Taxes in Texas

Writing in the LA Times, Michael Hiltzik wonders what the economic impact of falling oil prices will be in the Lone Star State. Predicting the future is hard, so who knows, but there’s a nice graphic in the article comparing state and local tax burden on different income groups.

Despite having relatively high sales taxes and low property taxes due to Proposition 13, both regressive policies, California’s state and local tax burden is lower on the bottom 60% of income earners. California taxes high income earners at a higher rate, resulting in a tax structure that’s at least marginally more progressive (or really, just less regressive) than that in Texas.

That’s nice, but the impact of a few percentage points of tax burden is offset by the higher cost of housing in California, probably by an order of magnitude. You might pay a little more in taxes in Texas if you’re poor, but you’ll pay much less for housing – so much less that you’ll still come out ahead. California’s more generous social programs, like wider Medicaid coverage, don’t seem so generous if you consider the additional cost of housing as functionally equivalent to a tax or premium required to access those programs.

Since, in general, rents and mortgages are paid by people with less money to people with more money, California’s high cost of housing is similar to a tax transfer from lower income people to higher income people. And make no mistake, this is a voluntary policy. While tony locales like Malibu and Beverly Hills might never be very affordable, there’s no reason for new construction in, say, Ontario or Arleta, to be much more expensive than Houston or Frisco. California’s seismic and energy codes probably make construction marginally more expensive, but this should simply be reflected by slightly higher prices and slightly smaller housing units, which we don’t see.

California’s complicated tax structure causes other regressive effects. For example, Adelanto has few options to try to shore up its tax books, so it’s trying to expand prisons in the city and charge other jurisdictions a per prisoner fee for use. This creates a political constituency that benefits from increasing incarceration rates, the social and economic costs of which will be borne disproportionately by minority and low income communities.

Texas may not be a paradise for the poor. If history is any guide, they will slash school and social program funding rather than increase taxes or use rainy day funds. But California’s progressive rhetoric rings hollow when you take a closer look, and the Golden State would need to implement many reforms before it could say it treats poor people fairly and creates opportunity for them to improve their lives.

4 thoughts on “Taxes in Texas

  1. Alon Levy

    California’s so-called progressive politics put its current administration somewhere at the right margin of UMP, the British Tories, the Swedish Moderates, etc. It’s not really climate denialist so it isn’t really UKIP or anything like that, but it does think a $13/t-CO2 carbon tax (via its cap-and-trade system) is a solution to the problem; non-carbon fuel taxes are unfathomable. It passed single-payer health care twice, only to be vetoed by Schwarzenegger twice, but now that Brown is in power and might actually sign such a bill, the state legislature is dragging its feet. University tuition is rising rapidly. About the only thing California could claim to be progressive about is the Bay Area’s relatively generous spending on public transit… but this spending buys a fraction of the quantity of subway that it would on this side of the Atlantic, and these subways are built in the wrong areas.

    1. letsgola Post author

      Also, re crime & prisons, note that many progressives in CA opposed Prop 47 (which reduces crimes that can be considered a “third strike”), in part because prison guard unions are a huge political force. Death penalty farce could be ended in short order by Brown commuting sentences or legislative action and yet… here we are.

  2. calwatch

    California’s system is more of a transfer from people who are newcomers and the young to people who have bought in the system and have stayed for a long time. It is possible to live well with low income in California, provided you have rent control or have purchased a house and are protected by Proposition 13.

    Transit-wise, California has public transit in every county, even the smallest ones, thanks to the Transportation Development Act. In Texas, many cities and counties don’t have even basic public transit since they haven’t paid for it. And as for the death penalty, Californians had the opportunity to repeal it at the ballot box in 2012 and failed to do so.

  3. Phantom Co

    AB 109 and Prop 47 have been a disaster so far. Violent crimes are up over 30% in L.A. this year, and over 70% in Central Division. It might have been better to reject these measure and eliminate the useless death penalty instead. California got it backwards, as usual.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s