JLARC Agrees: Index Virginia Taxes to Inflation

by Barbara Hollingsworth

Inflation is eroding the value of each dollar earned by Virginians, making it harder for them to afford decent housing, put food on the table and educate their children. But what many Virginians don’t know is that they have also been paying more in state income taxes while their real income has declined because the commonwealth’s tax code is not indexed to inflation.

A new report by Virginia’s Joint Legislative Audit and Review Commission (JLARC) points out that state income taxes in the commonwealth “have far outpaced median income, because income brackets have not been changed since 1990.”

Thanks to inflation, state income taxes owed by a median filer have increased 173% since 1990, while that same taxpayer’s actual income increased only 108%.

The result of 32 years of “bracket creep” is a 65% income tax hike automatically imposed on Virginia taxpayers without a single vote in the General Assembly. Over the years, bracket creep has made the state income tax much less progressive because, as the JLARC report explains, “a much higher percentage of each filer’s income [is] being taxed at Virginia’s highest rate of 5.75% on income of more than $17,000.”

That’s right. People earning just $17,000 per year are taxed at the highest rate, the same rate as those making a million dollars a year. That’s the opposite of a progressive system in which taxpayers making the most money are taxed at a higher level.

To make Virginia’s income tax more progressive, JLARC recommends “reducing taxes on lower-middle and middle-income filers,” including those earning between $36,000 and $68,000 per year, “by indexing the tax brackets to account for inflation.”

Indexing has been a longstanding policy objective of the Thomas Jefferson Institute for Public Policy. Back in 2018, TJIPP proposed indexing Virginia’s individual tax brackets, personal exemptions and standard deductions to inflation. But inflation was just 1.76% in 2019, compared to 8.20% in 2022. The case for protecting Virginia’s taxpayers from the ravages of inflation is much stronger now.

General Fund revenues have increased nearly 30 percent over the past four years. So it should come as no surprise that JLARC acknowledges that “revenue from the individual income tax is by far the largest source of state general fund revenue,” thanks to inflation-created bracket creep. This 30% revenue windfall was in addition to other taxes imposed on businesses and individuals in the commonwealth that led to a $2 billion state surplus.

The unfair effect of bracket creep is to force taxpayers to pay higher taxes on income that has lost some of its buying power due to inflation, and this unlegislated tax hike falls most heavily on lower- and middle-income Virginians.

The JLARC report notes that indexing alone, without any other needed tax reform, would increase the progressivity of Virginia’s state income tax by 23%. Because indexing would have to address 32 years of bracket creep in the state tax code, it would result in a one-time revenue reduction of 6%.

Another option is to create more tax brackets than the current four, which would increase progressivity even more and result in a 4% decrease in state revenue. Or JLARC suggests that the General Assembly could index tax brackets for inflation and add progressive new rates at the same time, benefiting mostly lower- and middle-income tax filers and resulting in just a 2 % revenue shortfall.

Whatever form indexing takes, it is imperative that the General Assembly make sure that inflation does not harm taxpayers more than it already has. Since Virginia is just one of 13 states that do not currently index their income tax brackets for inflation, lack of action on the part of the state legislature will continue to further erode the system’s progressivity over time. Virginians will watch helplessly as their income taxes continue to rise, while the buying power of that same income declines.

And this annual unlegislated tax hike will continue until and unless state legislators finally decide to do something about it.

A version of this commentary was originally published November 13, 2022 in The Richmond Times-Dispatch.  Barbara Hollingsworth is Visiting Fellow with the Thomas Jefferson Institute for Public Policy. 


Share this article



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)


Comments

29 responses to “JLARC Agrees: Index Virginia Taxes to Inflation”

  1. Paul Sweet Avatar

    Virginia’s income tax brackets and standard deduction actually haven’t changed since the 1970s. The 1990 change mentioned in the JLARC report was adding a bracket for 5.75% on all over $17,000. Back in the 1970s the average income was $10 – 15K, which is less than you would make at a full-time minimum wage job today.

    The standard deduction was 15% of adjusted gross income, with a minimum of $500 and maximum of $2000. The exemption was $1000 each for husband and wife, and $300 for each dependent.

    Tax brackets were the same as today:
    2% on the first $3000 taxable income
    3% on the next $2000
    5% on all over $5,000
    The present 5.75% on all over $17,000 was added in 1990.

    The Consumer Price Index has increased from 38.8 in 1970 to 266 in 2022, which is 7.6 times higher. If Virginia tax rates were adjusted by this amount for inflation, the standard deduction would be a minimum of $3800 and a maximum of $15,200. Exemptions would be $7600 for husband & wife, and $2280 for each dependent. Tax brackets would be:
    2% on the first $22,800
    3% on the next $15,200
    5% on the next $38,000
    5.75% on all over $129,200

  2. Deckplates Avatar

    Reducing Income Taxes is a good idea. Expand the four brackets and raise the Personal Exemption while adjusting annually to the CPI. It will spur growth, while allowing people to keep & spend more of their income.

