logo
Major Income Tax Cuts Enacted And Advanced In Slew Of GOP-Run States

Major Income Tax Cuts Enacted And Advanced In Slew Of GOP-Run States

Forbes18-04-2025

Kansas state capitol in Topeka
Lawmakers in multiple states have passed significant income tax rate cuts in recent weeks. Mississippi lawmakers and Governor Tate Reeves (R) enacted legislation in March that will phase out the Magnolia State's 4% income tax over time based on revenue triggers. Shortly thereafter, Kansas lawmakers followed suit by overriding a gubernatorial veto to enact income tax relief that moves the state tax code to a lower, flat rate.
Kansas Senate President Ty Masterson (R) and Speaker Dan Hawkins (R) led the charge for Senate Bill 269, legislation enacted this week that will move Kansas from a progressive income tax code with a top rate of 5.58% to a 4% single rate income tax. Kansas lawmakers passed this income tax cut at the end of March and Governor Laura Kelly (D) vetoed it on April 10. On April 15, Kansas lawmakers enacted SB 269 by voting to override Governor Kelly's veto.
SB 269 includes a revenue trigger resulting permanent rate cuts whenever a stipulated level of revenue collection is exceeded. Under 269, all surplus revenue collections exceeding growth in regional CPI inflation will be returned to taxpayers in the form of permanent income tax cuts until the rate falls to 4%. The tax reform package championed by Masterson and Hawkins also cuts the state corporate tax rate to 4% based on revenue triggers.
Many in South Carolina hope their state is the next to enact rate-reducing income tax reform. Speaker Murrell Smith (R) and his colleagues introduced legislation in March to move the state from a progressive income tax with a top rate of 6.2%, to a flat 3.99% income tax.
An economic impact study recently released by the Palmetto Promise Institute and the Buckeye Institute concluded that moving to a lower, flatter rate would come with many benefits for South Carolina residents and the state's economy.
'Broadening the base and moving to a flat rate of 3.99% will result in South Carolina's economy adding 1,000 jobs in 2026 and an average of 1,000 additional jobs each year between 2027 and 2030,' noted Oran Smith, senior fellow at the Palmetto Promise Institute. 'South Carolina's GDP will grow by $240 million in 2026 and average $250 million over the next 5 years, if the tax rate stays at 3.99%. Families will buy more because, they will have more money to purchase goods, and save and invest over $100 million annually each year over the next five years.
'Dynamic economic modeling, which considers how people and businesses respond to policy changes, shows that this tax plan will make South Carolina a more prosperous state and poised to compete with neighboring states that have already enacted tax policy reform over the past few years,' Smith added. 'The scenario below models collapsing all current personal income tax brackets in South Carolina into a single bracket with a flat rate of 3.99%. Table I below presents the dynamic effects of this scenario. Under this scenario, South Carolina's economic output (GDP) would increase by $240 million (2024 dollars) in 2026, with investment increasing by $110 million and consumer spending increasing by $70 million in the same year. Ultimately, the number of jobs for 2026 would be expected to increase by 1,000.'
At the March 18 press conference announcing the Speaker's tax reform proposal, Governor Henry McMaster (R) and South Carolina Senate leaders announced that they, like Speaker Smith and his colleagues, see income tax rate reduction as a top priority to pass before adjourning session in May.
The South Carolina House Ways & Means Committee will hold a hearing next week to take up the Speaker's tax reform bill and consider amendments. If they're successful, South Carolina will soon have a lower rate than neighboring Georgia and will be on more competitive footing relative to North Carolina.
Underscoring the heightened level of state tax competition, North Carolina lawmakers took action this week to increase their fiscal policy advantage over South Carolina, Georgia, and other states. The North Carolina Senate passed a new budget on April 17 that would take the state's 4.25% flat income tax down to 1.99%, provided certain revenue triggers are met. Under current law, North Carolina's income tax rate will fall to 3.99% and possibly as low as 2.49% so long as revenue triggers are met.
Like their counterparts in North Carolina, the Oklahoma Senate approved income tax relief this week. On April 14, the Oklahoma Senate passed House Bill 1539, legislation that phases out the state income tax entirely over time based on revenue triggers being met.
Oklahoma currently has a progressive income tax with a top rate of 4.5%. If the Oklahoma House votes to concur with the changes made by the state senate, the bill will go to Governor Kevin Stitt (R) for his signature. Governor Stitt has long been a champion of phasing out Oklahoma's income tax.
'There are nine states with no state penalty on work,' said Oklahoma Sen. Micheal Bergstrom (R-Adair). 'Consistently, they're experiencing better growth and opportunity, and this is not a surprise. When you don't penalize work and job creation in the form of state income taxes, your citizens are better positioned to pursue opportunity for themselves and to expand opportunity for others.'
National media outlets have published multiple articles in recent days and weeks alleging that Republican members of Congress are warming up to the prospect of allowing the top marginal federal income tax rate to go up for filers whose income exceeds some amount. On April 17, however, Kimberley Strassel reported in the Wall Street Journal that the push to raise the top marginal income tax rate is being led by certain White House staffers, which Larry Kudlow has also reported. While some advisers may be trying to convince the President to break a well documented campaign promise by raising the top federal income tax rate, Republican state lawmakers across the country are going in the other direction, taking action to reduce top rates, move to flatter income tax codes, and ultimately end state taxation of household earnings.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

