As a recent op-ed in the Wall Street Journal reports, high-tax states continue to bleed residents and income. Between 2022 and 2023, California lost a net $11.9 billion in adjusted gross income (AGI), New York $9.9 billion, and Illinois $6 billion. Higher earners with income over $200,000 drove much of this exodus. In Massachusetts, they accounted for 70% of outflows, doubling the 2019 share.

Meanwhile, no-income-tax states saw the largest gains. Florida added $20.6 billion in AGI, Texas $5.5 billion, and Tennessee $2.8 billion. Even non-income tax states with more frigid climes saw significant inflows, including Wyoming and South Dakota. In short, states without income taxes dominated the top destinations for both people and wealth.

Missouri, with its current 4.7% top individual income tax rate, sits in the middle of the pack. While we are not a major loser like California or New York, we are far from the magnet status of Florida or Tennessee. Drawing upon IRS migration data, past Show-Me Institute reports have shown that Missouri has consistently lost more people and more income than it gained. This has been particularly the case among working-age and higher-earning households seeking better economic climates.

These national migration patterns emerge at a pivotal moment for Missouri. State lawmakers recently approved HJRs 173 and 174, a proposed constitutional amendment backed by Governor Mike Kehoe that would ask voters to authorize the gradual phaseout of the state’s individual income tax. If approved, the general assembly would begin reducing the tax as revenues grow and would have the authority to speed up the process while modernizing Missouri’s outdated sales tax code.

Eliminating the income tax would align Missouri with proven winners in the migration data, making our state far more attractive to high earners, businesses, and young professionals—key drivers of growth. Moreover, we sit right next door to Illinois, which, while losing top earners at a breakneck pace, is also ranked the least friendly state for middle-class earners according to one report.

The pattern is clear. People and capital continue to flow to states with lower tax burdens and pro-growth policies. Missouri has the chance to join those states. By modernizing our tax code now, we can shut off the outflow of the past and build a more prosperous future.

The post Missouri’s Opportunity to Attract Talent: Latest IRS Data on “Voting with Their Feet” appeared first on Show-Me Institute.

In his January 30 op-ed for the Post-Dispatch, Kansas political scientist Michael Smith called Governor Mike Kehoe’s proposal to cut income taxes in Missouri a “near carbon copy” of Governor Sam Brownback’s 2012 income tax cuts in Kansas.

But Kehoe’s proposal for Missouri has large and important differences from Brownback’s. It isn’t a “carbon copy” at all.

The single largest flaw in Brownback’s tax cut was a peculiar change that eliminated all income taxes on “pass-through” business entities such as limited liability corporations (LLCs) without changing the tax code for other types of businesses. Even the right-leaning Tax Foundation criticized the provision at the time. Put simply, it didn’t encourage investment; it ended income taxes for one type of business while keeping them for others.

Not surprisingly, many businesses changed their corporate structure to suddenly become pass-through entities. The Tax Foundation found that over 390,000 entities claimed the exemption by 2015, more than double what was projected. These businesses didn’t invest in the state, hire more workers, or do anything other than change their legal status. Tax revenues declined significantly, and little growth followed.

Kansas also made critical mistakes in how it implemented income-tax cuts. The state slashed its top income-tax rate by nearly 30 percent immediately in 2012, with plans to cut even further. At the same time, Kansas’s elected officials failed to rein in spending. The combination of the pass-through exemption, immediate and deep rate cuts, and lack of spending discipline during this period fostered a fiscal crisis that could have been avoided. Even worse, the timing of these actions gave the state little room to adjust when projections weren’t borne out.

Kehoe’s proposal is fundamentally different. It asks Missouri voters whether they want to eliminate the income tax. If they do, the state can then expand and adjust its sales tax to replace the lost revenue. While many details remain to be finalized (and Missourians have every right to be skeptical while awaiting those details), the plan ensures that income tax rates can only be lowered after meeting revenue benchmarks, meaning Missouri would only cut taxes when it has the fiscal capacity to do so.

Setting aside the phasing out of the income tax, addressing Missouri’s outdated sales tax system is long overdue. While states nationwide are broadening what they tax, Missouri’s system remains narrow, with much of what is sold today escaping taxation entirely. Larger exemptions like home sales and healthcare services might make sense, but other current exemptions clearly don’t.