    Increasing taxes, by creating new higher brackets will penalize people who want to work harder to make more and save more. Of course, they will spend more.

    It is easy to understand the “justification” of increasing revenue to meet a new budget. Annually, the budget “requirements” always increase, and the revenue from taxation always needs to keep up with the new requirements. However, a better deal for taxpayers, who pay for the government costs, is to reduce the requirements. And then streamline the tax system? Ref. Art Laffer and the “Laffer Curve.”

    JLRAC report had only a piece of the taxes levied – Individual Income Tax. All the other taxes should be on the table for reduction. For example, the higher sales tax, the gas tax, the taxes on unearned income, etc. Business would benefit from lower taxes, and their expansion usually employs more people, who in turn would pay taxes.

    1. Super Brain Avatar
      Super Brain

      Federal tax on business has been reduced on corps down to 21%. Most all other pay tax on 80% of business income due to Sec. 199.

  3. Super Brain Avatar
    Super Brain

    The 65 and over age deduction has also lost to inflation.

  4. DJRippert Avatar

    I think Virginia ought to think long and hard about raising taxes, even through “progressive” means.

    The commercial occupancy rates in Northern Virginia are not good. Seems like a lot of people in the area still working from home / working remote. And who are these remote workers? I assume they are generally people at the higher end of the economic curve.

    Raising state income taxes on people who don’t need to physically show up to work might backfire. If a well paid person can work remotely from an overpriced townhome in Arlington why can’t that same person work remotely from an affordable single family home in Jacksonville or Dallas?

    https://www.arlnow.com/2022/07/11/arlington-office-vacancy-rate-continues-to-rise-amid-work-from-home-trends/

    1. how_it_works Avatar
      how_it_works

      Jacksonville and Dallas aren’t in Virginia. They don’t have any of the things that make Virginia a great place to live, like…

      …well…I’m trying to think of something…

  5. Stephen Haner Avatar
    Stephen Haner

    Significant tax changes happened at the last session in part because outgoing Gov. Northam set the stage, by making his own proposals and assuming lower revenues in his introduced budget. That would be the path for any additional changes this coming session — Gov. Youngkin would need to “bake in” more “tax relief” than the $400 million he has been discussing so far. So we’ll see what happens when the new budget draft is revealed in a month. It helps that next year both House and Senate are on the ballot.

    More on this in a fairly good discussion by Michael Martz in the Richmond Times-Dispatch:

    https://richmond.com/news/state-and-regional/govt-and-politics/expect-plenty-of-talk-on-taxes-but-no-overhaul-of-va-s-outdated-code/article_4e2182d9-49f1-581a-ad84-9cd97d192abe.html

  6. Dick Hall-Sizemore Avatar
    Dick Hall-Sizemore

    The headline on this article is misleading and the summary of the JLARC report is incomplete. JLARC did not agree “index taxes to inflation”. The report does do a good of documenting the impact of inflation on tax payments of low and middle-income citizens. And, some of the policy options proposed did involve indexing, but not all of them.

    However, the report itself was on making the state income tax more progressive (bad word for many in BR world). In addition to indexing, the report set out several other possible options that could make the state income tax more progressive without indexing:

    1. Higher tax rates for higher income folks. (These options would increase progressivity more than indexing would.)

    2. Increasing the refundable earned income tax credit to 100 percent.
    3. Increasing the filing threshold.
    4. Increasing the personal exemption.
    5. Increasing the standard deduction.

    Furthermore, there is one totally misleading if not false, statement: “…JLARC acknowledges that ‘revenue from the individual income tax is by far the largest source of state general fund revenue,’ thanks to inflation-created bracket creep.” Revenue from the state income tax has always been the largest source of state general fund revenue. The “bracket creep” has nothing to do with making it the leading source of revenue and JLARC did not attribute this position to “bracket creep”.

    1. energyNOW_Fan Avatar
      energyNOW_Fan

      I would agree Va. probably needs more progressive system. My perception is we are extremely tax friendly to lower incomes, we kill middle incomes with high tax rates, and not so bad for higher incomes due in part to lack of progressive structure.

      We should benchmark to our competitor states etc MD NC TN and try to remain competitive, inclusive of stupid stuff we do like extreme high car taxes. Get rid of car taxes as we know them, but some reduced local car tax component is poss OK.

