Skip to main content

Author Jon Zerolnick is research director for the Los Angeles Alliance for a New Economy. A slightly different version of his post appeared yesterday on Frying Pan News.

One of our favorite pastimes at Frying Pan News is exploding those irritating little factoids the Right likes to use to make its case for some policy or another. Myths like the Welfare Queen, or overpaid public employees, or the perennial American classic about bootstraps. (Since it seems that so many of these fraught conversations take place at family gatherings, we often call them “brother-in-law conversations.”)

Just in time for tax season, a new myth has been making the rounds: that states with no income tax fare better, economically, than other states. This notion is most associated with Arthur Laffer, the voodoo economist, but it has been amplified by, among others, ALEC (American Legislative Exchange Council) and the Wall Street Journal. Unsurprisingly, state politicians have taken up the call: In the name of spurring growth, some are citing Laffer’s work and proposing a reduction or elimination of state income taxes.

Kansas, for instance, is considering a dramatic tax overhaul that would eliminate the state income tax (as well as tax credits for the poor) and lower the state sales tax. This would have the perverse effect of raising taxes on the poorest residents. According to the Los Angeles Times, “A Kansas House tax committee passed a bill in which anyone making less than $25,000 a year — roughly half a million of the state’s 2.9 million residents — will pay an average of $72 more in taxes, while those making more than $250,000 — about 21,000 people — will see a $1,500 cut.”

But maybe some slight unfairness is okay if it serves the greater good: a rising tide, and so on. Not so fast, brother-in-law.

The D.C.-based Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy just released a report examining Laffer’s claims that the nine states with no income taxes outperform the nine states with the highest income taxes. (Since California is one of the nine “high-tax” states, we have a real dog in this fight.) Conclusion: not only is this false, but in fact it’s likely that the opposite is true!

If you look at per-capita economic growth over the last decade, the high-tax states outperform the no-tax states (10.1 percent vs. 8.7 percent). If you look at changes to the median family income over the last decade, high-tax states again outperform (-0.7 percent vs. -3.5 percent). If you look at the average annual unemployment rate over the last decade, there is no difference between the two groups (5.7 percent).

So how does Laffer (and the WSJ, and the Kansas and Oklahoma governors) get away with his claim? By fudging, of course. Instead of the sort of economic indicators mentioned above – the sort that actually matter in people’s lives – Laffer focuses on total growth in a state’s economic output. Because of the close correlation with population growth, this provides a distorted view. Once you adjust for changes in population (see paragraph above), Laffer’s findings vanish.

(Several of the no-tax states also have unique economic factors that allow them to generate revenue without an income tax: Alaska, Wyoming and Texas are among the most mineral- and energy-rich states, and Nevada generates much of its income from the gaming industry.)

If it’s so easy to debunk these sorts of empirical claims (“reality has a well-known liberal bias,” Stephen Colbert has noted), then why do they persist? Maybe that’s the question to put to your brother-in-law.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Because Even the Homeless Pay Sales Tax (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Odysseus, Calamity Jean

    which is why WA state with sales and no income tax has the #1 most regressive state taxes of all 50 states (or did a few yrs ago when I lived there).

    The richer you are, the smaller the fraction of income you spend on sales tax items, and probably the smaller fraction of money you spend inside the state at all.

    The reason they persist is that's what helps them take over. They own and run the public square so it's not as though they're going to be crucified for lying.

    We are called to speak for the weak, for the voiceless, for victims of our nation and for those it calls enemy.... --ML King "Beyond Vietnam"

    by Gooserock on Thu Mar 01, 2012 at 11:52:56 AM PST

  •  FL has no state income tax and is not doing (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Calamity Jean

    particularly well. 10% unemployment, huge state budget cuts etc.

  •  There are a suprising number of states (0+ / 0-)

    who have no income tax, or a very small income tax under 2%. At the high end Oregon has a top marginal rate of 11% and California has a 10.4% top rate for income over $1.0 million. State tax rates do seem to have had an impact on migration from high income tax states to lower income tax states.

    "let's talk about that"

    by VClib on Thu Mar 01, 2012 at 02:32:47 PM PST

  •  How are states supposed to solve their debt probs (0+ / 0-)

    without any money coming in?  

    I live in WA, a no income tax state, and they are having truly terrible problems dealing with debt and deficits, because there's little left to cut unless you want to dispense with roads to cross the mountains which bisect the state, schools, ferries to cross the body of water that bisects most of the state, and other issues not going away, and a constitution that requires various services to be performed by the state. We have a no tax idiot named Tim Eyman who puts up referenda constantly to eliminate taxes, without reference to how the state is supposed to pay for what the people want it to provide.

    Unless the Republican plan is that people really don't need any of that stuff at all, and will be happy with having none of it.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site