Personal Income Taxes

These forward-thinking states are demonstrating the wide variety of options for policymakers who want to raise more from the wealthiest people, rein in corporate tax avoidance, create fair tax codes and build strong communities.  

Governors and legislative leaders in a dozen states have made calls to fully eliminate their taxes on personal or corporate income, after many states already deeply slashed them over the past few years. The public deserves to know the true impact of these plans, which would inevitably result in an outsized windfall to states’ richest taxpayers, more power in the hands of wealthy households and corporations, extreme cuts to basic public services, and more deeply inequitable state tax codes.

Some states have improved tax equity by raising new revenue from the well-off and creating or expanding refundable tax credits for low- and moderate-income families in recent years. Others, however, have gone the opposite direction, pushing through deep and damaging tax cuts that disproportionately help the rich. Many of these negative developments are quantified in […]

The governors of both Kansas and Wisconsin recently stood up to legislators who tried to push through costly tax cuts that would overwhelmingly benefit the most well-off. Lawmakers in those states and others should shift their focus from expensive, top-heavy tax cuts to tried and true policies that help middle-class and low-income families.

While many state lawmakers have spent the past few years debating deep and damaging tax cuts that disproportionately help the rich, more forward-thinking lawmakers have improved tax equity by raising new revenue from the well-off and creating or expanding refundable tax credits for low- and moderate-income families.

It’s hard to go a week without seeing a politician or a news article hype up a state as the place that everyone is moving to – or should move to – because of low taxes. However, there’s a big problem with these proclamations: they aren’t true.  

Updated July 15, 2024 In 2024, state lawmakers have a choice: advance tax policy that improves equity and helps communities thrive, or push tax policies that disproportionately benefit the wealthy, drain funding for critical public services, and make it harder for low-income and working families to get ahead. Despite worsening state fiscal conditions, we expect […]

Last week, both houses of the Kansas legislature approved a significant tax cut centered around replacing the state’s graduated rate income tax structure with a flat tax instead. The bulk of this would flow to upper-income families, mostly through lowering the state’s top income tax rate from 5.7 to 5.25 percent. This tax cut would […]

Three states allow an unusual income tax deduction for federal income taxes paid. Missouri and Oregon limit these deductions by capping and/or phasing out the deduction, while Alabama, offers what amounts to an unlimited deduction. These deductions are detrimental to state income tax systems on many fronts, as they offer large benefits to high-income earners […]

Meaningful investments in Indiana’s future require a smart, and fair, tax code that recognizes current economic realities and can raise a sustainable stream of funding  from those most able to pay.

Nearly one-third of states took steps to improve their tax systems this year by investing in people through refundable tax credits, and in a few notable cases by raising revenue from those most able to pay. But another third of states lost ground, continuing a trend of permanent tax cuts that overwhelmingly benefit high-income households and make tax codes less adequate and equitable.

Minnesota’s House, Senate and Governor’s office have each proposed their own vision as to how the state should maximize its $17.5 billion surplus and raise new revenue, and these tax plans make one thing clear: Minnesota lawmakers are serious about using tax policy to advance tax equity and improve the lives of Minnesotans.

Kansas lawmakers failed to override Gov. Laura Kelly’s veto of a damaging flat tax package. In doing so, the state narrowly avoided traveling again down the same disastrous yet well-worn path of deep income tax cuts. States across the country can learn from Kansas’s experience by rethinking tax policy decisions and broader statewide priorities.

As Tax Day approaches, it’s worth thinking about not only the taxes that we individually pay but the overall condition of our tax code as well. State tax codes, while perhaps less discussed than the federal system, are critically important. Depending on how they are designed, state taxes can improve or worsen economic and racial […]

Minnesota lawmakers are considering a carveout that would treat seniors much more favorably than young families. The proposal would fully exempt all Social Security income from state income tax, even for seniors with exceptionally high incomes.

Under a well-designed income tax based on ability to pay, it is simply not necessary to offer special tax subsidies to older adults but not younger families. At the end of the day, your income tax bill should depend on what you can afford to pay, not the year you were born. It’s really as simple as that.

The flat tax plan and others being discussed that would cut even deeper would be windfalls for the wealthy, and expensive ones at that. Families with incomes over $300,000 per year, for example, could expect to gain, as a group, about a billion dollars annually under the flat tax plan. If you asked Ohio families about their top priorities for this legislative session, it’s a safe bet that very few of them would choose a billion-dollar tax cut for this group over funding for schools, parks, and infrastructure.

The word “tax” appears 97 times and counting in one recent summary of governors’ addresses to state legislators so far this year. The policy visions that governors are bringing, however, vary enormously. While there's good reason to worry about tax cuts for wealthy families and the flattening or elimination of income taxes, there are at least five great tax ideas coming directly out of governors’ offices this year.

With fears of gridlock in a divided Washington, tax justice champions are building momentum in other places where there's dire need for better tax policy: the states. We can upgrade communities across the country by making 2023 a year to win tax improvements in statehouses.

Despite mixed economic signals for 2023, including a possible recession, many state lawmakers plan to use temporary budget surpluses to forge ahead with permanent, regressive tax cuts that would disproportionately benefit the wealthy at the expense of low- and middle-income households. These cuts would put state finances in a precarious position and further erode public investments in education, transportation and health, all of which are crucial for creating inclusive, vibrant communities where everyone, not just the rich, can achieve economic security and thrive. In the event of an economic downturn, these results would be accelerated and amplified.

Flat taxes have some surface appeal but come with significant disadvantages. Critically, a flat tax guarantees that wealthy families’ total state and local tax bill will be a lower share of their income than that paid by families of more modest means.

Voters in Massachusetts and Colorado raised taxes on their wealthiest residents to fund schools, public transportation and school lunches for kids while making their tax codes more equitable. And voters in West Virginia defeated a proposal to deeply cut taxes, mostly for businesses, and drain the coffers of county and local governments.

In a significant victory for tax fairness, Massachusetts voters approved Question 1—commonly known as the Fair Share Amendment—Tuesday night with 52 percent of the vote. The new constitutional amendment creates a 4 percent surcharge on income over $1 million, and the revenue will specifically fund education and transportation projects in the Bay State.

The big problem with the Index is that it peddles a solution that not only falls short of the goal of generating business investment, but one that actively harms state lawmakers’ ability to provide the kinds of public goods – like good schools and modern, efficient transportation networks – that businesses need and want.