Amendment 5: Support the elimination of state income tax or not?

On August 4, 2026, Missouri voters will vote on several amendments to the State Constitution. One of those amendments, Amendment 5, concerns the elimination of the Missouri State Income Tax. The official wording that will appear on the ballot for Amendment 5 asks, “Shall the Missouri Constitution be amended to: Require legislative phase-out of the individual state income tax based on revenue growth, and authorize the expansion of sales and use taxes; curtail constitutional limits on taxing goods and services; and require local tax rate cuts without reducing school funding if local sales tax revenue increases?”

The official ballot language is a summary of what is actually permitted if the amendment passes. The specific details, what is authorized, and how that will be done can be found in HOUSE JOINT RESOLUTION NOS. 173 & 174 103RD GENERAL ASSEMBLY https://documents.house.mo.gov/billtracking/bills261/hlrbillspdf/6854H.02P.pdf 

The following statements were developed evaluating many sources including HOUSE JOINT RESOLUTION NOS. 173 & 174 103RD GENERAL ASSEMBLY using artificial intelligence, prompted, reviewed and rewritten by this author. They fall into two main areas: reasons to support the amendment and reasons to oppose it. For each statement, there is a “Pro” and “Con” Argument.

It’s important to note that there are no absolutes here only opinions, as this has never been done before in Missouri. The only absolute is the language contained in HOUSE JOINT RESOLUTION NOS. 173 & 174 103RD GENERAL ASSEMBLY https://documents.house.mo.gov/billtracking/bills261/hlrbillspdf/6854H.02P.pdf .The claims in the statements and the Pro and Con for each will prove themselves, one way or the other, only after Amendment 5 goes into effect if approved by the voters and the legislature acts on that vote. 

REASONS GIVEN TO SUPPORT AMENDMENT 5

1. Boosts economic competitiveness and growth

PRO: Moving from an income tax to a sales tax encourages people to work and invest. Supporters believe this will serve as an economic magnet, attracting new jobs and families to Missouri, as in states with no income tax, such as Texas and Florida. 

CON: Eliminating the income tax creates an $8.5 billion budget hole. Opponents warn that a tax rate this high could hurt economic competitiveness and growth by discouraging people from shopping locally. 

2. Keeps more money in taxpayers’ pockets.

PRO: The amendment forces the state to slowly eliminate the individual income tax forever. Supporters say this ensures the government gives extra money back to the people, letting hard-working families keep more of their paychecks.

CON: Replacing the income tax with a higher sales tax hurts lower-earning and middle-class families. These families spend a larger portion of their money on everyday goods. Opponents estimate that 80 percent of Missourians will see their total taxes rise, costing the average worker over $500 a year.

3. Relies on fiscally responsible revenue triggers

PRO: The phase-out of the income tax is tied to the state making enough money to make up for the loss of income tax revenue. Supporters say this means tax cuts will occur only when the state meets specific revenue goals, keeping the budget safe and responsible.

CON: The amendment itself does not set any specific revenue goals; it just tells future politicians to make them. Because state revenue naturally grows with normal inflation, these undefined triggers could force income tax cuts even when the state cannot truly afford them.

4. Modernizes an outdated tax code.

PRO: Missouri’s current sales tax mostly applies to physical goods, not modern purchases like digital goods and services. Supporters say expanding the sales tax will help local stores to better compete with out-of-state companies.

CON: Opponents call this an ‘everything tax’ on daily necessities. The amendment allows politicians to skip normal voter approval for five years. This gives them the power to add new taxes to things like doctor visits, rent, childcare and car repairs, making life much more expensive.

5. Drives local property tax relief

PRO: If the state taxes new services, local governments will automatically get more sales tax money. To stop local governments from getting too rich off this, the amendment requires them to offset it by cutting other local taxes, such as property taxes.

CON: This rule caps local communities’ earnings at 3 percent in the first year. Opponents point out that this is lower than recent inflation. This strict cap could leave growing towns unable to pay for basic services like roads and police.

REASONS TO OPPOSE AMENDMENT 5

1. Creates a massive $8.5 billion budget deficit

PRO: The income tax brings in $8.5 billion a year, paying for over 60 percent of the state budget. Opponents say there is no realistic way to replace this much money. Without it, the state will have to make devastating cuts to important services, including a possible 18 percent cut to local public schools.

CON: Supporters argue that the state will not actually face a deficit. They believe a mix of strong economic growth, taxing new services, and using carefully calibrated revenue triggers will safely cover the lost income tax revenue without harming the state budget.

2. Raises overall taxes for 80 percent of Missourians

PRO: Because lower-income and middle-class families spend a larger share of their earnings on daily items, swapping an income tax for a sales tax hits them the hardest. Opponents project that 80 percent of residents will face a net tax increase, while only the wealthiest will see a real tax cut.

CON: Supporters argue that eliminating the income tax is the best way to help everyone. They believe that removing the penalty on working and earning money is the fairest system and will leave more cash in the pockets of all Missouri taxpayers.

3. Imposes an everything tax on daily necessities

PRO: The amendment gives lawmakers the power to add sales taxes to everyday services that were previously untaxed. Opponents warn this will drastically raise the cost of living by taxing essentials like healthcare, housing and childcare without requiring a public vote for the next five years.

CON: Supporters claim this is simply modernizing an outdated tax code. They argue that taxing a wider range of services allows the overall tax rate to remain lower while making the system fairer for businesses that sell physical goods.

4. Locks the state into a dangerous constitutional blank check

PRO: The amendment requires politicians to eliminate the income tax, but it only allows them to expand the sales tax to fill the gap. Opponents argue this creates a permanent constitutional trap. Once the income tax is gone, it is banned forever, leaving future lawmakers unable to fix major budget crises.

CON: Supporters see this permanent ban as a necessary protection. By writing it into the constitution, they guarantee that future politicians cannot easily undo the tax cuts and go back to taxing the labor and income of Missourians.

5. Harms local communities with arbitrary revenue caps

PRO: The amendment sets a strict cap on how much new revenue local governments can keep. Opponents argue that capping local revenue growth at 3 percent ignores the reality of high inflation and rapid population growth, effectively forcing budget cuts on local communities that need to maintain schools and roads.

CON: Supporters say these caps are a vital tool for shrinking government. They argue the caps are necessary to ensure that local politicians pass the savings directly to the people in the form of property tax relief, rather than keeping the extra money for themselves.