Publication Search Results

One of the main economic goals of most state policymakers is, quite sensibly, to attract businesses to their state. But, all too often, these policymakers have been encouraged to think that tax cuts make the best bait. A growing body of literature reminds us that taxes themselves create public infrastructure that spurs investment and improves the quality of life for businesses and workers alike. Communities that illustrate a strong commitment to public institutions like good schools, well-built transportation systems, and quality police and fire protection will ultimately have an advantage in attracting new business investment. This policy brief looks at the complicated role taxes play in economic development and discusses why low-tax strategies are not effective.

Even though there is little evidence that cutting taxes and reducing public investments actually spurs economic development, lawmakers across the country have been persuaded to give tax breaks to companies in hopes of encouraging a thriving economic climate in their state. Some lawmakers are wising up to the idea that subsidies don’t work. But for policymakers who insist on offering incentives, there are some important, simple, and concrete steps that can be taken to ensure that subsidies aren’t allowed to go unchecked. This policy brief offers guidance on best practices for alternatives to providing blanket tax breaks.

State and local lawmakers face enormous pressure to attract and retain business investment–and all too often, anti-tax advocates will argue that tax cuts are the best approach to economic development, usually armed with “research” studies that conclude slashing taxes is necessary for economic development. But all too often, these studies are based on shoddy assumptions that make their results unreliable. This policy brief offers guidance on how to critically examine studies that claim that taxes must be cut in order to spur economic development.

As states continue to grapple with the impact of the most recent economic downturn, the budget revenue outlook for many states remains bleak. In this context, states must find ways to generate additional revenue without increasing the tax load on individuals and families struggling to make ends meet. For six states–Alabama, Iowa, Louisiana, Missouri, Montana, and Oregon–one straightforward approach would be to repeal the deduction for federal income taxes paid. Repealing the deduction would help these states reduce their budgetary gaps and make their tax systems less unfair. This policy brief explains how the deduction for federal income taxes works and assesses its impact on state budgets and tax fairness.

The personal income tax can be–and usually is–the fairest of the main revenue sources relied on by state and local governments. When properly structured, it ensures that wealthier taxpayers pay their fair share and provides lower tax rates on middle-income families. The personal income tax can be used to offset regressive sales, excise and property taxes. This policy brief explains the basic workings of the income tax.