Alaska‘s tax system ranks 3rd overall on the 2025 State Tax Competitiveness Index. Alaska, which forgoes an individual income tax and a state-level sales tax, ranks well on the Index due to the absence of major taxes, but has room to reform the taxes it does impose. Cities and boroughs can impose their own sales taxes, resulting in a lack of base uniformity, though local governments have agreed to adopt a uniform code with central administration for remote sellers, lessening compliance burdens.
The state’s corporate income tax has a 20 percent global intangible low-taxed income (GILTI) inclusion, making it a national outlier. Alaska also imposes a throwback rule, exposing some out-of-state activity of Alaska-based corporations to the state’s corporate taxes, and it only partially conforms to federal depletion allowances. Property taxes are somewhat high, and the state taxes some inventory, but with no individual income tax, state sales tax, capital stock tax, or inheritance or estate tax, Alaska keeps taxes low for most residents and for some businesses, particularly those not subject to production taxes (e.g., oil and natural gas).
| Category | Rank | Score |
|---|---|---|
| Overall | 3 | 7.05 |
| Corporate Taxes | 34 | 4.93 |
| Individual Income Taxes | 1 | 10.00 |
| Sales Taxes | 5 | 7.86 |
| Property Taxes | 30 | 4.92 |
| Unemployment Insurance Taxes | 45 | 4.00 |
Get facts about taxes in your state and around the U.S.
The State Tax Competitiveness Index enables policymakers, taxpayers, and business leaders to gauge how their states’ tax systems compare. While there are many ways to show how much state governments collect in taxes, the Index evaluates how well states structure their tax systems and provides a road map for improvement.
115 min read
States that tax GILTI increase filing complexity, drive up the cost of tax compliance, and introduce unnecessary economic uncertainty and legal risk. 21 states and DC continue to tax GILTI despite these challenges.
6 min read
Sports stadium subsidies are salient political gimmicks designed to appear as if politicians are providing tangible benefits to taxpayers. The empirical evidence shows repeatedly that stadium subsidies fail to generate new tax revenue and new jobs or attract new businesses.
6 min read