When you buy a book in person at Barnes & Noble or have the same book delivered to your house by Amazon, you pay the sales tax. However, when you buy the same text as a download to your Kindle, you pay no sales tax. Correcting such inconsistencies in Missouri’s tax code can level the playing field while expanding the sales tax base at the same time.

Opponents can point to Missouri’s western border all they want, but Missouri has other neighbors besides Kansas. Look at Iowa, Oklahoma, and Arkansas, which have all cut income tax rates significantly in recent years without any of the issues Kansas had. Look to our southeast border to see Tennessee, a state that has been growing rapidly for years thanks, in part, to having no state income tax. This isn’t surprising, as decades of economic research have shown consistently that states without income taxes grow faster economically than those with them.

As the Tax Foundation, which was highly critical of Kansas’ tax cut, wrote in 2024 about the larger picture of state tax cuts between 2012 and 2022:

In fact, far from tax cuts precipitating a Kansas-like crisis, tax collections have risen more on average in the past decade in the 25 states that cut income taxes (31.9 percent in inflation-adjusted terms) than in the four states and D.C. that raised them (27.8 percent).

The lesson from Kansas isn’t that eliminating the income tax is a bad idea, it’s that implementation matters. There’s no doubt that states without income taxes are growing faster than Missouri, and our state needs a new approach to keep pace in the national competition for families and businesses. Voters deserve the full picture, not an overly simplistic “Kansas” bogeyman, when debating our state’s tax future.

The post Missouri Doesn’t Have To Be Kansas appeared first on Show-Me Institute.

David Stokes, Elias Tsapelas, and Avery Frank join host Zach Lawhorn to outline what a responsible plan to eliminate Missouri’s income tax should include, from revenue triggers and spending restraint to rethinking other taxes. They also break down St. Louis County’s Bill 182 expanding prevailing wage and DBE mandates, Independence’s proposed TIF package for a new Wally’s gas station and what it says about corporate welfare, Missouri’s early literacy crisis and reforms like a universal third grade reading screener, mandatory retention, and banning three cueing, and what they are watching next on prefiled tax bills, data center policy, and rising property tax bills across the state.

Listen on Spotify

Listen on Apple Podcasts 

Listen on SoundCloud

Timestamps

00:00 Introduction to Missouri’s Income Tax Elimination Plan
02:52 Strategies for Reducing Income Tax Reliance
05:19 Understanding Missouri’s Tax System
08:26 The Importance of Competitive Tax Policies
10:53 St. Louis County’s Prevailing Wage Bill Discussion
13:45 Economic Implications of Tax Subsidies
16:24 Independence’s Wally’s Gas Station Development
19:28 The Flaws in Tax Increment Financing
20:20 Addressing Early Literacy in Missouri
27:54 Looking Ahead: Legislative Priorities

Produced by Show-Me Opportunity

The post Eliminating Missouri’s Income Tax, Subsidies for Gas Stations, and Early Literacy Reform appeared first on Show-Me Institute.

The post 2024 Missouri Tax Landscape appeared first on Show-Me Institute.

Think of some of the top GDP growth states in the nation: Florida, Texas, Tennessee. None of these states have a state income tax. Free markets really do matter, and it has been demonstrated time and time again around the world and in the United States.

The Fraser Institute issues a periodic ranking of states according to “economic freedom.” According to its most recent ranking, Tennessee came in third—right ahead of number four Texas, but behind number one New Hampshire and number two Florida. Missouri came in at a respectable, but distant, number 15 ranking. Almost all of the “least economically free” states in Fraser’s report (New York, California, Illinois, West Virginia, and New Mexico), saw population loss.

Not coincidentally, Texas, Florida, and Tennessee have also dominated the U-Haul Growth Index, which measures the ratio of one-way, inbound U-Hauls versus one-way, outbound U-Hauls.

Granted, it is hard for Missouri to be Texas or Florida when we do not have the geographical gifts that those states enjoy.

But Tennessee is right on Missouri’s border and has much in common with the Show-Me State. Tennessee eliminated taxes that hamper growth (such as the Hall Tax, which taxed stocks and bonds), prioritized education reform to increase school choice and accountability, and its leaders are embracing its identity as a pro-growth, freedom-loving state.