How the $1,000 ‘Trump accounts' for American babies compare to 529s and custodial Roth IRAs
How the $1,000 ‘Trump accounts' for American babies compare to 529s and custodial Roth IRAs

Yahoo

time20 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

How the $1,000 ‘Trump accounts' for American babies compare to 529s and custodial Roth IRAs

President Donald Trump and American business leaders this week celebrated a provision in his tax bill that would create and fund investment accounts for babies born in the next few years. The accounts would be allowed to compound and grow tax-deferred, similar to the way some retirement accounts work. 'In addition to the substantial financial benefits of investing early in life, extensive research shows that children with savings accounts are more likely to graduate high school and college, buy a home, start a business and are less likely to be incarcerated,' Trump said. 'Trump accounts will contribute to the lifelong success of millions of newborn babies.' Here's what you should know about these 'baby 401(k)s' and how they compare to other savings plans for children. The so-called Trump accounts are part of Trump's 'One Big Beautiful Bill Act' that passed through the House of Representatives last month. Republicans are aiming to get the bill through the Senate and signed by Trump by July 4th. Here's how the accounts would work: The federal government would contribute $1,000 to an investment account for every American baby born between Jan. 1, 2025, and Dec. 31, 2028. An additional $5,000 in after-tax contributions could be made annually to the accounts by parents, employers or other private entities. The money would be invested in index funds that track the overall U.S. stock market. Accounts would be controlled by a child's legal guardians until age 18. Earnings would grow tax-deferred and qualified withdrawals would be taxed at the long-term capital gains rate. 'The compounded growth of an initial $1,000 investment at the time of birth, at an average annual return of 8 percent, would amount to nearly $4,000 by age 18, more than $10,000 by age 30, and over $148,000 by age 65,' according to Bankrate Chief Financial Analyst Greg McBride. 'The key to achieving this type of growth is leaving the money untouched. As Warren Buffett espouses, 'Never interrupt compounding.'' Several business leaders praised the accounts and said they'd make contributions to their employee's kids' accounts. 'We see … the establishment of these Trump Accounts as a simple yet powerful way to transform lives,' Dell Technologies CEO Michael Dell said. 'Decades of research has shown that giving children a financial head start profoundly impacts their long-term success.' Get started: Match with an advisor who can help you achieve your financial goals Trump Accounts have some similarities with 529 savings plans, but there are some notable differences. Funding: Trump accounts would be initially funded by the federal government, while 529 plans are typically funded by parents, grandparents or other relatives. Withdrawals: Withdrawals from 529 plans are tax-free as long as they're used for qualified educational expenses. Withdrawals from Trump accounts would have fewer restrictions on their uses, but are taxed at long-term capital gains rates. Contribution limits: Annual contributions for Trump accounts would be limited to $5,000, while 529 plans allow for much higher limits, from about $235,000 to more than $600,000, depending on the state that sponsors the plan (these are lifetime limits; there's no annual limit for 529s). Many people assume that the maximum 529 plan contribution is $19,000 per child in 2025 — or $38,000 if you file jointly — but that's the maximum amount you can contribute without exceeding the annual gift tax limit. (If you give someone more than that limit in any given year, then you're required to file a gift tax return, though you likely still won't owe taxes on the gift.) Here's what else you should know about using a 529 plan to save for your kids' education. Compare advisors: Bankrate's list of the best financial advisors Custodial Roth IRAs also allow kids to set aside money and have it be invested so it grows over time. Here's how they compare to the proposed Trump accounts. Earned income requirement: Trump accounts would be funded at birth and allow for additional contributions each year, while custodial Roth IRAs require a child to have earned income during the year in order to contribute. Contribution limits: Custodial Roth IRA contributions are limited to $7,000 in 2025, or the total amount of earned income a child has during the year, whichever is less. Trump accounts would allow for annual contributions of $5,000. Taxes on withdrawals: Withdrawals from Roth IRAs during retirement are tax-free, while withdrawals from the proposed Trump accounts would be taxed at the long-term capital gains rate. Here's more on custodial Roth IRAs. The proposed Trump Accounts would create new investment accounts for every American baby born in the next few years, funded with $1,000 from the federal government. The accounts would be invested in index funds that track the U.S. stock market and could receive additional contributions each year of $5,000 from private entities. The plan is subject to change as the bill makes its way through the legislative process. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data

