https://www.moneygeek.com/living/states-most-reliant-federal-government/ NewsNation Here’s how much each state depends on federal money Deb Gordon, MoneyGeek via Stacker 15 hours ago In this file photo, a person walks in to the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) building. (Photo by Zach Gibson/Getty Images) (MoneyGeek) – As the United States faces a crucial decision concerning the future of its budget and debt ceiling, it is important to consider how this could affect individuals and state governments. To help put this into perspective, MoneyGeek analyzed which states are most dependent on the federal government. The analysis take into consideration political affiliation, net benefits that individuals and organizations in the state receive, state government revenue from federal sources and GDP per capita to assess which states are most dependent on federal funding. KEY FINDINGS – 7 of the 10 states most dependent on the federal government were Republican-voting, with the average red state receiving $1.05 per dollar sent to the IRS. – Twenty-nine states sent more to the federal government than they received, compared to just nine states in 2021. – Of the states that sent more than they received, 52% were Democrat-voting and 48% were Republican-voting. – New Mexico had the highest return on federal spending of any state ($3.69), and Delaware had the lowest ($0.32). Canva Federal dependency rankings by state To find the states in the U.S. that were most dependent on the federal government in 2022, MoneyGeek analyzed the return on taxes sent to the federal government and the percent of each state’s revenue provided by the federal government. This analysis also compared states by political affiliation and per capita GDP to learn more about the factors that contribute to federal dependency. The states that are the most federally dependent 11. Louisiana Dependency Score: 44.7 Return on Tax Dollars (dollars received per dollar of federal taxes): $1.25 Federal Funding as % of State Revenue: 33% GDP (in $M): $281,047 10. Alabama Dependency Score: 46.2 Return on Tax Dollars: $1.80 Federal Funding as % of State Revenue: 27% GDP (in $M): $275,396 9. Maine Dependency Score: 47.2 Return on Tax Dollars: $1.72 Federal Funding as % of State Revenue: 28% GDP (in $M): $83,514 8. Arizona Dependency Score: 49.8 Return on Tax Dollars: $1.71 Federal Funding as % of State Revenue: 30% GDP (in $M): $453,602 7. Vermont Dependency Score: 54.9 Return on Tax Dollars: $1.50 Federal Funding as % of State Revenue: 36% GDP (in $M): $40,249 6. Montana Dependency Score: 50.8 Return on Tax Dollars: $1.59 Federal Funding as % of State Revenue: 32% GDP (in $M): $64,757 5. Kentucky Dependency Score: 57.8 Return on Tax Dollars: $1.89 Federal Funding as % of State Revenue: 32% GDP (in $M): $258,293 4. Alaska Dependency Score: 73 Return on Tax Dollars: $2.41 Federal Funding as % of State Revenue: 34% GDP (in $M): $64,257 3. Mississippi Dependency Score: 75 Return on Tax Dollars: $2.60 Federal Funding as % of State Revenue: 32% GDP (in $M): $138,156 2. West Virginia Dependency Score: 89.5 Return on Tax Dollars: $3.09 Federal Funding as % of State Revenue: 34% GDP (in $M): $96,724 1. New Mexico Dependency Score: 100 Return on Tax Dollars: $3.69 Federal Funding as % of State Revenue: 32% GDP (in $M): $122,359 Red states lead with federal dependence Democratic-leaning blue states tend to be wealthier and pay more to the federal government than they get. In contrast, Republican-leaning red states tend to have less wealth and receive more federal government funds than they pay. In the MoneyGeek rankings, 7 of the 10 most dependent states are considered red states. Policy choices may partially explain this relationship. “A really conservative state might choose to tax itself at a lower rate, which means by default, they can give fewer state-funded services,” explains Kathy Fallon, human services practice area director at Public Consulting Group. “That can exacerbate the situation.” But a correlation between states’ economic health and political affiliation may reflect economic factors beyond those explained by political philosophy. “If red states pay less in taxes than they receive in benefits, that’s because they are generally poorer and program rules are progressive — not because they are ‘takers’ while blue states are ‘donors’ in any value-laden sense,” says Mark Shepard, assistant professor at the Harvard Kennedy School of Government and faculty research fellow at the National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER). Higher GDP equals less federal dependence MoneyGeek analysis shows that