• Comment (17)

Do Lower Taxes Create Jobs? Let’s Look at the States

May 3, 2012 RSS Feed Print

David Brodwin is a cofounder and board member of American Sustainable Business Council. Follow him on Twitter at @davidbrodwin.

In the ongoing debate over tax cuts, both sides make arguments that sound plausible. Progressives and liberals claim that a state with low taxes can't invest in schools, roads, and other improvements that boost productivity. Conservatives claim that high taxes discourage entrepreneurs and push businesses to flee the state. Both arguments are logical—but both cannot be true.

This argument reminds of a sign I once saw a sign in a client's office which read, "In God we Trust. All Others Must Bring Data." What does the data tell us about taxes and incomes?

[Read the U.S. News debate: Is Obama's Corporate Tax Plan A Good Idea?]

How higher taxes affect personal income

The Tax Foundation, a respected conservative-leaning group, has analyzed tax issues since 1937. They publish reports showing the average income and average tax load for all 50 states. Their analysis includes all state and local taxes.

I've charted this data (below) and added a green line to separate the states with high incomes from the rest. Aside from a few outliers, the trend is obvious: All but one of the states that enjoy higher incomes (greater than $50,000 per person) also impose higher total taxes (above 9 percent). At the same time, all but one of the states that keep taxes low (less than 9 percent) have lower incomes.

State tax rates vs. incomes

There is no evidence in this chart to confirm that low taxes lead to prosperity. In contrast, higher taxes accompany higher incomes, not the other way around.

[See a collection of political cartoons on the budget and deficit.]

Higher incomes or higher taxes: Which come first?

Although the chart shows high incomes and high taxes go hand in hand, it raises the question of which comes first: Do higher taxes enable higher incomes, or do higher incomes simply make high taxes acceptable? Frankly the evidence here is mixed.

One important state on the high-income side of the chart is Massachusetts, which owes its prosperity to great universities and to the successful technology companies spawned by their alumni. Massachusetts shows that taxes, when invested in leading educational institutions, can create prosperity even without other economic advantages. Northern California, if it were a separate state, would illustrate this point as well. Stanford University provides essential support for Silicon Valley. The leading private universities do not take direct support from state or local taxes, but they take a great deal of indirect state taxpayer support, since they are exempt from taxes on their property and income.

[Rick Newman: 6 Reasons America Will Rebound]

The other high-income states fall into two distinct clusters: the financial services cluster of New York, New Jersey, and Connecticut (fueled by Wall Street), and the government cluster of District of Columbia, Maryland, and to a lesser extent Virginia (fueled by the U.S. capital and its lobbyists and government contractors). Wall Street and the nation's capital exert such strong magnetism on talent that these states may not need top quality education and infrastructure to maintain their prosperity. People who live there pay higher taxes because they value the things that higher taxes provide (better roads, schools, parks, transit, cultural amenities and more.)  In turn, these services and amenities attract tourists who bring even money to these already-prosperous areas.

How some states with low taxes generate healthy incomes for residents

A few states—Alaska, Nevada, Florida, Wyoming, and New Hampshire—impose very low tax rates yet their residents enjoy solid mid-range incomes. Do these states blaze a trail that other states can follow?

Unfortunately these states' success is tough to copy. Both Alaska and Wyoming have abundant and valuable natural resources (energy and minerals) coupled with small populations and little need for public services. Nevada, Florida, and Wyoming benefit greatly from tourism as well. And New Hampshire gets a free ride from Massachusetts-based high tech companies without paying the corresponding taxes.

[Read the U.S. News debate: Is a Flat Tax a Good Idea?]

How do low taxes really affect growth in income?

A new study by the Institute on Taxation and Economy Policy provides additional perspective. Researchers at this respected, progressive-leaning group looked at the net change in income from 2001 to 2010. They compared the nine states with the highest income tax against the nine states with the lowest income tax. The results, in the chart below, show that the states with the highest taxes actually had the strongest economies throughout a difficult decade.

There are no guarantees when it comes to taxes and economic development. But without abundant natural resources or heavy tourism or the generosity of a neighbor, no state in the United States has been able to sustain high prosperity without a robust tax base. The data speaks clearly on this point. Let's trust it.

 

Tags:
infrastructure,
economy,
education,
taxes

Reader Comments Read all comments (17)

Add Your Thoughts
Your comment will be posted immediately, unless it is spam or contains profanity. For more information, please see our Comments FAQ.

What baffles me is whether the conservative Republican talking-heads that are favored by channels like CNBC ever study this data? If large tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans lead to greater investment and entrepreneurial activity, why did we have so precipitate a decline in economic activity in 2007 through 2009 when the Bush tax cuts took effect?

Al Ferg of FL 3:37PM September 24, 2012

Bruce Tee, and Suzy Q. are among the elitist, hard-headed conservatives, that are proving that even when data is supplied by a CONSERVATIVE think tank (like the American Tax Foundation), they still DON'T GET IT! Republican economists like Ben Stein have also vehemently denied that there is any evidence to support the belief that lower taxes lead to more jobs and overall prosperity for the middle class. It leads to more prosperity, only for the rich. While your information and data is mostly correct, it is your INTERPRETATION of the facts that is INCORRECT! GET A CLUE, ALREADY!

Robert Heintze of CO 1:00PM September 13, 2012

Thanks for exposing the conservative lie that "lower taxes for the job creators/producers of society lead to more jobs being created." Oh, so that's why corporate America is hoarding over $2 trillion in cash (the most in history)? Research any economic data on U.S. tax rates over the past century, and they will indicate that corporate, individual, and capital gains taxes are currently at their lowest levels since the 1920s! They were all at their highest levels during the 1950s and 1960s. A tax is NOT a fine for doing well. It is a duty which every adult American must pay if you want sufficient public works, services, and infrastructure. Yes, we need to drastically reduce wasteful spending. But the federal deficit will NEVER be eliminated by cutting taxes! Also, I cannot find a single study to support the belief that the rich pay MORE than their fair share of taxes. The wealthy investment bankers, lenders, financial corporate CEOs, and other illuminati (if you want to call them that); who are really running this country--not the president--are brainwashing you into thinking this because they simply DO NOT WANT TO PAY THEIR TAXES!

Robert Heintze of CO 7:26PM September 10, 2012

Economic Intelligence

Insights, perspectives, and commentary on the economy. Follow it on Twitter @EconomicIntel.

advertisement

Latest Videos

advertisement