COLUMBUS, Ohio — Taxes may be as certain as death, and some experts say what also should be certain is knowing exactly how our tax dollars are being spent.

According to new data, the average American paid about $14,000 in federal income taxes in 2018. The National Priorities Project at the Institute for Policy Studies crunched the numbers, and the largest chunk of every tax dollar, nearly 30 cents, goes to health care.

Program director Lindsay Koshgarian said military spending encompasses the second biggest share, at 24 cents. However, she noted, less than 5 cents of that goes to troop pay and benefits, while 12 cents goes to military contractors.

"Just for a point of comparison, Lookheed Martin got $48 billion. The entire budget for the Environmental Protection Agency is about $8 billion,” Koshgarian said. “So this is a huge amount of money that is going to federal contractors."

The average taxpayer spent about $100 on K-12 education, which is the same amount on immigration and border patrol, including family separations. About 15 cents of each tax dollar went to federal interest in the national debt; 7 cents to unemployment and labor; and 6 cents to veterans.

Koshgarian said federal crisis response is being funded at the expense of crisis prevention. She explained the average taxpayer paid $179 to deal with the aftermath of natural disasters, such as floods, hurricanes and wildfires.

"And those disasters, we know, are probably exacerbated by climate change,” she said. “And so the $179 is 22 times as much as you contributed to renewable energy, which is only $8 for the average taxpayer."

Individual income taxes account for half of all federal government revenues, which Koshgarian said is a lot more than corporate taxes.

"Back in 2017, individuals were paying $7 for every $1 paid by a corporation, and today that number's gone up to $11,” she said. “Individuals are carrying more of the burden for funding the federal government compared to what they used to."

Corporations paid 47 percent less in income taxes during the first five months of fiscal year 2019, compared with the same period in 2017.

This story was produced in association with Media in the Public Interest and funded in part by the George Gund Foundation.


get more stories like this via email

West Virginia lawmakers are clamping down on corporations trying boost environmentally and socially responsible investing. A new report by EcoConsult Solutions finds their actions will likely cost taxpayers at least $9-million, and perhaps as much as $29-million dollars annually. Senate Bill 262, passed last year, restricts the state from investing in companies deemed to be energy boycotters. Among those boycotted include BlackRock, Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan Chase, Morgan Stanley and Wells Fargo.

Jim Kotcon, chair of the West Virginia Sierra Club, said restricting long-term financial investments in the form of bonds could end up costing residents and taxpayers by reducing the amount of money the state has for public services and programs.

"This appears to be an effort by the state government to help bail out the coal industry and to deny the real cost of climate change on West Virginia citizens," Kotcon said.

More than two dozen states are suing the federal government over a U.S. Department of Labor rule change on environmental, social and governance, or ESG, in workplace retirement accounts. The rule allows 401(k) providers to consider climate change and other issues when making investments.

Kotcon said environmental groups believe state investment funds should take into consideration environmental and social factors, especially since West Virginia communities are struggling to cope with increased flooding and extreme weather events driven by climate change.

"It has become sort of an extremist initiative," he said, "trying to penalize financial institutions that are attempting to do the right thing."

More than a dozen states so far have passed or have pending bills that would pull state funds from investments deemed to be adverse to the oil and gas industry, according to the report.

A Minnesota House committee heard testimony Thursday about the governor's proposed spending plan for education. As these talks unfold, public polling indicates voters want to see more dollars go toward improving public schools.

Gov. Tim Walz's plan calls for boosting the general education funding formula over the next two years and tying it to inflation, while adding more staff such as counselors and social workers.

State Education Commissioner Willie Jett touted the overall proposal during the committee meeting.

"We must never lose sight of the fact that a well-supported educator workforce is fundamental and critical to the survival of our schools, and the well-being and academic success of our students," he said.

Nationally, a new American Federation of Teachers poll found 66% of voters think the government spends too little on education, and nearly 70% want to see more funding. The governor's plan closely aligns with education priorities among legislative Democrats. Republicans, who are in the minority this session, have voiced concerns that too much surplus money would go to underperforming schools.

Minnesota is also looking at boosting unemployment insurance aid to include hourly school workers when they struggle to stay employed over the summer. Rep. Emma Greenman, DFL-Minneapolis, said it's encouraging to see more conversation about helping support staff.

"If your district is like my district," she said, "you're hearing a lot about the staffing shortages, about the need for 'paras' - I hear a lot about that from parents and teachers - about the bus driver shortage."

By "paras," she meant paraprofessionals who help in clasrrooms.

In the AFT poll, teacher shortages and unsafe campus environments were listed as among the most serious problems at schools. The survey was conducted in late December and included input from 1,500 registered voters nationwide.

Gov. Greg Gianforte delivered his State of the State address to the Montana Legislature Wednesday night, discussing his plans for the state's hefty budget surplus.

Lawmakers are looking at a surplus of $2.5 billion. Republican Gianforte's top priority for the money is tax cuts.

Rose Bender, director of research for the Montana Budget and Policy Center, said the governor's proposal disproportionately benefits wealthy Montanans.

"The governor's income-tax cut proposal gives the wealthiest 1% of Montanans, on average, $6,000 each year in tax cuts, while middle-income families or those near the median income receive on average $50," Bender explained.

Bender noted most of the other tax cuts proposed, such as a property tax rebate, also would skew toward higher-income Montanans. However, she said a child tax credit the governor touted in his speech would be helpful for people with more modest incomes. The proposal would provide $1,200 to families with children age six and under, similar to a federal Child Tax Credit, which expired at the end of 2021.

Bender argued the Montana Legislature should do more this session to make health care costs more affordable and invest in child care, which is costly for families. She added other issues need addressing, as well.

"Montana's experiencing a serious housing crisis, and investing some direct state dollars into long-term housing solutions for families living on lower incomes should be another priority," Bender contended.

In his speech, Gianforte also asked lawmakers to focus on education reforms this year, including what he's calling more "parental rights." The session is scheduled to adjourn April 25.