    2. energyNOW_Fan Avatar
      energyNOW_Fan

      I would agree Va. probably needs more progressive system. My perception is we are extremely tax friendly to lower incomes, we kill middle incomes with high tax rates, and not so bad for higher incomes due in part to lack of progressive structure.

      We should benchmark to our competitor states etc MD NC TN and try to remain competitive, inclusive of stupid stuff we do like extreme high car taxes. Get rid of car taxes as we know them, but some reduced local car tax component is poss OK.

    3. energyNOW_Fan Avatar
      energyNOW_Fan

      I would agree Va. probably needs more progressive system. My perception is we are extremely tax friendly to lower incomes, we kill middle incomes with high tax rates, and not so bad for higher incomes due in part to lack of progressive structure.

      We should benchmark to our competitor states etc MD NC TN and try to remain competitive, inclusive of stupid stuff we do like extreme high car taxes. Get rid of car taxes as we know them, but some reduced local car tax component is poss OK.

      1. Dick Hall-Sizemore Avatar
        Dick Hall-Sizemore

        The car tax is imposed by boards of supervisors and city councils. Gov. Gilmore tried to get rid of it, but only partially succeeded. The amount you pay in personal property tax (the car tax) today would be higher without the state subsidy that is built in. One way to avoid higher car taxes is to avoid buying new vehicles. This year I owed no personal property tax on my 2000 and 2001 car and pickup, both of which which run fine.

        1. James McCarthy Avatar
          James McCarthy

          The car tax affects lessees differently. I began leasing (three year term) twenty years ago to mitigate the depreciation slope while enjoying an up to date vehicle requiring less repair and maintenance. IOW, enhanced worry free transportation. Term end lease buyouts are generally not a good financial proposition. As with a home, ownership is mythical as the lessor (like the mortgagor) is the beneficial owner. The driver is a mere steward of the “property.”

          1. All right, another Jim McCarthy silly walk.

            By definition a car lessee never acquires any ownership. That is what “lease” means, especially as contrasted with “buy” where the purchaser receives title to the car.

            While the amounts may not be large in early years, a mortgagee acquires equity with each payment that includes principal payment. At the end of the mortgage ownership passes completely to the mortgagee. Home ownership is not “mythical”. Home equity is the largest asset most people have.

            Congrats on more nonsense, foolishness and things that just ain’t so Jimmy. They are your specialties.

          2. James McCarthy Avatar
            James McCarthy

            Auto lessees receive a very small equity at lease end. Title is in the name of the driver/lessee as well as the finance agency. Home investment does not involve the extent of depreciation that auto purchase/ownership does. Home titles also generally are in the name of the mortgagee and mortgagor. All you have distinguished (without knowing it) is the time element. Equity in a ten-year-old purchased auto is far removed from it purchase/acquisition value. If you were not so intent upon skewering my comments, you might learn something. Doubtful, but possible.

            My comment concerned a comparison between one form of property tax and its effects versus the more commonly experienced home ownership. It also addressed the comment about the car tax.

          3. I would be pleased, and BR would be a better place, if you did not keep making comments that so demand “skewering” as you put it. As it is, your nonsense constantly merits plaudits for its eminent foolishness. I try to oblige with well earned awards for Jim McCarthy’s silly walks.

            In a car lease title remains with the dealer or lessor. It does not pass to the lessee as it does when a car is purchased. The owner can recover the car tax by billing it to the lessee separately, or it may be rolled into the lease payment depending on the terms of the lease. Either way it is part of the cost of the vehicle to the owner/lessor and is passed on to the lessee.

            Title to a home passes to the purchaser with the mortgage holder having a lien on the property. Mortgage holders are not involved with real estate tax, home owners are and they pay it directly.

            Your earlier blather. “As with a home, ownership is mythical”. Home ownership is not mythical and ownership is profoundly unlike a car lease.

            A double dose of congrats for a Jim McCarthy silly walk. You’ve earned it.

          4. I would be pleased, and BR would be a better place, if you did not keep making comments that so demand “skewering” as you put it. As it is, your nonsense constantly merits plaudits for its eminent foolishness. I try to oblige with well earned awards for Jim McCarthy’s silly walks.

            In a car lease title remains with the dealer or lessor. It does not pass to the lessee as it does to a buyer when a car is purchased. The owner/lessor can recover the car tax by billing it to the lessee separately, or it may be rolled into the lease payment depending on the terms of the lease. Either way it is part of the cost of the vehicle to the owner/lessor and is passed on to the lessee.

            Title to a home passes to the purchaser with the mortgage holder having a lien on the property. Mortgage holders are not involved with real estate tax, home owners are and they pay it directly.

            Your earlier blather. “As with a home, ownership is mythical”. Home ownership is not mythical and ownership is profoundly unlike a car lease.