states with higher per capita GDP are less dependent on the federal government. “Higher-income states produce the majority of the tax dollars that go into the federal government’s pocket,” Fallon says. Because of the higher income, states and their residents need less support and use fewer federal dollars. Fallon noted that tax code changes have made wealthy states’ contributions more pronounced. “Before, people who paid large state income taxes would deduct those from their federal tax payments,” she says. Now, state tax deductions are capped. “Ironically, it means the wealthier states’ populations are paying even more.” Take action in your state Taxes may be one of life’s only two certainties — along with death — according to writing attributed to Benjamin Franklin. But how much you pay in taxes and what you get for your tax dollars can vary greatly depending on where you live and your income tax bracket. Suppose you’re in a state that provides net contributions to the federal government and, therefore, to other states. In that case, you may consider whether your policy priorities are reflected in how the federal government spends and distributes that contribution. If your state receives more than it contributes, you might examine the role the federal government plays in the day-to-day life of your state. Educate yourself, decide how you feel about how your state budgets and spends money and show your approval or disapproval at the polls when you vote. No matter how divided the nation feels politically, states remain interconnected economically, bound to each other through tax contributions and receipts. Participating in the process and voting ensures that your voice is heard at the state and national level. Canva Methodology When evaluating the states most dependent on the federal government in 2022, MoneyGeek created an overall score focused on two key metrics: return on taxes sent to the federal government and the percent of each state’s revenue provided by the federal government. This final overall score was converted to a 100-point scale. To determine the return on taxes sent to the federal government, MoneyGeek utilized reporting by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) to identify the amount of taxes paid by the residents and businesses of each state for individual income tax, business income tax, estate and gift taxes, unemployment insurance taxes and excise taxes. Data from the Treasury Department was used on payments from the federal government to individuals and organizations within each state and calculated the monetary benefit provided by the federal government to each state relative to the amount of taxes provided by each state (Medicare payments were removed from this calculation as this information was consolidated to a handful of states). This metric was given a double weighting and converted to a 100-point scale for inclusion in the final score. MoneyGeek defined each state as being Republican or Democrat-led based on its voting history in the past five presidential elections. States where the Democratic candidate won three out of the five elections were labeled as blue, and states where the republican candidate won three out of the five elections were labeled as red. The percentage of each state’s revenue provided by the federal government was calculated using information on each state’s revenue sources collected by the U.S. Census. This metric was given a full weighting and converted to a 100-point scale for inclusion in the final score. SOURCES Bureau of Economic Analysis. “Gross Domestic Product by State, 1st Quarter 2021.” Accessed October 7, 2022. Internal Revenue Service. “SOI Tax Stats – Gross Collections, by Type of Tax and State – IRS Data Book Table 5.” Accessed October 7, 2022. USAspending.gov. “State Profiles.” Accessed October 7, 2022. U.S. Census Bureau. “2019 State & Local Government Finance Historical Datasets and Tables.” Accessed October 7, 2022. The Washington Post. “The final GOP tax bill is complete. Here’s what is in it.” Accessed October 17, 2020. This story originally appeared on MoneyGeek and has been independently reviewed to meet journalistic standards. Categories: Business, U.S. Back to top
And to add to this damning article, this doesn't take in consideration the support states are getting from Federal government activities, from military bases, NASA, various federal offices, etc. Mississippi's largest employer is a military contractor and, if I'm correct, it's also the state that threatens to secede and is the poorest state, run by a few wealthy families. Very similar to the banana republics of Central America.
