Tax credits supporting innovation are about to expire. Texas should extend them
Innovation makes workers more productive and leads to new businesses that pay taxes and create jobs. But while the Lone Star State is renowned for its strong economy, investment in Texas research and development (R&D) remains distressingly low. That limits the growth of future-shaping companies and employers before they can even get started.
With the Texas Legislature now in session, it's vital that legislators take on this issue by extending — and enhancing — the state's innovation investment. One way to do this is through R&D tax credits, which reward companies that invest in Texas R&D by reducing their tax burden.
Texas offered this economic development incentive from 2000 to 2007, then shut it down for seven years. A smaller program started again in 2014, but it will end in 2026 unless the Legislature extends it.
Senate Bill 2206, filed by state Sens. Paul Bettencourt and Joan Huffman, both Republicans from Houston, and HB 4393, by state Rep. Charlie Geren, R-Fort Worth, would extend the program and adjust it so it is easier to administer. Yet even if this important legislation passes, our state's R&D tax credit program will badly trail what is available in other states. Currently, Texas spends less on R&D relative to its population and state output than peer states do.
Our state's tentativeness is surprising, given the clear benefits of R&D tax credits. A study by Rice University's Baker Institute found that a strong R&D tax credit program could boost Texas' economy significantly — increasing the state's economic output by $1.3 billion in five years, $2.4 billion in 10 years, and $4.4 billion in 20 years, and consumer spending by $246 million in five years and $2 billion in 20 years.
Texans would reap the benefits as well. The Baker Institute study shows that R&D tax credits could create nearly 114,000 jobs in the first 10 years. With an average salary of $75,000, that adds up to more than $8.5 billion in wages.
Overall, the study estimates that the total benefits from R&D tax credits would be $14.6 billion after 10 years and $62 billion after 20 years.
By contrast, states that don't invest in R&D see slower economic growth and lower standards of living. While other incentives like property tax breaks are more common, R&D tax credits benefit a wider range of businesses.
These investments also pay for themselves. The Baker Institute study examined a moderately sized R&D tax credit program that would cost $661.4 million in 2025 — and found that it would grow the Texas economy enough to cover this cost.
So, the question isn't whether Texas can afford to extend the R&D tax credit; it's whether Texas can afford not to.
Economic growth is the most important part of a healthy economy. It produces opportunity and improves living standards in each successive generation.
R&D tax credits help deliver that healthy growth. They also allow smaller, non-established businesses to gain a foothold and compete in the marketplace. As those smaller firms succeed, they create new opportunities for others. And, with a healthy ecosystem of innovation investment, there are always new, cutting-edge companies coming into the pipeline.
Texans rightly celebrate our state's economic success over the past several decades. Innovation-focused programs, especially R&D tax credits, can ensure that success continues for future generations.
Extending the current program would help. Expanding it — especially to the point that it's competitive with other states — would ensure that the state will thrive in the future as much as it has in the past.
John W. Diamond directs the Center for Tax and Budget Policy at Rice University's Baker Institute; he was the lead author on the study of the economic effects of R&D tax incentives in Texas. Jennifer Rabb is president of the Texas Taxpayers and Research Association, which represents many of the state's biggest employers.
This article originally appeared on Austin American-Statesman: R&D tax credits fuel innovation. Texas should extend them | Opinion
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New York Post
27 minutes ago
- New York Post
Democratic governors face a school-choice reckoning: Kids or unions?
Republicans in Congress achieved a historic breakthrough last month — and Democratic governors should jump at the chance to take advantage of it. It's the first-ever nationwide school choice program, included as part of President Donald Trump's One Big Beautiful Bill Act. The program aims to give every child in America a shot at a better future by funding private- and parochial-school scholarships through a dollar-for-dollar federal tax credit. Advertisement But each state's governor has to choose to join it — and nowhere is the need more urgent than in New York, where Gov. Kathy Hochul has a golden opportunity to make good on her own words. In 2022, in her gubernatorial debate with GOP nominee Lee Zeldin, Hochul said she supported lifting New York's charter school cap. But in the years since, she's let the leftist state Legislature handcuff charter expansion, leaving too many poor kids stuck in a one-size-fits-all government school monopoly that's failing them spectacularly. Advertisement Empire State families are demanding more choices to escape from failing district schools. Tens of thousands of kids are on charter-school waitlists in New York City — and 78% of New York parents support Education Savings Accounts like the school choice initiative passed by Congress. New York spent about $37,000 per student in 2023 — 66% higher than the state's average private-school tuition — yet only 13% of NYC's black 8th graders are proficient in math. Statewide, inflation-adjusted per-student spending has skyrocketed 209% since 1970. Have outcomes gotten 209% better? Advertisement Of course not: Test scores have stagnated or declined, proving that throwing more money at the problem without competition is a fool's errand. But now Hochul can't blame the Democrat-controlled state Legislature as an excuse to keep poor kids from accessing better schools, whether charter, private or religious. The new federal school-choice program puts the decision squarely in her hands, and in the hands of her fellow governors. Advertisement Other states' Democratic leaders are showing signs of cracking under the pressure of common sense. Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro's team has said he's considering opting in to the federal program. Even more encouraging is North Carolina Gov. Josh Stein, who vetoed a bill passed by the state's GOP-controlled legislature demanding he sign on to the program — calling the bill 'unnecessary,' since he 'intend[s] to opt North Carolina in.' Stein's veto message explicitly stated that 'school choice is good for students and parents,' and pledged to allow North Carolina's public-school students access to the funding. Stein's stance could encourage other Democratic governors to jump on the bandwagon. Speaking of which, California's Gov. Gavin Newsom should opt in, too. He sent his own kids to private school, and attended one himself in his early years. It's hypocritical to oppose school choice for other families while enjoying it for your own. Advertisement What makes the new federal program so compelling — even for Democratic governors beholden to teachers' unions — is a built-in incentive that's impossible to ignore. If states don't opt in, their constituents — whether they know it or not — will be subsidizing scholarships for families in the red states that are already rushing to sign on. All American families and taxpaying individuals can donate to K-12 scholarship-granting organizations and receive a dollar-for-dollar federal tax credit in exchange, even if their state doesn't join up. Advertisement All the governors can decide is whether kids in their state can access those scholarships. Opting out means shooting your state in the foot: Your taxpayers' donations will flow to other states' kids, leaving your own students behind. The ongoing crisis in our schools amplifies the urgency. Last week a new FBI report revealed 1.3 million crimes committed at schools from 2020 to 2024, including about 540,000 physical assaults. Advertisement The statistics prove what parents already know: Too many kids are getting beaten, bullied and traumatized in environments that should be safe havens for learning. Democratic governors can no longer do the bidding of teachers' unions by locking children in failing schools infested with violence. The unions' iron grip has protected mediocrity and danger for too long. School choice breaks that stranglehold, giving parents the power to vote with their feet and demand better. Trump's bill puts children first and champions freedom, opportunity and accountability in education. Advertisement It's time for Hochul and her peers to free our kids from the public school monopoly by helping families find better education opportunities. If she doesn't, she risks cementing a legacy of statewide failure and decline. Corey DeAngelis is a senior fellow at the American Culture Project and a visiting fellow at the American Institute for Economic Research.
Yahoo
34 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump wants to get rid of mail-in voting. It's become an increasingly important part of American elections.
More and more voters, including Republicans, have been opting to cast their ballots through the mail. President Trump on Monday said he would lead a movement to get rid of mail-in voting, based on the false claim that they lead to widespread fraud. 'ELECTIONS CAN NEVER BE HONEST WITH MAIL IN BALLOTS/VOTING,' he wrote in a post on Truth Social in which he also railed against voting machines used across the country. Trump wrote that he would be signing an executive order to 'to help bring HONESTY' to next year's midterm elections, but didn't share any details on what that order might include or what legal authority he would rely on to issue it. The Constitution gives states the power to control their own elections within the confines of laws set out by Congress. The president does not have the ability to unilaterally change voting laws. Trump has a long history of opposition to mail-in voting, also known as absentee voting. False claims about mail ballots being rife with fraud are central to his unfounded belief that the 2020 presidential election was rigged against him. 'We gotta stop mail-in voting and the Republicans have to lead the charge,' Trump told reporters at the White House Monday. 'If you [end] mail in voting, you're not gonna have many Democrats get elected.' It is true that Democrats voted by mail in much larger numbers than Republicans during the 2020 election, but that discrepancy was largely attributable to the unique circumstances of the COVID pandemic, along with Trump's persistent criticism of the practice in the months before Election Day. Historically, mail ballots have not given either party a strong partisan advantage. The GOP also closed, or in some states even flipped, the mail-in voting gap during last year's presidential race. Trump's renewed focus on mail-in voting seemed to come after his conversation with Russian President Vladimir Putin during their summit in Alaska last week to discuss a potential end to the war in Ukraine. 'Vladimir Putin, smart guy, said you can't have an honest election with mail-in voting,' he told Fox News host Sean Hannity in his first interview after the summit. During the Fox News interview, he also falsely claimed that the U.S. is 'the only country in the world' that allows mail-in voting because it's so rife with fraud. In fact, dozens of countries permit at least some voters to cast their ballots through the mail. Growing importance There has been limited use of absentee ballots since the earliest days of the United States, but the practice has become much more common in recent decades. The share of ballots cast by mail during presidential election years doubled between 2000 and 2016, reaching 21% during Trump's first successful presidential run, according to the U.S. Census Bureau. Four years later, concerns about COVID infection and more permissive absentee ballot rules caused the use of mail-in voting to spike dramatically. More than 40% of ballots cast in the 2020 race were sent through the mail. Mail-in voting declined to 29% of all ballots last year, but that was still well above any previous non-pandemic year on