Tax structure and revenue instability: the Great Recession and the states

Table 2 Change in actual taxes vs. potential revenue exposure: high and low states

	(1)	(2)	(3)	(4)	(5)	(6)
	All states	5 most progressive states²	5 most regressive states³	5 largest % decreases in state taxes⁴	5 largest % increases in state taxes⁵	8 states with high mineral taxes⁶
Change in total state tax revenue ($ per return)	−138	−400	232	−782	1031	480
(Standard Deviation)	(582)
Percent change in total state tax revenue	−3.1	−6.7	1.2	−14.6	17.7	7.9
(Standard Deviation)	(10.3)
Potential revenue exposure¹	−255	−466	−189	−459	−102	−9
(Total state taxes, in $ per return)
(Standard Deviation)	(215)
Progressivity:	0.8	0.98	0.54	0.78	0.77	0.75
Burden on top 5%/Average burden
Average tax burden	0.082	0.084	0.057	0.08	0.071	0.079

Notes:
¹Defined as the weighted sum of the change in AGI 2007–2009 per federal return in 2007 by segment of the distribution (i.e., top 5 percent, next 15 percent, bottom 80 percent), weighted by effective tax burden by segment in 2007.
²California, New Jersey, Oregon, Delaware, Vermont.
³Washington, South Dakota, Wyoming, Nevada, Florida.
⁴Arizona, California, New Mexico, Florida, Connecticut.
⁵Wyoming, North Dakota, lowa, Indiana, Montana.
⁶Wyoming, West Virginia, Texas, Oklahoma, North Dakota, Montana, Louisiana, New Mexico.