Citation URL: http://www.urban.org/CarolRosenberg

State and local revenues have been relatively stable over the last 30 years, growing from 13.5 percent of GDP in 1972 to 16.3 percent in 2005. However, as shown in the table, the composition of revenues has changed, with property taxes declining from 25.6 percent of revenues to only 16.6 percent. Much of this decline occurred in the 1970s.

Education expenditures are one of the largest spending areas for state and local governments, and per–pupil expenditures have been growing over time. We examine trends in state aid for education and overall education spending and decompose the existing drivers behind growing state costs. We then explore how predicted future demographic trends will affect education spending levels, as the percent of the population that is of school age falls. We conclude that there will continue to be a large state role in education funding, but demographic changes may lead to reduced political support for schools in the future.

Personal income tax systems vary widely across states, leading to different levels of progressivity. Forty-three states and the District of Columbia have an individual income tax. Eight of these states apply a single tax rate to all taxable income, while the remaining states have multiple tax brackets and rates. Even among states with graduated rates, most systems are fairly flat.

Individual taxpayers may claim some expenses (for example, mortgage interest, state and local taxes, and so on) as itemized deductions or claim a standard deduction. The standard deduction eliminates tax liability for many low-income filers and simplifies tax return preparation. Between 1995 and 2004, the share of itemizers increased from 29 percent to 35 percent. In addition, itemizers accounted for more than two-thirds of all adjusted gross income reported on tax returns and 80 percent of tax liability.

Many taxpayers must calculate their federal income tax liability under two sets of rules: those applying to the regular income tax and those of the alternative minimum tax. If a taxpayer owes more tax under the alternative rules, then the difference is paid as AMT. The AMT hits people in some states harder than it does in others because state and local income and property taxes are not allowed as itemized deduction against the AMT and because states vary based on the income of their residents. This column discusses AMT participation rates by state and the general expansion of the AMT across all the states.

Return to list of authors