Elimination of Georgia income tax is on the campaign table

If there is an election in Georgia, there’s going to be talk of eliminating the state’s income tax. This election cycle, it’s more than an idle candidate’s pledge. 

Lieutenant Governor Burt Jones, himself a candidate for Governor, has announced a study committee of Senators who will spend the next few months looking at ways to phase out Georgia’s income tax. Jones is bringing along other candidates for the effort.

Chairing the study committee will be the head of the Senate’s Appropriations Committee, Blake Tillery, who is a candidate for the job Lieutenant Governor Jones currently holds. Serving on the committee will be Senators John Kennedy, who just relinquished the title of Senate President Pro Tempore to also run for Lieutenant Governor. Senator Steve Gooch, a former Senate Majority Whip, Majority Leader, and also a candidate for Lieutenant Governor will serve as well. Senate Transportation Chairman Greg Dolezal, who is said to be looking at a run for Lieutenant Governor but has not yet announced his intensions, also joins.  

In addition to those announced and potential candidates for the state’s top two offices, the incoming Senate President Pro Tempore, Larry Walker, and Majority Leader Jason Anavitarte, add the political horsepower of those who intend to remain in the Senate past the 2026 election. Other Senators named to serve are Finance Committee Chair Chuck Hufstetler, who has authored many bills which would eliminate or cap various tax credits currently offered by the state, Ethics Committee Chair Sam Watson, and Democratic Senators Ed Harbison, Nan Orrock, and Michael Rhett.

Let’s be clear, this is no longer an empty bumper sticker slogan. The power structure of the Georgia State Senate – including those who want to be in the top statewide positions beginning in January 2027 – have decided to propose a plan that would dramatically change how Georgia funds its current $38 billion state budget. 

I’ve been highly critical of similar campaign pledges in the past. They were talking points without substance. The candidates were offering something for nothing. That “nothing” included math to back up how the revenue would be replaced, or if existing programs or services would have to be cut.

Here, we have more than on candidate’s talking points. We have a pledge not only to eliminate a tax, but a vehicle to show us how.  

I wish them well, but for now will remain skeptical. Anyone considering eliminating what is currently just under half of all state revenues should approach such an exercise with eyes wide open. We need not just focus on the good, but the messy details of transition and the full consequences, including many which might not be intended.

Note that we’re not going to just cut spending by an equal amount. That would indict all participating as to have been governing a state with a budget that is 50% fat. 

On the contrary, various metrics have Georgia’s budget among the leaner end of state governments. The Tax Foundation has us 39^th out of 50^th states in spending per capita by state and local governments.

Those last few words are one of the complicating factors here, “..and local governments”. Our tax burden isn’t just what the state collects, but Georgia has ceded a lot of revenue collection to counties and cities.  

The spending from local sales taxes almost equal the 25% of state revenue that comes from the same source. Local counties and school boards get virtually all of our property tax dollars. These dollars, now mostly outside of state control, contribute to our overall tax burden.

But there’s more there than that. When the state “axed the tag tax” the last time the public decided a particular tax was politically expedient to vaporize, the state created a formula to rebate local governments for their lost share of the revenue. When the state tried unsuccessfully to eliminate local sales taxes on motor fuel in 2015, the locals instead got a cap on the price they could tax, but also got increased local road dollars.

The point here is that when it comes time to re-divide the state revenue pie, local officials are not interested in a fiscal diet. And virtually none of them are elected or reelected on comparative indexes of state and local tax burdens.

There are many more issues that must be addressed as part of this process. For now, it’s important for Georgians to understand that this could be one of the largest policy changes our state has undertaken in decades. We need to approach it with clear, sober analysis as to what we might get, and what we might have to give up, to decide if this is really in the state’s best interest.