
Mississippi Senate passes its income tax cut plan
The Senate voted Monday evening to pass a tax cut that reduces the state income tax and the sales tax on groceries while raising the gasoline tax, setting up negotiations with the House.
The measure passed the GOP-majority Senate 34-15, with four Democrats supporting it and four Republicans opposing it. It now heads to the House, whose leadership is advocating for its own plan, which would eventually eliminate the state individual income tax.
The Senate plan amounts to a net tax cut of $326 million, a more modest sum than the $1.1 billion net cut passed by the House. The Senate would reduce the state's flat 4% income tax to 2.99% over four years, while the House would eliminate the income tax over more than a decade.
Senate Finance Chairman Josh Harkins, a Republican from Flowood, told reporters that the legislation was a responsible way to cut taxes while slightly increasing the gasoline tax to provide more revenue for infrastructure funding.
'I think we've put forward a really good plan that helps families at the grocery store by lowering the sales tax on groceries,' Harkins said. 'And it provides incentives and rewards work.'
The Senate plan would reduce the state's 7% sales tax on grocery items, the highest in the nation, to 5% starting July 2025. Municipalities receive a portion of grocery tax revenue, and the Senate plan would make cities whole.
The Senate bill would raise the state's 18.4-cents-a-gallon gasoline excise by three cents yearly over the next three years, eventually resulting in a 27.4 cents-per-gallon gas tax at completion. This is an effort to help the Mississippi Department of Transportation with a long-running shortfall of highway maintenance money.
Most of the chamber's Democratic members opposed the plan over fears that the state could not afford to wipe out around half a billion dollars each year from its budget and still address some of the state's critical issues such as public education and health care.
'That's a lot of money, and we need that money for basic infrastructure,' Democratic Sen. Hob Bryan of Amory said. 'Everyone benefits from infrastructure.'
Some Democratic members attempted to amend the bill to eliminate the grocery tax or change the tax structure to avoid increasing the gas tax. But the GOP-majority chamber on party-line votes defeated the amendments.
Four Republican senators voted against the final measure because it raised the gasoline tax, something they viewed as going against the GOP's core ideology.
Sen. Angela Burks Hill, a Republican from Picayune, told reporters the gas tax increase would hurt rural people the most because they have to drive further for work and to purchase groceries.
'I'm just trying to follow my party's platform of low taxes,' Hill said.
Now that both chambers at the Capitol have passed separate tax proposals, the key question will be how much legislative leaders can compromise on a final package. House Speaker Jason White, a Republican from West, and Republican Gov. Tate Reeves have said abolishing the income tax is their primary goal this session.
White previously told Mississippi Today that he's willing to compromise with the Senate, but he wants a final tax cut that's substantive and meaningful.
'We're not interested in a small piece of a tax cut while not addressing other issues,' White said.
Reeves has thrown cold water on the Senate's proposal because it doesn't entirely eliminate the income tax. If lawmakers can't agree on a proposal, he could call them into a special session to address taxes.
Harkins, though, said he hopes lawmakers can 'build consensus' on a final package during the regular session. House and Senate leaders will likely debate the measure for the next month. The deadline for lawmakers to approve tax and appropriations bills is March 31.
___
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Newsweek
16 minutes ago
- Newsweek
Texas' Largest Newspaper Trashes Greg Abbott Protest Move: 'Expect Better'
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. The Houston Chronicle, Texas's top selling newspaper, has published an editorial fiercely critical of Governor Greg Abbott over his rhetoric and decision to deploy Texas National Guard troops in response to protests against immigration enforcement, saying "we expect better of him." Newsweek contacted Governor Abbott for comment on Friday via email outside of regular office hours. Why It Matters On Tuesday, Abbott announced the deployment of Texas National Guard soldiers. The following day on X he said "5,000+" National Guard personnel would help manage protests in the state adding: "Don't mess with Texas." The move came after days of unrest in Los Angeles which began on June 6 when demonstrators clashed with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents attempting to conduct raids in the city. The following days saw more violent disorder with Waymo self-driving vehicles set on fire and rocks thrown at police who responded with tear gas and other "less lethal" weapons. Abbott's move places him at odds with California's Democratic Governor Gavin Newsom, who opposed President Donald Trump's decision to deploy California National Guard troops and Marines to Los Angeles. What to Know In its editorial, the Houston Chronicle said Abbott's decision to deploy National Guard troops following protests "seems like an overreaction," adding: "But there was no serious indication Tuesday that Texas was on the verge of exploding. No burning cars. No looting. No mayors imposing curfews." Instead the editorial claimed the "most significant provocation to violence seemed to come from Abbott himself, citing the governor's warning that "Peaceful protesting is legal. But once you cross the line, you will be arrested. FAFO." FAFO is an acronym for 'F*** around find out.' The editorial described this as "the kind of thing that middle schoolers say before a fistfight" adding: "This isn't the grown-up leadership that Texas needs." Governor Greg Abbott speaking during a bill signing in the State Capitol on April 23, 2025 in Austin, Texas. Governor Greg Abbott speaking during a bill signing in the State Capitol on April 23, 2025 in Austin, Texas. Brandon Bell/GETTY According to All Sides, a website which monitors media bias, the Houston Chronicle is a centrist publication. In recent years it has endorsed Democratic presidential candidates including Kamala Harris in 2024 and Joe Biden in 2020. There was some disorder in Austin and Dallas on Monday night during anti-ICE protests, police making a number of arrests in both cities. According to Fox 7 Austin, four officers were injured after some demonstrators began throwing rocks and other missiles, while police responded with pepper balls and tear gas. Further protests are expected across Texas on Saturday as part of the national "No Kings" movement, which said it has organized 1,800 demonstrations nationwide. The protests coincide with Trump's 79th birthday