州所得税取消的经济影响

The Council of Economic Advisers January 2026 Executive Summary For years, no-income-tax states like Texas, Tennessee, and Florida have often led the pack in attractingand retaining residents looking to put down roots where they do not have to split ownership over the fruitsof their labor with state government. In particular, of the 9 states that currently have no personal incometax, 5 of them rank amongst the top 10 states in terms ofGDP growthover the past decade and 4 of themrank amongst the top 10 states in terms ofnet migration ratesfrom other states.1At the other end of thespectrum, high-income-tax states like California, New York, and New Jersey have suffered a population This paper studies the economic impacts and feasibility of states phasing out their income tax. Recognizingthat states have to collect tax revenuesomehow, the analysis here studies two different scenarios. In thefirst scenario, the state pursues full revenue replacement by broadening the sales tax, leaving the baseline The quantitative analysis in this paper is done on an individual state-by-state level, studying the impact ofthese two reform scenarios on key economic outcomes like GDP, wages, business startup activity, and the Key insights distilled from the economics literature include: •Income taxes are more economically damaging than sales or property taxes;•The harmful economic effects of state income taxes include outmigration, brain drain, stifledinnovation and entrepreneurship, and reduced GDP; Key findings from CEA’s analysis of state income tax phase-outs include: •A 1 to 1.6 percent increase in the level of GDP for the average state;•A 16 to 19 percent increase in new startups for the average state;•A $4,000 increase in the average wage; Introduction When financing state programs, policymakers face an array of tax instruments for collecting revenue—most prominently, taxes on income, sales, property, or some combination thereof. It is not just the level of States differ dramatically in their tax structures. Nine states levy no personal income tax, while others derivemore than 40 percent of revenue from it (Vermeer, 2023). Some rely heavily on sales taxes; others onproperty taxes. This variation reflects both uncertainty about economic effects and differing policy Understanding the consequences of each instrument is essential for states seeking to finance publicservices while allowing the private sector to thrive by unleashing human creativity and potential. This paperexamines the economic evidence and finds that property and sales taxes better enable economic growth, The paper comes to these conclusions on both theoretical and empirical grounds by studying the state-of-the-art economics literature on the topic and by undertaking an original quantitative analysis to study the The Costs of Different Forms of Taxation: Theory and Evidence Debates over taxation frequently center around the issue of how much tax revenue should be collected,which is a proxy for how expansive government services should be. However, to properly understand thecosts of different forms of taxes, it is important to separate the level of total taxation from its composition.Moreover, while a lot of attention is paid to the idea that taxes transfer resources from the private sector tothe government, that is not the only cost they impose on society. After all, some resources do need to be Economists have extensively studied these losses from taxation. The key insight is that not all taxes areequally efficient—some taxes create far more economic damage per revenue dollar than others. Anefficient tax changes behavior as little as possible; an inefficient tax causes substantial changes in economic Economists distinguish between two types of tax burden. Thestatutory burdenis simply the number ofdollars collected by a particular tax. Theexcess burden(or deadweight loss) represents the additionaleconomic cost imposed when taxes alter decisions about buying, working, or investing. A highly efficienttax has low excess burden relative to revenue raised, while an inefficient tax generates substantial excess Evidence from Cross-Country Studies A number of cross-country studies have examined how tax structure affects economic growth usingvariation across OECD countries over several decades. What is striking is that empirical analyses Johasson et al. (2008)examine growth rates in 21 OECD countries from 1970 to 2005. They find thatcorporate and personal income taxes are negatively associated with GDP growth per capita, whileproperty and sales taxes predict higher growth. They estimate that shifting 1% of tax revenues from Arnold et al. (2011)find that property taxes are least harmful to economic growth, followed byconsumption taxes, with personal income taxes more harmful and corporate income taxes most harmful. Acosta-Ormaechea et al. (2019)expand the analysis to more countries and find similar results: corporateand personal income taxes are ass