State Taxes and Heavy Anchors

Email Print

About 15
years ago, a young man paid me $100 to suggest just one idea that
would save him money. He was in his 20s. Like an idiot, I accepted
his offer. I should have handed back his $100 and told him this:
"If I can save you money, will you give me half of the savings
for three years?"

He was a
commodities broker. He claimed to make $200,000 a year. I asked
him where he lived. He said Portland, Ore. My suggestion was incredibly

move across
the state line to Vancouver, Wash., which has no state income
tax. Oregon had a 10% top income tax bracket, but no sales tax.
I told him, "Buy all of your big-ticket items in Portland,
but live in Vancouver." Taxes matter.

What amazed
me at the time was the fact that someone who was pulling in $200,000
a year as a commodities speculator had never bothered to consider
the tax consequences of his geography. His income was not tied
to geography. All he needed was a telephone. A few miles up the
road was a tax haven. This never crossed his mind.

Texas has
no income tax. This creates problems for businesses located just
across the state line. Texas business owners in effect receive
the equivalent of a tax subsidy. This was especially true before
Texas revised the tax code for business in the mid-1990s. In response
to the Texas threat, the Arkansas legislature decades ago quietly
passed a law that few Arkansas voters know about. The law grants
income tax immunity to residents living inside the city limits
of the two-states border city of Texarkana. Today, when you drive
down State Street, you see all of the banks on the Arkansas side
of the line. Taxes matter.

Robert Anderson
replaced me at the Foundation for Economic Education (FEE) in
1973 when I decided to go into the business world. He retired
from high-tax New York to Wyoming (no income tax), but does his
bulk shopping in Montana (no sales tax). That’s whenever he doesn’t
live in his motor home at Disney World in Florida (no income tax).
Taxes matter.

I lived in
Texas for almost 20 years. I moved out of North Carolina in 1979
because I got tired of paying North Carolina’s income tax. It
also galled me that North Carolina allowed me to only deduct 15%
of my income for charitable donations. Above 15%, I had to pay
the state for the right to give away my money. The state offered
only two exemptions from this law: you could donate 100% of your
money to the state, tax free, and you could donate more than 15%
to a university in the state. I called this the Duke exemption.
So, when I knew I had a winning direct-mail ad for Remnant
Review, I took most of my year’s business profits (almost
$150,000 — a good year) and did a mass mailing in late December
(a tax-deductible expense for all of 1979), moved to Texas in
the first week of January, and collected all of the money that
came back in the mail (tripled) in Texas, where I paid no state
income tax. That saved me at least $20,000 after moving costs.
Taxes matter.

If you could
keep an extra 4% to 7% after taxes, compounded, for 40 years,
this could make a tremendous difference for your net worth. This
is why anyone who lives in a high tax state had better live there
because he makes more money than the tax burden costs him, while
keeping after-tax expenses as low as he could in a low-tax state.
Otherwise, he is giving away his money to bureaucrats. Taxes matter.


Most people
pay no attention to such matters when they are young. If they
live in a high-tax state, they don’t move out of state. When they
are middle aged, they are chained to an anchor: grandchildren.
They don’t move.

This is why
young people should decide in their 20s to move out of a high-tax
state. They should then systematically invest their tax savings.

They can
buy a lot of things on the Internet and thereby escape paying
sales taxes (at least for now). So, a state with no income tax
and a high sales tax is less of a burden for smart shoppers. Best,
of course, is a state with neither sales tax nor income tax. New
Hampshire comes to mind.

There is
a Web page that lists all states in terms of their tax burden.
The chart is adequate, but it doesn’t consider business taxes
as a separate category. For running a business, other sources
of information are superior, such as Agora’s manual, "The
State Income Tax Report." But,
as a handy-dandy introduction, click here. Print out the page.

Then ponder your economic future.

The thing
that grabbed me is this. The #1 state for taxation, from the bureaucrats’
point of view, is Maine. State #49 is New Hampshire, which has
a high property tax. The states are contiguous. They provide similar
state "services." They have similar populations culturally.
Yet they impose dramatically different tax burdens. New Hampshire’s
economy is consistently stronger than Maine’s. Taxes matter.

It’s also
worth comparing Massachusetts and Vermont with New Hampshire:
same story.

the colored map of which counties went for Bush and Gore? I
like this version better: it has the Democrat counties in red.

New Hampshire
went for Bush by about 7,000 votes. Nader got about 21,000 votes.
So, the state’s four electoral votes went to Bush, which won him
the election. (Forget about Chad; remember Ralph.)

States without
state income taxes are these: Alaska, Wyoming, New Hampshire,
Florida, Tennessee (earned income), Texas, South Dakota, Nevada,
and Washington. Washington has a "no income tax" clause
in its constitution, which takes a 2/3 majority to amend. This
has been attempted repeatedly; voters have always rejected the
proposed amendment.


When we think
of economic opportunities, we usually think "salary."
Salary increases are usually tied to promotions. They are also
tied to the decisions of our bosses as to how much we are worth.

When I think
of economic opportunities, I think "business," followed
closely by "real estate." This means counties, not states.

