13 votes

American Cities with the Highest (and Lowest) Taxes

Yahoo News: The report, released by the Office of Revenue Analysis of the Government of Washington, D.C., reviewed the estimated property, sales, auto and income taxes a family paid in 2011 in the largest city in each state. The differences were stark. A family of three earning $75,000 in Cheyenne, Wy., paid just $2,808, or 3.7% of its income. In Bridgeport, Conn., that same family would have paid $16,105, or 21.5% of its income. Again, this is excluding federal taxes.

Another interesting trend was that cities with higher tax burdens tended to have higher unemployment, while lower-taxed cities tended to have among the lowest unemployment. While this is often a product of the state economy, in some cases, the city's rate is much higher than the state. Bridgeport, the city with the highest tax burden among the 51 cities studied, also had the highest unemployment rate, at 11.7% in December. The state of Connecticut's rate that month was just 8.6%.


Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

It is a selective statistics.

It is a selective statistics. The economic powerhouses of California and New York have been high-tax, high-regulation states of years. They might be having unemployment issues now, but why was the economy so great historically?

Plan for eliminating the national debt in 10-20 years:

Overview: http://rolexian.wordpress.com/2010/09/12/my-plan-for-reducin...

Specific cuts; defense spending: http://rolexian.wordpress.com/2011/01/03/more-detailed-look-a

Cyril's picture

Map : States Unemployment, January 2006 to April 2013

Map : States Unemployment, January 2006 to April 2013

(Finding something odd? See pointer** that tries to reassure you there isn't)


** http://www.bls.gov/cps/duration.htm

"Cyril" pronounced "see real". I code stuff.


"To study and not think is a waste. To think and not study is dangerous." -- Confucius

The Northeast

More than anything, it seems to be a rural vs. urban thing.

The rural states are fairly free economically and socially: New Hampshire, Vermont, and Maine.

The states dominated by one or more large urban centers: Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York, and New Jersey are all very bad across the board. Huge cronyism and corruption; High taxes of every possible kind, which are aggressively collected; high unemployment and high levels of dependency on the state; heavily restrictive firearms laws; intrusive business regulations; tons and tons of petty codes and rule for every aspect of life, etc. etc.

I would make the correlation...

that the highest taxes cities also have some of the highest crime rates in the country.

What do you think. Am I stretching?

"Freedom is never easy in a world of tyranny" - ME

Large cities tend to have

Large cities tend to have high taxes, higher crime rates, and higher COL so it is not exactly surprising. Of course you would expect a person to make much more in NYC than Fargo, ND.

regarding the unemployment numbers

regarding the unemployment numbers, I'd expect much of it has to do with the degree of services those collected taxes are then being redistributed to non-workers in New England vs. in Wyoming.

When a progressive state collects these higher taxes and provides services that improves the quality of life of non-workers; they have doubly incentivized workers to shift to non-work.

I remember reading an analysis on mises.org or from LewRockwell.com that had calculated all the possible benefits a parent of two could qualify for at each income level. The X axis started at $0 earned and moving up to 6 figure salaries. The Y axis graphed their total compensation if they maxed out every gov't program they could qualify for; so it was money earned + gov't aid totaled together.

Starting at about $45,000 the graph had an increasing slope (more total compensation for more earned income), but below $45K the graph was all messed up, with signifant brackets where more work lead to a poorer family.

A person might be earning $19K and qualify for $15K in aid. But hit $20K and they lose out in $5K if gov't dollars thus their standard of living goes down unless they can work enough hours to get their salary up to $25K. There was also a significant advantage for some people making 20-something thousand to stop working b/c they were about even with people not working at all.

So many less skilled laborers are being discouraged from hard work b/c unless they reach that $45K threshold their work would often cause their kids to have a lower standard of living.