The movement toward lower, flatter, and, in some cases, no income taxes is reshaping state fiscal policies to relieve taxpayers from excessive government.
States must restrain spending growth while cutting and flattening income-tax rates.
E conomist Milton Friedman famously said, “I am in favor of cutting taxes under any circumstances and for any excuse, for any reason, whenever it’s possible. The reason I am is because I believe the big problem is not taxes, the big problem is spending.”
This sentiment encapsulates the driving force behind the tax-cut revolution transforming the American economic landscape. This movement toward lower, flatter, and, in some cases, no income taxes is reshaping state fiscal policies to relieve taxpayers from funding excessive government.
For instance, Georgia’s reduction of the state income-tax rate from 5.49 percent to 5.39 percent and Idaho’s shift to a flat income-tax rate of 5.8 percent enhance competitiveness and support more economic activity. Iowa’s adoption of a flat income tax rate of 3.8 percent, one of the lowest in the nation, further exemplifies this trend.
Arkansas reduced individual and corporate tax rates, providing tax relief for the third time in 15 months. Hawaii’s substantial increase in standard deductions and adjustment of tax brackets aims to provide relief to low- and middle-income families. Kansas included property-tax relief alongside consolidating its income tax from three to two brackets.
The tax-cut revolution represents a shift towards more efficient and equitable tax systems. By adopting flatter, lower tax rates, states can enhance their economic competitiveness and improve the quality of life for their residents.
However, these tax cuts must be accompanied by sustainable budgeting practices that limit government spending.
In 2023, Americans for Tax Reform (ATR) launched The Sustainable Budget Project, which monitors state government spending and tracks which states have or have not enacted sustainable budgets.
The project defines a sustainable budget as one that limits the pace of state government spending to lower than the rate of population growth plus inflation. This approach ensures that government growth is kept in check, preventing excessive taxation and debt accumulation.
Examining spending trends from 2014 to 2023 reveals the crux of the problem. Aggregate 50-state spending, excluding funding from taxpayers through the federal government, increased by 59.1 percent during this period.
If states had restrained their spending to the rate of population growth plus inflation, they would have spent $1.44 trillion in 2023, $430 billion less than the $1.87 trillion spent. Over the entire decade, this would have saved $1.4 trillion, leaving more money in taxpayers’ pockets.
Some states have demonstrated the benefits of sustainable budgeting.
ATR found that six states held total spending growth below population growth plus inflation: Alaska, Colorado, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Texas, and Wyoming.
Additionally, six other states held growth in state funds, which excludes federal funds, below the rate of population growth plus inflation: Louisiana, Massachusetts, Montana, North Carolina, Ohio, and Rhode Island.
Sustainable budgeting is the key to ensuring long-term prosperity. By focusing on responsible budgeting and reducing obstacles to economic growth, such as high spending, taxes, and regulations, states can create an environment where everyone can prosper.