Nebraska‘s tax system ranks 24th overall on the 2025 State Tax Competitiveness Index. Nebraska has taken strides to improve its income tax competitiveness in recent years by reducing its individual and corporate income tax rates. Currently, the state’s graduated individual income tax rates range from 2.46 percent to 5.84 percent, and its corporate income tax rates range from 5.58 to 5.84 percent. Despite these improvements, Nebraska maintains an uncompetitive “convenience of the employer rule,” which can lead to double taxation (with no offsetting credit) for remote employees working for businesses located in Nebraska—ultimately a disincentive for businesses to locate in the state if they want to be able to hire across the country. Nebraska also requires individual income tax filing and withholding for nonresidents working even a single day in the state.
Notably, Nebraska’s property taxes are on the high side regionally and nationally, and Nebraska is one of the few states that continues to impose an antiquated capital stock tax, which is assessed against the net worth of Nebraska corporations and imposed regardless of whether a firm makes a profit. The Nebraska Occupation Tax, as it is known in the state, is collected every other year, which complicates the filing process, since firms must track their net worths across two tax years. Nebraska also retains an inheritance tax, albeit on a declining share of beneficiaries, and is the only state to have adopted but then abandoned a tangible personal property tax de minimis exemption.
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.
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.
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.