As outlined in the past. The concept that 'red' states are the 'takers' that "depend on federal benefits" is absurd. Let's eliminate military base spending, farm subsidies, and other non-welfare federal spending from the accounting. The red states do not really want the military bases that were forced on them. These bases take up large tracts of land that are useful for other economic purposes and require local money spent on policing & other services because they tend to be high crime / low income areas. Let's put a large military base in NYC or Boston - and bulldoze all the existing homes. The displaced residents can survive on the 80%+ of large farm subsidies that are sent to the owners of corporate farms who reside in blue states (but is seen as red state money for some reason). Let's focus on federal welfare spending--defined here as childhood nutrition programs, food stamp programs, WIC benefits TANF benefits, and other similar benefits. This article from USA Today "New Yorkers lead pack in government benefits" compiled data showing which states had the highest per capita expenditures for every type of government-provided benefit and blue states top the list and red states made up most of the bottom 10. Top 10 - Most dependent on government aid 1 New York 2 West Virginia 3 Rhode Island 4 Maine 5 Pennsylvania 6 Massachusetts 7 Vermont 8 Kentucky 9 Michigan 10 Connecticut Bottom 10 - Least dependent on government aid 41 South Dakota 42 Nebraska 43 Wyoming 44 Idaho 45 Georgia 46 Texas 47 Nevada 48 Virginia 49 Colorado 50 Utah
https://www.thefiscaltimes.com/2015...Don-t-Even-Think-About-Closing-Military-Bases Congress to Pentagon: Don’t Even Think About Closing Military Bases December 18, 2015 The Defense Department has been pressing for years to close unneeded bases in the U.S., which would save billions and help gradually downsize and reconfigure the military. But that campaign has been mostly greeted with hostility on Capitol Hill. Last March, for example, Pentagon officials argued before a Senate panel that a new Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) round would pay off handsomely, producing $2 billion a year in savings by shrinking the infrastructure by only five percent, according to the Military Times. But influential Republicans including Sen. Kelly Ayotte of New Hampshire, chair of the Armed Services readiness subcommittee, lashed back, noting that the last BRAC in 2005 cost the government $35 billion and yet produced little in the way of savings. “Now is not the time to spend billions of up-front dollars on another BRAC round, especially as costs for the last one have dramatically exceeded expectations,” she said Just in case the Defense Department and the White House didn’t get the message, the GOP-controlled Congress inserted unmistakable language in the $1.1 trillion omnibus spending bill for fiscal 2016 barring DOD from planning another massive shutdown of military bases. “None of the funds made available by this Act may be used to propose, plan for, or execute a new additional Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) round,” states the legislation, which is awaiting final approval by the House and Senate. “Normally, Congress just tells an agency that they can’t spend money to do this or that,” said Steve Ellis, vice president of Taxpayers for Common Sense. “But telling the Pentagon that they can’t spend money to propose a BRAC is the legislative equivalent of ‘don’t even think about it.’ The Administration can’t even put it in their Fiscal Year 2017 budget request next year.” It has been a full decade since Congress last authorized a major downsizing of the military’s U.S. footprint. More than 350 installations have been closed in five BRAC rounds dating back to 1988. In an effort to insulate the decision making from politics, Congress in the past has left the nitty gritty of deciding which bases to preserve and which to close to an independent commission, and then voted to approve or reject the overall recommendations. Given the steady decline in the number of troops and civilian workers, there is less and less of a need to maintain many sprawling and costly bases and military installations in the country. The Defense Department at one time estimated its excess or surplus infrastructure at between 18 percent and 30 percent, according to The Fiscal Times. The Pentagon’s vast real estate portfolio includes more than 562,000 buildings and structures on 523 bases, posts and centers. At a time when Defense Secretary Ashton Carter and Gen. Joseph Dunford, the chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff are pressing to streamline the military and reorganize combat commands, administration officials, defense budget analysts and others are dismayed by the staunch congressional resistance to downsizing the infrastructure. This is especially alarming when the Pentagon is being showered with so much money -- $572.6 billion alone in fiscal 2016 – while little is being done to crack down on waste or adequately audit spending. However, lawmakers argue that the timing is wrong for another BRAC amid widespread public concern about defense and the threat of ISIS terrorists. And they say that the last downsizing during the administration of Republican President George W. Bush in 2005 provided a cautionary note about the limits to savings that can be achieved by closing bases. Mostly, House and Senate members don’t like base-closures because they are politically divisive – pitting one state against another – and they can lead to the loss of jobs and economic opportunity in their states that could become an issue during an election. Ayotte, for example, is facing a tough challenge next year from Democratic Gov. Maggie Hassan and can’t afford to appear willing to risk a base closing in New Hampshire. Related: U.S. Weapons Worth $500 Million Vanish in Yemen “Congressmen don’t want bases closed in their districts, it’s as simple as that,” said Gordon Adams, a professor emeritus at American University and an authority on defense spending and strategy. “And that’s almost entirely what it is. The military brass would love to close bases; they would love to get the savings from consolidating infrastructure for things that they really want. They know they have too much infrastructure.” However, the controversy isn’t cut and dried. When the last BRAC was considered and approved in 2005, the Pentagon estimated similar excess capacity to what it is claiming now, according to reports. Congress ultimately approved reducing military infrastructure by less than 3.5 percent, but at a cost of a startling $35 billion to achieve. The annual savings from that huge investment turned out to be roughly $4 billion. Ever since then, opponents of more base closures cite the Bush administration’s costly experiment. Yet Adams said that the 2005 BRAC was different from earlier efforts because “they did more realignment than they did closure.” “What that means is taking forces from point A and grouping with them with forces at point B, consolidating bombers, consolidating fighter aircraft,” he said. “They didn’t close very many bases. But they had to do a lot of spending to reconfigure bases so that they could receive the incoming material and people.” “Members of Congress hide behind that cost to oppose any future base closure rounds,” he added.