Missouri has made recent progress in lowering the income tax burden. Since 2017, the top income tax rate has decreased from 6 percent to 4.7 percent for 2024.

Bringing the number down to zero should not just be a talking point—it ought to be a serious goal. If we want to be a top growth state, a nationwide destination for families, and attract more businesses, lowering the income tax is a great place to start.

I can speak from experience: having no state income tax is a luxury and a draw. Don’t we want that in our state too?

The post Slashing the Income Tax to Zero appeared first on Show-Me Institute.

As I wrote about a few weeks ago, Missouri is also facing a demographic decline. Recent college graduates or businesses looking to relocate will be more likely to choose a state with a promising economic outlook. When I wrote about demographic decline in St. Louis, I mentioned that Austin, Texas, and Orlando, Florida, have experienced substantial growth. One likely reason for these cities’ success in attracting new residents is their lack of a local or state income tax, which serves as an incentive for businesses and individuals to move to those cities.

So what can policymakers do? Show-Me Institute analysts have written extensively about the benefits that an income-tax cut could have for Missouri. States such as Texas, Florida, and Tennessee have cut their income tax to zero and also consistently fare well in ALEC’s economic outlook and performance rankings.

While Missouri has made incremental progress on cutting taxes, we still lag behind the true national leaders. This year’s legislative session is almost over, and so far we haven’t seen any significant tax reforms become law. Lowering taxes could help both our economic and demographic woes. But we need more urgency from our elected officials on this issue, or Missouri will only continue to fall further behind.

The post Two Birds, One Stone: Could an Income Tax Cut Help Missouri Reverse Two Declines? appeared first on Show-Me Institute.

The bill would cut the top rate on personal income taxes, cut the corporate income tax rate in half and exempt Social Security payments from taxation. State Rep. Dirk Deaton, R-Noel, said the bill would promote economic growth, noting that future tax cuts included in the bill only take effect when triggered by revenue growth.

“This is really just limiting the growth of government,” Deaton said. . . .

The bill would accelerate a tax cut approved in September that will reduce state revenues by almost $800 million annually when fully implemented. The corporate tax cut would be the second in less than five years.

House Speaker Dean Plocher, R-Des Peres, made a corporate tax cut a top priority for the chamber as the session opened.

For the individual income tax, the rate would drop from 4.95% to 4.5% immediately, eventually dropping to 4.05% after a series of triggers. The corporate income tax would drop from 4% to 2%, and then to 0% after a series of triggers. The exemption for all social security income would be immediate.

I’ve pushed for reductions and eliminations of the individual and corporate income taxes for years, so it should come as no surprise that this plan is music to my ears. Income taxes are the most destructive taxes from the perspective of growth, and among them, corporate income taxes are the most destructive of them all. Reducing both with the intent of eventual elimination is sound policy.

Further, while the targeted social security carve out is understandable, eliminating taxation for certain groups of people can make the overall objective of reducing and eliminating a tax for everyone more difficult over time, with fewer and fewer people carrying the cost of government. This concern applies to an even greater degree to corporate handouts like economic development tax credits, such as the one for film studios being debated this session. Fortunately, economic development tax credits aren’t involved in this bill, at least not yet.

Thankfully, the scope of HB 816 and 606’s “targeted” tax policy is limited; the bulk is solid in principle and practice. We’ll keep you posted on the bill’s progress.

The post Tax Cut and Reform Package Passes the House appeared first on Show-Me Institute.

Then as the summer began, rumors percolated that a special session would be called to reduce income taxes, and in July, Governor Parson declared his intention to bring the legislature back for that purpose. Show-Me Institute experts supported that move. The special session gaveled in September, and the governor signed that tax cut bill—SBs 3 & 5—into law yesterday.

The details of the tax cut bill accord with the original recommendations for reform from Institute analysts in July, so you may be unsurprised that I’m keen on the final product. Starting next year, the income tax will drop below 5% for the first time, to 4.95%, and then (subject to revenue triggers) will migrate toward 4.5% over a period of years. The bill also modestly cuts taxes from the bottom alongside these top-rate cuts, exempting the first $1,000 of a taxpayer’s income from taxation. All in all, a good strategy.

