Carl Davis is the research director at ITEP, where he has worked since 2008. Carl works on a wide range of issues related to both state and federal tax policy. He has advised policymakers, researchers, and advocates on tax policy issues in nearly every state. Much of his work relates to the link between taxes and economic growth, and the shortcomings of dynamic scoring and supply-side economic theories.
A new talking point printed on the opinion page of The Wall Street Journal is proving irresistible to state lawmakers looking for an excuse to reduce or eliminate their states’ income taxes:
A new analysis by economist Art Laffer for the American Legislative Exchange Council finds that, from 2002 to 2012, 62% of the three million net new jobs in America were created in the nine states without an income tax, though these states account for only about 20% of the national population.
Idaho Governor Butch Otter and the state legislature are seriously considering repealing the personal property tax on business equipment. The governor claims that repealing the tax would help the state’s economy, but says that he is “painfully aware” that repeal would dramatically cut into the revenues that many local governments depend on to provide public services. 1 The tax generates $141 million in revenue every year for cities, counties, and public schools. As a result, the Governor says that he “can’t predict” whether lawmakers will be able to reach agreement on repealing the tax.
Arthur Laffer’s consulting firm–Arduin, Laffer & Moore Econometrics (ALME)–has released a report purporting to show that North Carolina could usher in an economic boom if it repeals its personal and corporate income taxes and replaces them primarily with a much larger sales tax. Prepared for the Civitas Institute, “More Jobs, Bigger Paychecks” relies on an economic analysis that is fundamentally flawed to the point of making it entirely useless.
Almost without exception, state lawmakers do not closely scrutinize special tax credits, exemptions, and other “tax expenditures” on a regular basis. A recent report by the Pew Center on the States found, for example, that half the states have done nothing even remotely rigorous in the last five years to determine if even a single one of their economic development tax incentives is working.
Lawmakers often provide targeted tax cuts to groups of individuals or corporations in the form of special tax breaks–including exemptions, deductions, exclusions, credits, deferrals, and preferential tax rates. These tax breaks have long been called “tax expenditures” because they are essentially government spending programs that happen to be administered through the tax code. However, tax expenditures are usually less visible than other types of public spending and are therefore harder for policymakers and the public to evaluate. This policy brief surveys the difficulties created by tax expenditures, and describes options for better integrating them into the normal budget process.
In the past half century, state lawmakers have explored a wide variety of approaches to scaling back property taxes. One such approach is the split roll property tax, also known as a classified property tax. Unlike a regular property tax system which taxes all types of real property at the same rate, a split roll property tax applies different tax rates to different types of property. This policy brief looks at the advantages and disadvantages of the split roll approach.
State lawmakers seeking to enact residential property tax relief have two broad options: across-the-board tax cuts for taxpayers at all income levels, and targeted tax breaks. More than 40 states have chosen to achieve across-the-board tax relief by providing a “homestead exemption.” This policy brief explains the workings of the homestead exemption and evaluates its strengths and weaknesses as a property tax relief strategy.