Without military bases boosting their economies red states would be even bigger takers than they already are. https://comptroller.texas.gov/economy/fiscal-notes/2016/september/military.php Military Installations Worth Billions for Texas Comptroller Study Weighs Economic Impacts by Bruce Wright Texans have a long and proud military tradition, and have distinguished themselves in every conflict since there was a Texas. But for many communities throughout the state, the military isn't just a focus for pride. B-1 flight prep: Flight preparation begins for a B-1B Lancer at Dyess Air Force Base. Photo courtesy of the U.S. Air Force Texas Comptroller Glenn Hegar recently visited a number of Texas military installations to announce the results of a new study that quantifies the economic benefits Texas derives from the presence of these facilities in our state. The Comptroller study found that the 15 major military installations located in Texas generate more than $136.6 billion in economic activity here each year, and add $81.4 billion to our gross state product (Exhibit 1). They also generate $48.1 billion in annual personal income and support, directly and indirectly, nearly 806,000 Texas jobs. http://www.nola.com/military/index.ssf/2013/09/military_bases_defense_contrac.html Military bases, defense contracts, retirees bring $8.7 billion to Louisiana economy, study says The Naval Air Station-Joint Reserve Base's main entrance in Belle Chasse. The air station is one of the region's economic engines and plays a key role in the $527 million that military installations' payroll and contracts contribute to southeast Louisiana. (U.S. Navy) The military presence and defense contracts pumped more than $8.7 billion into the Louisiana economy during the 2012 fiscal year, with almost one third of the money tied to bases and activities in the New Orleans area, according to a summary of a long-sought economic impact analysis commissioned by the state. About 82,700 Louisiana jobs -- or about 4.35 percent of the state’s employment -- are tied to the military, and the workforce generated $287 million in state and local taxes in fiscal 2012, according to the study. The military presence alone accounted for $5.2 billion during the year, an amount that includes payroll for troops and civilians who work for the Department of Defense, U.S. Coast Guard or Louisiana Military Department, plus contracts associated with those installations. The balance includes defense contracts held by private companies in petroleum, shipbuilding and other industries, totaling $2.8 billion. Also, $637 million in pension checks was paid to the almost 24,000 military retirees living in Louisiana, according to the study. "We strongly support our military men and women in Louisiana as well as the installations at which they are based," Louisiana Economic Development Secretary Stephen Moret said Wednesday. "Accordingly, we have committed a great deal of staff time to developing and maintaining strong relationships with military installation leaders here as well as their superiors at the Pentagon." http://www.nola.com/military/index....ending_key_piece_of.html#incart_more_business Military spending key piece of Louisiana economy The Naval Air Station-Joint Reserve Base in Belle Chasse is one of Louisiana’s economic engines, contributing a portion of the $2.4 billion in direct contract spending in the state by Defense Department entities and the U.S. Coast Guard, according to a summary of a new economic study The study, commissioned by the Louisiana Economic Development, has not been released publicly. Almost 24,000 military retirees report living in Louisiana. They received more than $597 million the 2012 fiscal year, according to the study. The study looks at total economic effect, total direct contract spending and the total economic effect for military retirees living in the state. Combined with “induced effects,” the total economic effect on Louisiana was almost $5.2 billion, according to the summary. Fort Polk, the sprawling U.S. Army post in rural west-central Louisiana, is ranked at the top of the military installations in the state, according to the private group Fort Polk Progress, which announced the summary and reportedly helped pay for the study. The base contributes almost 16,000 jobs and almost $600 million in payroll to the state, according to the report. About $1.3 billion in spending in the state was tied to Fort Polk in the 2012 fiscal year. The state claimed a victory earlier this year to head off the Army’s proposal to reduce Fort Polk dramatically. The study looks at seven military installations and activities in the state, including Barksdale Air Force Base in Bossier City. U.S. Navy officials at the Belle Chasse air station have for years said the installation ranks as the fifth top employer in the state, a finding the study reportedly confirms.The economic impact study “confirms what our city has always known: Fort Polk is our economy,” Leesville Mayor Robert Rose said in the Fort Polk Progress release.
Yeah, eliminating military base welfare, farm subsidies welfare and other federal government welfare makes red states less welfare takers