            A double dose of congrats for a Jim McCarthy silly walk. You’ve earned it.

          5. James McCarthy Avatar
            James McCarthy

            Stupid analysis, beyond silly. Unless an auto is purchased for cash, a financing agency remains a lienor/owner. Title cannot be transferred without satisfaction of the lien. The parallel, to home ownership is obvious. If you finance an auto or lease it, their is no “ownership.” While making mortgage payments, all that is “ owned” is the resident’s equity.

            The silly time you exert making useless points is astonishing. However, as such behavior apparently is gratifying for you, have at it. All that is profound in this exchange is your persistent need to make an inane point.

          6. “Stupid analysis, beyond silly. Unless an auto is purchased for cash, a financing agency remains a lienor/owner. Title cannot be transferred without satisfaction of the lien.” emphasis added

            A car’s title does pass when it is purchased and a lien for a loan can be recorded against it, but title is transferred. That’s why when people buy cars they are called “owners” and localities bill them for property tax on property they “own”. It is really pretty simple and clear, well for most people anyway.

            I don’t get up in the morning looking for opportunities to poke at you, I’d prefer giving you some up votes. But I need some help from you. Please stop doing silly stuff like you are here.

        2. Localities have very limited sources of income. What would they replace lost revenue from car taxes with?

          Higher real estate taxes would not be popular, but they would at least be progressive in the sense that they would tax real property owners which is a more affluent group than car owners.

          1. James McCarthy Avatar
            James McCarthy

            “Real property owners” unless mortgages are fully satisfied have only equity, not ownership. It’s a guess but most paying mortgages likely drive autos which may have no financing, are financed, or leased, or for which an auto loan is otherwise outstanding. Affluence, therefore, is relative while auto and real property taxes may be unevenly burdensome.

            Home values tend to increase increasing potential equity. Auto values do not. Superficial analysis and statements like yours fail to appreciate the financial diversity defining many thousands upon thousands of Virginians.

          2. Maybe they do things differently in New York than here in Virginia. That’s the only thing that seems likely can explain your silliness.

            Title to real property, mostly houses, cars, boats, stuff like that, passes when the purchase is executed. The lessor secures the loan/mortgage with a lien on the property, not by keeping the title. Mortgages have a little monkey motion but the transaction is the essentially like a lien on a car title.

            There is an easy way to tell a purchase from a rental or a lease. Title passes with purchases. Title does not pass with rentals or leases.

            I’m not a lawyer like you, and I don’t pretend to be one. They did make us take business law in B school. I tried to stay awake in class and learn the basics.

          3. James McCarthy Avatar
            James McCarthy

            My earlier comment noted that auto title in a lease is in the name of the driver and financing agency. Real property title does not “pass” fully to driver or resident until the lien/mortgage is satisfied, not upon the purchase agreement which binds borrower and lender. If the auto or home is purchased in full, title may pass.

            Your analogy between auto and home users conforms exactly to my first and subsequent comments. It may be silly to conclude that from your post but it seems appropriate. Banking laws and the UCC generally make all such transactions uniform across the nation.

          4. Please just stop. You’re digging yourself in deeper with each blather. You are embarrassing yourself.

            Title to property passes when purchase money changes hands. A potential claim on property to secure a loan in case of default may be recorded through a lien. That is not title.

            If you have been driving leased vehicles you may have never seen a Virginia car title. It very clearly identifies ownership and separately clearly identifies liens.

            While the format is quite different, ownership of real property by the purchaser, title, is clearly identified as is a claim against the property in case of default on a loan.

            Goodnight.

          5. James McCarthy Avatar
            James McCarthy

            I concede to your explanation.

    4. Stephen Haner Avatar
      Stephen Haner

      JLARC was perfectly clear that inflation is what makes the income tax less and less progressive over time. Yes it did suggest other things.

      1. Dick Hall-Sizemore Avatar
        Dick Hall-Sizemore

        I agree that inflation has made the income tax less and less progressive over time. However, with a top 5.75 per cent rate on anything over $17,000, it was not that progressive from the beginning.

        1. James C. Sherlock Avatar
          James C. Sherlock

          What do you two gentlemen see as the resistance in the GA to your proposals all these years?

        2. OTOH, 5.75% is not a heavy tax burden, and you’re right Virginia’s tax structure was never terribly progressive. As inflation has done its work over the years Virginia’s income taxes have more and more come to resemble a flat tax.

          There have been some arguments for a relatively low percentage flat tax over the years. Maybe it’s worth declaring that a feature rather than a bug and having the GA and Gov concentrate on doing other things the Commonwealth needs to do to improve the quality of life for its citizens.

Leave a Reply