I then think
"taxes." This means states, but to a lesser extent,
it means counties.

we ought to think "lifestyle." That’s what really matters.
If we pay more taxes but enjoy such benefits as greater safety,
better cultural opportunities, communities of similarly minded
people, then the money forfeited is worth it. Taxes then become
payments for overall lifestyle received — not state "services."

I live in
Northwest Arkansas. The lifestyle here is worth paying for. I
am in state #40, according to the tax chart. That’s pretty good.
I am buying business opportunities and lifestyle. But I would
be unwilling to live in this #40 state in most other regions of
the state. Counties matter.

If I were
to experience a huge increase in my income, I would buy a similar
lifestyle in the #47 state: Tennessee. For pure lifestyle, I would
locate in the northeast corner. But because of the residences
of two of my children, now Tennesseans, I would locate closer
to Nashville. Tennessee is a wide state. Johnson City is too far
from Nashville and Memphis.

These are
the kinds of calculations that few Americans indulge in, despite
their unprecedented geographical mobility. They think "salary
and family" and not much else. Cost of living enters in when
they are moving from a place like Arkansas to a place like San
Francisco, or the reverse, but otherwise, not many people think
about cost of living.

But retirees
do. Californians are reversing the great westward migration of
the 1930s. They are becoming Arkies. They choose a place like
Northwest Arkansas because it feels more urban, less Arkie. Northerners
have been moving to Asheville, N.C., for three decades. The beauty
and lifestyle are good, and taxes are no worse than in northern
states, New Hampshire excepted. The very rich live in Naples,
Fla. in the winter and Asheville in the summer.

richest Americans live on Jupiter Island (average home price:
$5.6 million) in the winter and Mt. Desert Island, Maine, in the
— not long enough to establish residence. Add
Jekyl Island, Georgia, to the list, and that’s where the elite
meet to eat. (Duffy ain’t here, nor are his peers.)


A young married
couple may choose a big city because it offers better pay for
young men who are just starting out. I recommend to such couples
that they select lifestyle from day one. Where would they like
to retire? Move there now. Start buying real estate. Start putting
roots down in the area where they will be buried.

If this requires
working at low wages for a time in order to build up a small business,
do it. If this involves turning down a future transfer, even if
turning it down means getting fired, do it. Buy lifestyle on the
installment plan: no money down, 50 years to pay.

is generally wasted time unless you use the drive time to learn
things that will advance your career or your income or your calling.
(Calling: the most important thing you can do in which you would
be the most difficult to replace.) Time is precious. A high-paying
job that eats into your time is not a good job unless you own
the company.

It is difficult
for young men to believe this. In life’s inescapable trade-off
between time and money, young men think they are long on time
and short of money. This is usually a mistaken evaluation. Money
can compound; time always contracts. We are short of time.

This means
that we usually must pay for our future lifestyle with forfeited
early money. We must live poorer early in order to live better
later. This is true of our investment of money. It is also true
of our investment of time. Because of the heavy anchor of family
ties, the cost of buying a better lifestyle late in life is prohibitively
expensive for most people unless they started buying it early.

Up the road
40 miles from me is a visible testimony to this truth: Bella Vista,
Ark. For decades, it has been a retirement community for Chicagoans
and similarly deprived lifestyle victims. They come for golf:
nine local courses. The wife builds her dream home. The husband
plays golf. They join a country club. Then the husband drops dead.
The wife moves back to her family up north. She sells her dream
home. You cannot imagine the nice homes that you can buy cheap
in Bella Vista. Ten years ago, before the Californians started
pouring in, they were even cheaper.

Before Punta
Gorda, Fla., became a hot market three years ago, it was the same
story. It may still be.


Taxes matter.
Lifestyle matters even more.

You should
make a decision soon. Do you intend to retire? If so, do you intend
to retire into another occupation or calling? Unless you are very
rich — a multimillionaire — your golden years will be employment years.
Social Security and Medicare aren’t going to be there when you
need them.

You should
begin to identify towns with low real estate costs. Look for cultural
support institutions, such as a college or university that offers
concerts and plays, plus a large library. Consider buying a rental
home there that you can retire into later. Make the transition
less expensive.

If I lived
in an area with very high real estate costs, such as Boston, where
a parking space sells for as much as $100,000, or San Francisco,
or southern California, I would consider moving out of my home
and renting it, thereby establishing it as an income-producing
property. A year from now, I would sell it or exchange it on a
tax-deferred basis for several rental homes in the town where
I intend to move. (See Section 1031 of the Internal Revenue Code.)
Anyone age 55 or older should sell such a residence now and use
the one-time tax-free capital gains to buy several rental properties
outside the region.

Most people
are tied to emotional anchors. They cannot bring themselves to
cut the chain. This offers investment opportunities for the handful
of people who see what the future is likely to bring: price inflation,
rising urban crime, higher taxes, and a disguised default of Social

One way or
another, you are buying a future lifestyle. Pick it now. The longer
you procrastinate, the more expensive it will be when it comes
time to buy.

4, 2003

North [send him mail]
is the author of Mises
on Money
. Visit
For a free subscription to Gary North’s newsletter on gold, click

North Archives

Email Print