The Blog at MSPC

Jennings' advertisement is so demonstrably false it raises a larger question: why is Jeopardy! allowing him to sully its reputation?

Under the proposal, homeowners would need to have lived in Wyoming for at least one year and occupied their primary residence for at least six months of the previous tax year. The exemption would apply to the residential structure, excluding land.

The study highlights a distinction voters should understand: the $1 million exemption is established in statute, rather than protected by the state constitution. Lawmakers could change that exemption through future legislation, potentially extending the tax to additional taxpayers.

With the federal rules now on the table, Washington's remaining question is no longer how the program will work. It is whether the state will participate. Taxpayers and students in Idaho, Montana and Wyoming are already set up to benefit from the new federal Education Freedom Tax credit.

Politicians and the media are claiming approval of Initiative 645 will "cut funding" for public schools, higher education and health care. There's only one problem - it's not true.

The study finds a statewide, one-size-fits-all solution would be especially difficult because Idaho counties have vastly different property values and retail economies.

“Medicare For All” has an estimated cost of $32 trillion dollars for the first ten years. Tax increases would be in the neighborhood of 20 percent, with a serious detrimental impact on the country’s gross domestic product (GDP).

You may have heard objections to Governor Gianforte’s proposal to move Montana to a flat income tax. We’ve heard those objections before. Experience proved that they were wrong then. And they are wrong now. Here are the facts.

By adopting I-645, voters would have the opportunity to restore the state’s “competitive advantage” of no personal income taxes while working to increase faith in Washington’s business climate.

Open collective bargaining should be the default when government officials are negotiating public services and government salaries with taxpayer dollars. Especially when those dollars are already stretched thin.

Supporters are free to make their case. They can argue that only a small percentage of Washingtonians will pay the tax. They can argue that its revenue is necessary to pay for government services and tax reductions elsewhere. But the media has a different job. It shouldn't make the branding decision for voters.

The direction of the evidence is remarkably consistent. Lower and flatter income taxes are associated with faster growth, higher incomes, improved compliance, stronger competitiveness, and greater protection against future tax increases.

If states want tax relief that does more than provide temporary relief—if we want a tax cut that changes the state's long-term economic trajectory—then reducing the individual income tax should be near the top of the list. And Montana is front and center in the current conversation.

The underlying study explains that lower marginal rates can encourage additional economic activity as businesses invest, employment expands, wages rise and personal income grows.

Seattle’s threat of an illegal strike should be a warning. Washington’s education system should put children at the center of every spending decision.

Had the bit tax been adopted, what was once framed as a trivial tax—half a cent to download a photo, or a cent to send 100 emails—would now cost the average American household an estimated $784,000 per year.

Rapidly increasing property tax bills are a real concern. The question is which property tax reforms offer the best path to foster fairness, stability, transparency, and fiscal restraint.

The vivid contrast between Seattle and Bellevue is a lesson every municipality in the country can learn from. Imposing high local taxes and onerous regulations incentivizes individuals and businesses to look to neighboring jurisdictions for relief.

Idaho holds a distinction that should concern policymakers in Boise: Idaho has the highest flat individual income tax rate in the country.

Before Idaho's next property-tax debate becomes another argument about assessments, exemptions and tax shifts, let's put government spending on the table too.