No Income Tax State Status

Submitted by [deleted] t3_zzewxn in boston

Could or would a no income tax state change status due to the amount of people moving in?

This came to mind because of a report that Florida is the #1 state people want to move to.

0

Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

therealcmj t1_j2b78k7 wrote

I like Florida weather. I try to go there every year because of it. But I doubt I will ever live there.

They pay less in income tax but more in other taxes and fees and other costs to more than make up for it. Especially if you’re not rich.

> IN THE 10 STATES WITH THE MOST REGRESSIVE TAX STRUCTURES (THE TERRIBLE 10), THE LOWEST-INCOME 20 PERCENT PAY UP TO SIX TIMES AS MUCH OF THEIR INCOME IN TAXES AS THEIR WEALTHY COUNTERPARTS. Washington State is the most regressive, followed by Texas, Florida, South Dakota, Nevada, Tennessee, Pennsylvania, Illinois, Oklahoma, and Wyoming.

https://itep.org/whopays/

14

Maxpowr9 t1_j2bgob4 wrote

Yep, taxes go to public services and when you cut out a revenue stream, you have to make up the difference somewhere or cut services.

8

rainniier2 t1_j2b8yw8 wrote

According to the most recent census, MA has had a net population loss so I’m not sure what population gain your question is referring to.

5

[deleted] OP t1_j2bcivu wrote

population increased and we still face housing shortages.

−4

potus1001 t1_j2bm3mh wrote

Financially, that could not work in MA. Prop 2 1/2 limits the increase in a municipality’s property tax levy to 2.5% plus new growth. So because of this, a lot of cities and towns rely heavily on State subsidies. You suddenly take that away, and very few communities could operate.

MA doesn’t receive enough in sales/hotels/meals taxes, to make up for income taxes. Florida can, since it’s primarily a tourism destination, plus they’re State services are already lacking to begin with.

4

saucisse t1_j2fc0c7 wrote

No, thank you. I like my very high standard of living, highly-educated population, and public services.

2

Itchy-Marionberry-62 t1_j2ehq7b wrote

And there are many millionaires still in the state. Maybe not for long though. What do you have against millionaires? Do you give all your assets away and save nothing? 🤔

1

Itchy-Marionberry-62 t1_j2becf4 wrote

Of course the no tax helps in growth. Massachusetts will suffer greatly because of the latest tax increase voted in. Connecticut is now realizing their mistake by going down this route. Massachusetts will continue to lose population.

−10

[deleted] OP t1_j2brkap wrote

[deleted]

5

Itchy-Marionberry-62 t1_j2bwchw wrote

More moderate? Is that before the new tax increase?

−2

[deleted] OP t1_j2bxqhx wrote

[deleted]

6

Wtf_is_this1234 t1_j2cljz1 wrote

If it affects so few people, what exactly is the point of doing it?

1

capta2k t1_j2ddhda wrote

It affects a small number of People but a larger portion of Income earned in the state because even in fair Massachusetts the gap between the rich and the poor is huge and growing.

4

Wtf_is_this1234 t1_j2ddjek wrote

The same state that literally just refunded people for collecting too much in income tax.

1

capta2k t1_j2dlewt wrote

Did we collect too much tax or did we spend too little? Potato - potatoe

The Healey administration is going to be under a lot of pressure to increase spending, something Governor Baker chose not to do

1

saucisse t1_j2fbruy wrote

Because that tiny percentage of people has a huge percentage of the money. 1% of $100 is 1. 1% of 1,000,000 is 10,000.

0