A bill introduced in the Massachusetts House, (H. 74) would expand funding for community media programming by imposing a new tax on the gross revenues of digital streaming service providers. The sentiment is understandable, but the proposed solution leaves much to be desired.
Timothy Vermeer is a Senior Policy Analyst with the Center for State Tax Policy at the Tax Foundation.
He holds a master’s in public policy from Georgetown University’s McCourt School of Public Policy and a bachelor’s degree in political science and sociology from Calvin College. His research includes work on whether labor or capital bear the burden of states’ corporate income taxation.
Prior to joining the Tax Foundation, Tim served as an artillery officer in the U.S. Marine Corps and he continues to serve in that capacity in the U.S. Marine Corps Reserve.
In his free time, Tim enjoys following Chicago sports and spending time outdoors with his wife and children.
The Pennsylvania Senate Finance Committee recently advanced two bills, SB 345 and SB 346, that would build on last year’s historic corporate net income tax (CNIT) reform.
As policymakers in St. Paul finalize this year’s tax bill, they should avoid policies that incentivize the diversion or relocation of capital. Importantly, states do not institute tax policy in a vacuum. The evidence from states’ experiences and the academic literature supports the conclusion that tax competitiveness matters not just to businesses but to human flourishing.
America’s Progressive Tax and Transfer System: Federal, State, and Local Tax and Transfer Distributions
The overall U.S. tax and transfer system is overwhelmingly progressive, and understanding the extent—and source—of that progressivity is essential for lawmakers considering the trade-offs associated with each tax policy decision.
A recently enacted bill in Mississippi made the Magnolia State only the second state in the country to make full expensing permanent. The bill joins reductions to the individual income tax and capital stock tax rates, already in progress, as model, pro-growth reforms for the region.
Adopting the sound tax reforms still pending in Santa Fe is an opportunity for New Mexico to keep up with the pack or risk falling further behind.
The proposed reforms would be welcome changes to the Commonwealth’s tax code, but the economic principles behind the reforms also have important implications for the Bay State’s income tax system writ large.
Crafting a hybrid bill for a low, flat rate on a broad base—with well-designed revenue triggers to responsibly reduce rates in the future—could be an ideal way forward for the North Dakota Senate.
Individual income taxes are a major source of state government revenue, accounting for more than a third of state tax collections:
Most of the 2023 state tax changes represent net tax reductions, the result of an unprecedented wave of rate reductions and other tax cuts in the past two years as states respond to burgeoning revenues, greater tax competition in an era of enhanced mobility, and the impact of high inflation on residents.
On Election Day, a narrow majority of Massachusetts voters approved Question 1, also known as the Fair Share Amendment, which will transition the Commonwealth from a flat rate individual income tax to a graduated rate system.
From income tax changes to cannabis legalization and taxation, here’s what voters decided on Election Day.
Massachusetts’ competitive tax advantage in New England is driven primarily by its competitive individual income tax rate and its sales and use tax structure. If the Commonwealth changes its tax code in ways that narrow the base or increase the rate, it cedes greater tax competitiveness to other states, regionally and nationally.
Every change to a state’s tax system makes its business tax climate more or less competitive compared to other states and makes the state more or less attractive to business.
Arkansas recently became the 13th state to authorize an individual income tax rate reduction this year. This round of tax cuts accelerated reforms enacted eight months ago.
Policymakers from both parties in Harrisburg have proposed reducing Pennsylvania’s 9.99 percent corporate net income tax (CNIT) rate but could not agree on an approach—until now. With the enactment of HB 1342 lawmakers finally succeeded in cutting what had been the second highest state corporate tax rate in the nation.
Among the 46 states that held legislative sessions this year, structural state tax reform and temporary tax relief measures were recurring themes.
Research almost invariably shows a negative relationship between income tax rates and gross domestic product (GDP). Cuts to marginal tax rates are highly correlated with decreases in the unemployment rate.