Challenge to Tampa Bay Senate seat revisits how it was created in 2022
Challenge to Tampa Bay Senate seat revisits how it was created in 2022

Yahoo

time33 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Challenge to Tampa Bay Senate seat revisits how it was created in 2022

The federal courthouse in Tampa on June 11, 2025. (Photo by Mitch Perry/Florida Phoenix) Day Three of the federal lawsuit alleging that a Tampa Bay area state Senate district was racially gerrymandered focused in part on how that district was created in 2022. The suit, filed by the ACLU of Florida and the Civil Rights & Racial Justice Clinic at New York University on behalf of three residents of Tampa and St. Petersburg, alleges the Legislature packed Black voters into District 16 to reduce their influence in nearby District 18, in violation of their equal-protection rights. Democrat Darryl Rouson serves in SD 16, while Republican Nick DiCeglie is the incumbent in SD 18. The defendants are Senate President Ben Albritton and Florida Secretary of State Cord Byrd, and their attorneys began their defense on Wednesday, bringing Jay Ferrin back to the witness stand in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida in Tampa. Ferrin is now a senior adviser to the Florida Senate, but he served as staff director of the Florida Senate Committee on Reapportionment in the fall of 2021, when the districts lines were created. He discussed how he and his staff went about drawing up the Senate districts that year and the guidelines they followed. The reapportionment process beginning that fall was taking place under the guidance of Ray Rodrigues, who chaired the Senate Reapportionment Committee. Defense attorneys aired several Florida Channel video excerpts on Wednesday showing Rodrigues explaining how 'hard lessons were learned' following the Florida Supreme Court's decision in 2015 to throw out the GOP-controlled Legislature's maps after deeming them unlawful under the Fair Districts constitutional amendments adopted by voters in 2010. Rodrigues was insistent that he wanted the 2022 Legislature to conduct itself in such a fashion that the courts would not reject the maps lawmakers would produce. 'This map will withstand a court challenge,' Rodrigues declared on the floor of the Senate. That's what the trial taking place this week will ultimately determine. Ferrin testified that, after his staff created other Senate districts in the Tampa Bay area, there remained about 100,000 residents in Pinellas County who would have to be inserted into another Senate district. (With the population of Florida in 2021 at 21.5 million people, Ferrin said, his staff were tasked to draw approximately 538,438 voters into each of the 40 Senate districts). The resultant SD 16, which encompasses parts of St. Petersburg and Hillsborough County, is similar to the 'benchmark' map created in 2015 that was then known as Senate District 19. Ferrin denied that he was instructed to maintain that same configuration. He also said that under the rules promulgated by Rodrigues, he and his fellow staffers could speak about any new maps only with either the Senate's general counsel or other Senate members — and not the general public. He was not supposed to review public submissions. Florida senators were allowed to propose amendments during the reapportionment process, to add their own maps. Rodrigues and Democratic Sen. Audrey Gibson had filed such amendments, Ferrin said, but no senator had asked him to directly to create any Senate maps. ACLU attorney Nicholas Warren said at the beginning of the morning that he had sought to depose Rodrigues and fellow Republican and committee member Danny Burgess before the trial, but both had asserted legislative privilege, which shields them having to testify in certain lawsuits. In the afternoon, the defense called two expert witnesses who criticized the expert witness testimony and voting analysis that came from the plaintiffs on Tuesday. Steven Voss is a political science professor at the University of Kentucky. When asked to break down the political partisanship of the Tampa Bay area, he included four counties that make up the Tampa Bay metropolitan statistical area — Hillsborough, Pinellas, Polk and Hernando. Based on population, he said, five Senate districts could be folded into the area, and that three historically were reliably Republican while two would favor Democrats. Currently, that breakdown is four Republican districts and one Democratic — with Senate District 14, which Voss said historically favored Democrats, going to the GOP in 2022. Voss took aim at the alternative voting maps produced for the ACLU by Penn State University professor of statistics Cory McCartan. Those maps showed that a district could have been fairly drawn up exclusively in Hillsborough County while still protecting Tier-1 standards there and in Pinellas County. (That involves the Florida Constitution's Fair District Amendment, which says that districts shall not be drawn with the intent or result of denying or abridging the equal opportunity of racial or language minorities to participate in the political process or diminish their ability to elect representatives of their choice). Voss said that the result of McCartan's work was that he was 'cracking and packing' voters in his maps to ultimately help Democrats at the voting booth. Sean Trende, senior elections analyst for RealClearPolitics, also testified for the defense. He praised the composition of the Senate maps passed by the Legislature in 2022, saying it was 'pretty incompetent racial gerrymandering, if that's what's going on.' The trial is expected to conclude on Thursday. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store