That said, I sure hope future legislators plan on accelerating the process sometime in the next few legislative sessions. At the current tax cut pace, the income tax would be due to be eliminated in roughly 50 years . . . assuming tenth-of-a-point cuts continue to be scheduled in the future and happen on time from the 4.5% rate. Knowing the way the legislature operates, the issue of income tax cuts may not be broached much in 2023, but the legislature should consider shortening the timeline for such cuts considerably, and soon.

That said, congratulations to the governor, the Senate, and the House for getting this across the finish line. While we look askance the agricultural tax credits that were passed alongside the tax cuts, the income tax cuts were needed and at least partially saved this year’s legislating cycle. Hopefully next year another special session won’t be required because the regular session ends up being very productive. Fingers crossed.

The post Special Session Tax Cut Passed—and Signed appeared first on Show-Me Institute.

The tax rate varies by county based on the amount of money the tax it replaced—a commercial inventory-based tax—raised in each county in 1985. If your county had many businesses that generated products subject to the inventory tax, such as Clay County with the Claycomo Ford Plant, you probably have a high replacement tax rate. If you are a county that had a lot of businesses that did not generate much taxable inventory, such as counties in the Lake of the Ozarks region with its tourism economy, you likely have a low commercial surtax rate. But the real issue is that because of the difficulty in adjusting the rate, counties still have the rate based on the economic conditions of 1985.

That is why we built this map. The map below shows the commercial surtax rate for every county in Missouri. The redder the county, the higher the rate. The rate varies from $1.70 per $100 of assessed commercial valuation in St. Louis County to $0.01 in Reynolds County. The unweighted average rate is $0.53; the median rate is $0.41. Please check out the map (there is also a download link at the bottom of the post) and see where your county fits.

The post Map of Commercial Property Tax Surcharges in Missouri appeared first on Show-Me Institute.

The post Financial Data on Missouri’s 20 Largest Cities appeared first on Show-Me Institute.

The post Missouri’s Tax Landscape: 2022 appeared first on Show-Me Institute.

Colorado’s governor defended his call for an income tax rate of zero with basic economic theory. When you tax something, you make it more expensive and discourage buying or doing it. With sin taxes such as cigarette taxes, the tax is added to do just that—make the price of cigarettes higher and discourage cigarette smoking.

But is that really what we want to do with income taxes? Do we want to discourage people from earning income? Show-Me Institute researchers have asked these questions for years as they’ve written about Missouri’s income tax and the earnings taxes in St. Louis City and Kansas City. The individual income tax accounted for more than 26 percent of Missouri’s total revenues in 2020 (Colorado’s 4.63 percent individual income tax contributed almost 20 percent of the state’s revenues in 2020). Given the adverse incentives created by income taxes, it would be in Missouri’s best interest to rely less on this harmful tax.

Missouri legislators have taken steps to lower the state income tax, perhaps indicating a general acknowledgment of the negative effects of income taxes. For example, the online sales tax bill from earlier this year includes mechanisms to incrementally lower the top state income tax rate to 4.8 percent. This is a great step in the right direction, but we are still far from zero. As Polis said: “We can find another way to generate the revenue that doesn’t discourage productivity and growth . . . and we should.” I agree, and I hope that Missouri lawmakers share this sentiment and continue to lower income taxes in our state.

The post Colorado Governor vs. Income Taxes appeared first on Show-Me Institute.

Last month, I wrote about the many complicated questions surrounding the gas tax bill. The primary question is whether the bill runs afoul of the state’s Hancock Amendment, which is a constitutional amendment that requires tax increases above a certain threshold to be subject to a public vote. Several legislators expressed their concerns with the bill and urged the Governor to veto the legislation. In the end, Governor Parson signed the gas tax into law, indicating he’s not too concerned about the potential constitutionality issues.

Perhaps that’s why the bill’s fiscal note was changed before it was signed into law. Originally, the fiscal note stated, “the net increase in state revenues by this proposal exceeds the limit to revenue growth set forth by Article X, Section 18(e)” (meaning the bill’s tax hike is expected to bring in more revenue than the Hancock Amendment allows). But the updated fiscal note added an important caveat:

However, the calculation under Article X, Section 18(e) is based on the fully implemented impacts of all legislation passed during a session. Therefore, it is unknown at this time whether the cumulative impact of all legislation passed during the 2021 session will be greater than the limit allowed.