record. Every state allows mail-in voting to a certain extent, but access to absentee ballots varies a lot. Some states require anyone who wants to vote by mail to provide a valid excuse for why they're unable to cast their ballot in person. About two dozen states allow anyone to apply for a mail-in ballot without providing a reason. A handful of states conduct what are known as 'all-mail' elections, where people can still vote in person if they choose, but ballots are automatically sent to all registered voters. States can also have very different rules for when absentee ballots must be requested, when they must be received and when they can be counted. Fraud in American elections is exceedingly rare, regardless of how votes are cast. Experts have found that mail-in ballots do have a slightly elevated rate of fraud compared to in-person voting, but the overall numbers are far too low to have had a meaningful effect on any election, let alone a presidential race in which more than 150 million ballots are cast. A database of known electoral fraud incidents compiled by the staunchly conservative Heritage Foundation found just 378 cases of mail-in voting fraud in the U.S. since 1982, a time period in which more than 1.2 billion votes were cast in presidential elections alone. GOP attitudes shifting Trump's opinion of mail-in voting hasn't changed, but that's not the case with members of his party. Republican voters have almost completely flipped their views on the practice over the past few years. Less than one in five GOP voters said they were confident that mail-in ballots were counted accurately in the wake of Trump's loss in 2020, according to the Pew Research Center. After his victory last year, however, 72% of Republicans said they had faith that mail-in votes were fairly counted. Confidence among Democrats also shifted, dropping from 95% in 2020 to 78% last year. It remains to be seen what will happen to public opinion in the wake of Trump's new attacks on mail-in voting. It's also unclear how much, if at all, he might be able to limit access to absentee ballots through executive action. Any steps he does attempt to take will likely face an immediate legal challenge.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Why Texas Democrat Nicole Collier is sleeping at the state Capitol after refusing to submit to Republican demands
GOP leadership required Democrats to consent to a police escort in order to leave the building. Collier chose to stay instead. Texas Democrat Nicole Collier made headlines earlier this month when she, along with dozens of her colleagues, refused to come to the state Capitol as part of an effort to block Republicans from passing new congressional maps. Now, a day after returning to the Legislature, Collier is drawing attention because she won't leave. The 52-year-old native Texan, who represents parts of Fort Worth in the Texas House of Representatives, slept in the House chamber Monday night after refusing to accept a police escort that Republicans had required as a stipulation for being allowed to exit the building. All other Democrats conceded to the rule. Collier did not. 'When I heard the order, I was like, 'Hell, no.' Why should we bow down to what they want?' she said in a video from inside the chamber posted by Texas House Minority Leader Gene Wu on Monday night. Wu and Democratic Rep. Vince Perez joined Collier as a show of solidarity in sleeping at the Capitol overnight, despite being free to leave if they chose to. 'This is civil disobedience, right? What we're doing right now,' Wu said. 'Everybody can find their own way to do this. Don't get yourself in trouble maybe, but good trouble.' On Tuesday morning, Collier posted an image of herself resting in an office chair with her feet propped up and a sleep mask on her face, along with the caption 'This was my night, bonnet and all.' Wu and Perez had similar sleeping arrangements, she said. Collier has asked a judge to intervene to end what she calls her 'detention' at the hands of Republican House leadership. A handful of Democratic supporters were arrested outside the House chamber Monday night for refusing to leave in protest of the restrictions that had been imposed on Collier. Texas House Speaker Dustin Burrows, a Republican, released a statement saying that Collier is 'well within her rights' to remain inside the Capitol if she continues to decline a police escort, but said he would spend his time focusing on other issues that 'Texans care about.' Collier, Wu and Perez were among the dozens of Democrats who left Texas earlier this month in order to prevent Republicans from being able to consider a new redistricting plan that could secure the GOP up to five more seats in Congress in next year's midterms. They successfully kept the House from meeting for two weeks, but chose to return to the state in order to prepare for a court battle over what they argue are illegally gerrymandered maps. They were back at the Capitol on Monday, which allowed the House to meet briefly before adjourning with a plan to reconvene on Wednesday. One Democrat who did accept the police escort, Rep. Sheryl Cole, said that the officer assigned to follow her around threatened to arrest her and 'made a scene' after losing track of her during her morning walk. 'I remain undeterred by this intimidation tactic by House Republicans to have a 24/7 state police presence to intimidate me and my colleagues,' she wrote on social media Tuesday. This is also why I stand with my colleague [Nicole Collier], who has refused to go along with this charade.' On Tuesday afternoon, several more Democrats announced that they had changed their minds about submitting to police escorts and would be joining Collier in the House chamber overnight. 'I was wrong. She was right. I'm with Nicole,' Rep. Morales Shaw said told reporters. 'There is no legal basis … for what is being done.' Texas House Democrats have been running a livestream of the House floor since early Tuesday morning. Collier, Wu and the rest of the Democrats reportedly intend to remain in the chamber until the House session resumes. The GOP's redistricting plan is expected to be the only bill that will be brought up for a vote on Wednesday. Solve the daily Crossword
