who just benefited from a substantial tax cut.
Two narratives that intentionally obscure who benefits from the tax law are emerging. One focuses on the personal income tax cuts that will result in an increase in net take-home pay for many employees once their employers adjust withholding. Anecdotes abound of working people getting a $100 or more increase, after taxes, per paycheck, but the reality is that most workers will receive a lot less than that. Meanwhile, the wealthiest 1 percent of households will receive an average annual tax break of $55,000, an amount that nearly eclipses the nation’s median household income.
February 15, 2018 • By Matthew Gardner
When President Trump released the initial outline of his tax reform plan in April, carried interest repeal was nowhere to be found. And when Congress hammered out a tax plan in late December, lawmakers agreed to reduce the cost of the carried interest tax provision by about 5 percent. (Full repeal would have raised $20 billion over a decade; the enacted provision raises about $1 billion.)