What this means is that Missouri will be implementing a gas tax hike on October 1 without knowing whether the law violates the state’s constitution. And if it’s later determined the tax hike doesn’t comply with the Hancock Amendment, the issue will be sent to voters for approval before collections can continue.

It’s an unfortunate situation that state taxpayers will soon be facing, and it’s made worse by the fact that it all could have been avoided if the legislature had simply sent the gas tax hike question to voters as it’s done in the past. My colleague Jakob Puckett has written repeatedly about the inadequacy of Missouri’s current gas tax to maintain our state’s deteriorating roads. But is raising taxes on Missourians without their input, and without knowing whether the way it’s being done is constitutional, the right answer? I, for one, don’t think so.

The post Missouri’s Gas Tax Hike is Coming appeared first on Show-Me Institute.

https://issuu.com/showmemo/docs/tax_booklet

The post 2020 Missouri Tax Landscape appeared first on Show-Me Institute.

The post Missouri’s Tax Landscape appeared first on Show-Me Institute.

One such topic is the internet sales tax. Ever since the Supreme Court handed down its Wayfair decision, states across the country have been adjusting their laws to allow for the collection of internet sales taxes from businesses that don’t have a physical presence in the state. The issue has gained some traction in Missouri over the past few years, but the legislature has yet to act.

Before using the internet sales tax as a new stream of revenue, here are a few things policymakers should consider:

• Revenue Neutral – Raising taxes on Missourians during a once-in-a-generation pandemic should be a non-starter. To ensure the overall tax burden of Missourians stays the same, the internet sales tax should have a mechanism to make it revenue neutral in perpetuity. To balance the increased sales tax, the legislature should agree to lower another tax (corporate, income, sales, etc.) at a rate corresponding to the projections for internet sales tax collections.
• Accountable – If the legislature wants another source of revenue, it should include measures that ensure the funds are collected accountably. Instead of simply adding to the billions collected each year in sales and use taxes, these new funds should be tracked separately. Doing so would allow Missourians the opportunity to track how much money is being raised as a result of the legislation, and also help ensure the move remains revenue neutral by seeing how other taxes will be adjusted each year accordingly.
• Transparent – In such trying economic times, it is more important than ever that taxpayers know where their tax dollars are being spent. Any government that wants to begin collecting a new tax should be required to regularly publish its transaction data. My colleagues have been writing about the need for checkbook transparency for years, and any effort to raise taxes should include this policy as a precondition.

In the coming months, discussions about Wayfair will likely begin again, and supporters of small, responsible government need to pay attention. Collecting an internet sales tax can be done in a responsible way, but under no circumstances should the budgetary problems of today be used to justify raising taxes on Missourians for years to come.

The post Now Is Not the Time for Higher Taxes appeared first on Show-Me Institute.

Missouri ranked 14th and 18th in 2017 for income and sales tax collection as a percentage of state and local tax collection, respectively. I’m sure many Missourians can believe those rankings; with earnings taxes in our major cities and special taxing districts piled up across the state, we pay a lot of income and sales taxes. Though all taxes mean money out of our pockets, they don’t all have the same effects on economic growth.

Research (including research from SMI) shows that income and sales taxes have a larger negative effect on economic growth than property taxes. Income and sales taxes distort decisions related to working and spending, two huge drivers of economic growth. Decisions on property tend to be more permanent; a 3 percent increase in sales taxes may make you spend less at the store, but a 3 percent increase in property taxes probably won’t make you sell your house. This is why property taxes tend to distort the market less.

Revenue from income and sales taxes also tends to be more volatile than revenue from other kinds of taxes. During economic downturns (and especially during an economic shutdown), income and sales tax collections will fall quite a bit as people lose their jobs and have less money to spend. We won’t necessarily see such a large decrease in property tax revenue due to the same reason discussed above; it’s harder to make quick, short-term decisions about big investments like property. This is bad news if government-funded programs and services rely heavily on income and sales taxes for revenue.

It’s important to understand how our taxing decisions affect the overall growth of our state. Relying on income and sales taxes creates problems, and other states seem to be clued into this. It may be time to think about shifting toward property taxes and away from income and sales taxes in order to stay competitive with other states and promote economic growth in Missouri.

