2% Food Tax starting today!

[$Saving!]

Another way to look at the issue is to determine which states have the highest overall tax burden to it's residents.

Here's a list:

Total tax burden (per capita) by state. Definition, graph and map.

[CW&M Mom]

Originally Posted by $Saving! Another way to look at the issue is to determine which states have the highest overall tax burden to it's residents. Here's a list: Total tax burden (per capita) by state. Definition, graph and map.

Wyoming doesn't have income tax or a tax on food though...and they are number 2 :shrug7: They do however have very few residents...

[$Saving!]

Originally Posted by cori n wes mom Wyoming doesn't have income tax or a tax on food though...and they are number 2 :shrug7: They do however have very few residents...

Yes, because Wyoming has exhorbitant sales taxes on everything else.

Quote from Forbes:

Wyoming has no state income tax, and has relatively small property taxes ($526 per year). Still, the state draws 70% of it's tax revenue, or $1,658 per person, on individual tax receipts at the checkout counter.

[CW&M Mom]

They have a 4% sales tax on non food items. The only states that have less than 4% is Colorado...and the 5 states that have no sales tax at all. Calling it exorbitant...is stretching it. http://www.taxadmin.org/fta/rate/sales.pdf

[everprincess]

I'm very surprised CA has no food tax. I thought they were broke.

[$Saving!]

Originally Posted by cori n wes mom They have a 4% sales tax on non food items. The only states that have less than 4% is Colorado...and the 5 states that have no sales tax at all. Calling it exorbitant...is stretching it. http://www.taxadmin.org/fta/rate/sales.pdf

While sales tax may not be high, other taxes are, which is why it is ranked 2nd in the nation for taxes paid per capita.

Wyoming levies a 4% general sales or use tax on consumers, which is below the national median of 5.85%. In 2007 combined state and local general and selective sales tax collections were $2,069 per person, which ranks 5th highest nationally. Wyoming's gasoline tax stands at $0.14 per gallon, which ranks 48th highest nationally. Wyoming's cigarette tax stands at 60 cents per pack of twenty and ranks 39th highest nationally. The sales tax was adopted in 1947, the gasoline tax in 1935 and the cigarette tax in 1923. Wyoming is one of the 37 states that collect property taxes at both the state and local levels. As in most states, local governments collect far more revenue. Wyoming's localities collected $1,505.12 per capita in property taxes in fiscal year 2006, which is the latest year the Census Bureau published state-by-state property tax collections. At the state level, Wyoming collected $427.56 per capita during FY 2006, making its combined state/local property taxes $1,932.68, which ranks 4th highest nationally.

And since Wyoming doesn't collect corporate income taxes either, it's all generated through sales tax and property taxes.

[CW&M Mom]

Originally Posted by $Saving! While sales tax may not be high, other taxes are, which is why it is ranked 2nd in the nation for taxes paid per capita. And since Wyoming doesn't collect corporate income taxes either, it's all generated through sales tax and property taxes.

part of what your missing though.....is NO ONE LIVES THERE. Sorry but IMO taxes in a state like California..are astronomically bigger than in Wyoming. Wyoming has no income tax, no sales tax on food, small income tax on non food..not a horrible property tax...not to mention outside of the resort like places to live...the housing is cheap. So I will pay WAY MORE taxes in California than I will in Wyoming. Your stat your looking at is only looking per capita...Wyoming is high...cause no one lives there. So california looks smaller...but California residents pay far more taxes than someone from Wyoming..,if you look at the gross amount they pay.


Think of it this way...I have no idea the exact property tax of wyoming vs California...since this ends up being more of a county thing....but even if the rate is higher in Wyoming...I can purchase a nice big house for aprx under 200K...in California I can't buy a shack for that in most area's... so regardless my property tax in California is going to be much much bigger.


Also when you throw a stat like that in...and your doing it per capita...that's per person...whether that person is 2 months old or 20 years old. That family of 4 is going to spend far more money than an individual. It may be a far more accurate stat to do per tax filing...to get a better idea of what is actually paid.

[CW&M Mom]

better stats that are actually more indepth and accurate if you look at the whole picture.

Tax Burden By State
If all other things are equal, a state with a lower burden is a more attractive place to retire than a state with a higher one. To get a true sense of which state is less expensive, you need to look at state and local tax burdens. Only then do the low tax states stand out.
It is estimated by the Tax Foundation that the nation as a whole will pay on average 9.7% of its income in state and local taxes in 2008, down from 9.9% in 2007 primarily because income grew faster than tax collections between 2007 and 2008. This is the latest report the Tax Foundation has issued.
New Jersey residents paid 11.8%, topping the charts. New Yorkers were close behind, paying 11.7%, and Connecticut was third at 11.1%. The top 10 were rounded out by Maryland (10.8%), Hawaii (10.6%), California (10.5%), Ohio (10.4%). Vermont (10.3%), Wisconsin (10.2%) and Rhode Island (10.2%).
Alaskans pay the least, 6.4 percent in 2008, but Nevada is close at 6.6 percent. In four states the residents pay between 7 and 8 percent of their income in state and local taxes: Wyoming (7.0%), Florida (7.4%), New Hampshire (7.6%) and South Dakota (7.9%). Four other states round out the bottom 10: Tennessee (8.3%), Texas (8.4%), Louisiana (8.4%) and Arizona (8.5%).

[$Saving!]

Originally Posted by cori n wes mom better stats that are actually more indepth and accurate if you look at the whole picture. Tax Burden By State If all other things are equal, a state with a lower burden is a more attractive place to retire than a state with a higher one. To get a true sense of which state is less expensive, you need to look at state and local tax burdens. Only then do the low tax states stand out. It is estimated by the Tax Foundation that the nation as a whole will pay on average 9.7% of its income in state and local taxes in 2008, down from 9.9% in 2007 primarily because income grew faster than tax collections between 2007 and 2008. This is the latest report the Tax Foundation has issued. New Jersey residents paid 11.8%, topping the charts. New Yorkers were close behind, paying 11.7%, and Connecticut was third at 11.1%. The top 10 were rounded out by Maryland (10.8%), Hawaii (10.6%), California (10.5%), Ohio (10.4%). Vermont (10.3%), Wisconsin (10.2%) and Rhode Island (10.2%). Alaskans pay the least, 6.4 percent in 2008, but Nevada is close at 6.6 percent. In four states the residents pay between 7 and 8 percent of their income in state and local taxes: Wyoming (7.0%), Florida (7.4%), New Hampshire (7.6%) and South Dakota (7.9%). Four other states round out the bottom 10: Tennessee (8.3%), Texas (8.4%), Louisiana (8.4%) and Arizona (8.5%).

True that. Overall tax burden to a working couple or individual is one way to look at it and then retirement is another too. Each state needs to be looked at carefully as some states offer favorable breaks for taxes based on income/retirement income being instate or out of state earned etc.

It's very complex anymore as each segment of the government dips into the pockets , federal, state, county, municipalities etc.

[CW&M Mom]

Originally Posted by $Saving! True that. Overall tax burden to a working couple or individual is one way to look at it and then retirement is another too. Each state needs to be looked at carefully as some states offer favorable breaks for taxes based on income/retirement income being instate or out of state earned etc. It's very complex anymore as each segment of the government dips into the pockets , federal, state, county, municipalities etc.

I understand your sentiment...but in general...Wyoming is quite proud of how little each entity dips into one person's pocket. In fact...it's probably one of the best examples of a no frills government. They don't take much in...but they don't give much "away" either...when it comes to entitlements.