State Tax Rates and 1995 Collections
Special Report No. 64
State tax and fee collections grew by 6.7 percent between 1994 and 1995. The growth in inflation-adjusted tax collections continues a trend that began more than a decade ago. The three fastest growing categories of state collections were corporate income taxes (14 percent), property taxes (11.4 percent), and tobacco taxes (11.2 percent).
On average, economic growth in 1995 accounted for almost all of the growth in state collections. For the nation, state collections grew 0.26 percent faster than personal income. That growth rate compares with an inflation-adjusted decade-long average of 0.22 percent. However, the growth rate of state tax collections relative to personal income growth varies substantially from state to state. From 1994 to 1995, the five states that had the highest tax growth relative to personal income growth were Alaska, Missouri, Michigan, North Dakota, and Connecticut. The five states that had the highest personal income growth relative to tax growth were Wyoming, New Mexico, Vermont, Hawaii, and New Jersey.
The growth of taxes relative to income does not necessarily correlate with the overall tax burden in a state. For example, in 1995, Alaska had the highest tax burden per $1,000 of personal income and it recorded the fastest tax growth between 1994 and 1995. Yet, over the prior 10 years, Alaska had the slowest tax growth. These anomalies arise because Alaska enjoys enormous tax inflow from oil production, making it a unique case. New Mexico ranked third among the states in terms of taxes per $1,000 of personal income, but it recorded the second slowest tax growth. (If Washington, D.C., were a state, it would have the highest ranking tax burden.)
Was this page helpful to you?
The Tax Foundation works hard to provide insightful tax policy analysis. Our work depends on support from members of the public like you. Would you consider contributing to our work?Contribute to the Tax Foundation
Let us know how we can better serve you!
We work hard to make our analysis as useful as possible. Would you consider telling us more about how we can do better?Give Us Feedback