and a controversial parade planned for Washington, D.C. nominally celebrating the 250th anniversary of the U.S. Army. On Thursday, U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer ordered the Trump administration to return control of the California National Guard troops he deployed to Newsom, though this was later temporarily blocked by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeal. What People Are Saying In its editorial the Houston Chronicle said: "We join Gov. Abbott in urging that anyone planning to protest do so peacefully. But we also hope that he and other leaders will set a respectful tone and allow police to do their jobs. Local law officers have more peacekeeping training and community knowledge than National Guard soldiers. And the National Guard, in turn, is far better at domestic peacekeeping than the U.S. military. Domestic policing is not the military's job, not what the vast majority of soldiers are trained to do." On Thursday, via X, Abbott said: "Texas will not tolerate the lawlessness we've seen in LA. I deployed 5,000+ Texas National Guard soldiers & 2,000+ DPS troopers across Texas to maintain order at these protests. "Anyone who damages property or harms a person will be arrested. Don't mess with Texas." Speaking to Newsweek about Saturday's planned protests Mark Shanahan, who teaches American politics at the UK's Surrey University, said: "How many people turn out for the 1,800 planned protests will be fascinating and an indication of the strength of opposition to Trump's hard-line policies on immigration and law and order. For 249 years the USA really hasn't tolerated kings or tyranny, yet this president continues to push ever-harder at those Constitutional barriers. His military parade is more reminiscent of the exercises in hubris and vanity often seen in Moscow and Pyongyang." What Happens Next It remains to be seen what role, if any, the Texas National Guard will fulfill during Saturday's 'No Kings' protests. Any conflict between soldiers and demonstrators on American streets would likely spark civil liberties concerns.


Washington Post
23 minutes ago
- Washington Post
AP Decision Notes: What to expect in Virginia's primaries
WASHINGTON — Virginia Democrats will settle a crowded six-way primary for lieutenant governor on Tuesday as well as a contested nomination fight for state attorney general. Meanwhile, voters across the commonwealth will choose nominees for the state House of Delegates. The winners will advance to the general election in November, when Republicans will defend their seats for the three top statewide offices, including governor, while Democrats will try to cling to their narrow majority in the state House. In Virginia in the year following a presidential election, candidates from the president's party historically have faced strong headwinds at the ballot box.


Forbes
24 minutes ago
- Forbes
House Approves Bill That Would Claw Back $9.4 Billion In Funding, Now Moves To Senate
WASHINGTON, DC - JUNE 9: The U.S, Capitol Building seen at dusk on June 9, 2025 in Washington, DC. (Photo by) Getty Images As expected, the House of Representatives voted in favor of a bill to rescind $9.4 billion in funding for National Public Radio (NPR), the Public Broadcasting Service (PBS), and the United States Agency for International Development (USAID). The bill, proposed by President Trump, does not focus on approving new dollars, but instead targets a clawback of previously approved funds, a move known as rescission. Just before the vote, Trump posted (in part) on Truth Social: Despite the President's message, not all Republicans voted yes on the rescission. Four GOP representatives—Mark Amodei (Nev.), Brian Fitzpatrick (Pa.), Nicole Malliotakis (N.Y.), and Mike Turner (Ohio)—voted no. That represented a shift from the vote to consider the measure, which passed earlier in the week—in that vote, Kentucky's Thomas Massie was the sole Republican voting no (he changed his vote to yes for the Thursday vote). Despite the name, the clawback isn't from a single pot of money—the cuts will be made across appropriations over several fiscal years. As approved by the House, the bill reduces pre-approved funding for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting by $535 million per year for fiscal years 2026 and 2027. Currently, PBS receives about 15% of its revenue from CPB's federal funds, while approximately 1% of NPR's annual operating budget comes from the CPB (that percentage is a bit higher for member stations, including those in rural stations or underserved areas). 'Unobligated' balances for certain USAID programs available under the 2024 and 2025 fiscal year appropriations are also permanently rescinded—those total approximately $8.3 billion. For context, the U.S. government's last fiscal year budget totaled $6.75 trillion in spending. The U.S. government has spent $4.85 trillion in fiscal year 2025, an increase of $356 billion over the same time period last year. The most significant outlays went to Social Security, followed by Medicare and interest to pay down the national debt. Following the vote, Katherine Maher, NPR President and CEO, released a statement, saying in part, 'Americans who rely on local, independent stations serving communities across America, especially in rural and underserved regions, will suffer the immediate consequences of this vote. If rescission passes and local stations go dark, millions of Americans will no longer have access to locally owned, independent, nonprofit media and will bear the risk of living in a news desert, missing their emergency alerts, and hearing silence where classical, jazz and local artists currently play.' The bill now moves to the Senate, where its future is uncertain. Republicans hold a narrow majority, but some Senators have expressed reluctance to pass the retroactive cuts. PBS has urged the Senate not to pass the bill, saying in a statement, 'The fight to protect public media does not end with this vote, and we will continue to make the case for our essential service in the days and weeks to come. If these cuts are finalized by the Senate, it will have a devastating impact on PBS and local member stations, particularly smaller and rural stations that rely on federal funding for a larger portion of their budgets. Without PBS and local member stations, Americans will lose unique local programming and emergency services in times of crisis.' White House officials have signaled that they want to send more cuts, but it's unclear what the appetite might be for continuing to undo the work of an earlier Congress. One option that could be considered? A pocket rescission. While a rescission requires an affirmative vote of Congress to claw back funds, a pocket rescission issued within 45 days of the end of the fiscal year allows for a rescission if Congress simply fails to act. The government's fiscal year ends on September 30, which means that the window for such a move opens in mid-August.