The post Missouri Doesn’t Rely on Property Taxes as Much as Other States. Is That a Problem? appeared first on Show-Me Institute.

The sales tax rate in St. Louis is now one of the highest in the nation, only behind places like Chicago and Seattle. Currently, the base sales tax rate in the City of St. Louis sits at 9.679%. So, when you shop, you’re paying nearly 10% extra in taxes, and when you shop in one of the many areas with overlapping special taxing districts, you’re paying close to 12%. The rate is high relative to other cities, and it is high absolutely—it is pretty darn expensive to spend your own money in the Arch City.

The chart below depicts the base sales tax rate in St. Louis over the past 20 years. Slowly and steadily (and sometimes in quick bursts), it has been on the rise.

Source: Missouri Department of Revenue, Sales/Use Tax Rate Tables

Recent increases are due to special sales taxes for additional public safety funding and expanded economic development initiatives (like the north–south MetroLink expansion, which is unlikely to spur any development).

As I’ve written before, with each increase in the sales tax rate, policymakers will have fewer and fewer chances to go to taxpayers for projects that truly need funding. St. Louis may soon reach a point where the public is simply unwilling to cough up more of its money, however pressing the public need. Some residents and businesses may just call it quits and move elsewhere.

Moreover, we should all ask ourselves whether we’re getting the government we’re paying for. When the city has basic infrastructure woes (you should see the road I drive on every day for work), has trouble keeping refuse trucks running, and seems most occupied with giving away subsidies, it is hard to believe St. Louis government is worth nearly 10 cents on the dollar (in addition to the numerous other taxes it levies). 

Policymakers, like the rest of us, could always use extra cash. But there is a point at which we must make do with what we have. St. Louis officials should begin tightening their belts instead of asking for more, just like the average taxpayer must.

The post St. Louis’s Ridiculously High Sales Taxes appeared first on Show-Me Institute.

The Tax Foundation’s rankings are a composite based on each state’s corporate, individual income, sales, property, and unemployment insurance taxes. Missouri ranks in the top ten for three of the taxes (corporate, unemployment insurance, and property), but 25^th for the remaining two (individual income and sales).

Despite the generally favorable ranking of Missouri’s tax climate from the Tax Foundation, the state’s economic growth continues to lag. In 2017, Missouri was ranked 37th among states with a paltry 1.1 percent real Gross State Product (GSP) growth rate, while the average growth over the previous ten years is even worse at only 0.48 percent. The tax climate is certainly not the only contributor to economic growth, but the difference in state rankings raises the question of whether the Tax Foundation’s index may be missing something.

To evaluate the applicability of the ranking results to Missouri, it is helpful to consider what makes a business climate attractive to new businesses, and whether the index attempted to capture those criteria. Studies show the main determinants of business climate are the tax and regulatory burdens each business must bear. From the outset, the Tax Foundation index does not measure regulatory burden, and also excludes most local taxes from their calculations. If the Index is missing several important components, should the state’s Department of Economic Development be touting the results?

The Tax Foundation’s rankings offer valuable information about Missouri’s business tax climate, but should not necessarily be the basis for future policymaking. If lawmakers are serious about improving Missouri’s business climate, reducing the regulatory burden and reforming local taxes should be part of the discussion.

The post Is Missouri’s Business Tax Climate Competitive? appeared first on Show-Me Institute.

None of this is to say that taxes are unnecessary or even bad. Taxes are necessary to fund the basic services we all agree are the responsibility of government. But Missouri can do better. A report from the Tax Foundation released last week underscores the point. According to the Tax Foundation’s count, Missouri has 1,393 sales tax jurisdictions, second only to Texas.

This staggering number is due to special taxing districts such as community improvement districts, transportation development districts, and the like. These districts are easily established and are often not open and transparent. Many were established without a public vote. Yet each has the power to tax us on each purchase.

One effort to cap the sales tax rate in Missouri at 14 percent is making its way through the legislature. But if the proliferation of special taxing districts itself is not addressed, the general assembly risks ceding its influence over tax policy to an ever-growing number of tiny fiefdoms.

The post Missouri’s Dubious Tax Honor appeared first on Show-Me Institute.