Pennsylvania tax revenues for 1st quarter at 6.1% above pre-recession peak |

Pennsylvania tax revenues for 1st quarter at 6.1% above pre-recession peak

Deb Erdley

At least we’re not Ohio.

A new report by the Pew Charitable Trusts that looks at state tax revenues at the end of the first quarter of 2019 found they were up 13 percent across the nation since their pre-recession peak in 2008.

“The results mean that states collectively had the equivalent of 13 cents more in purchasing power for every $1 they collected at their recession-era peak more than a decade earlier,” the Pew team reported.

When researchers drilled down to the state level, things weren’t quite as rosy.

In Pennsylvania, the recovery saw state tax revenues increasing by 6.1 percent from the pre-recession peak, less than half the national level.

Like Pennsylvania, West Virginia saw an increase in state tax collections over the 2008 peak, but only 2.3 percent.

And then there was Ohio, where tax revenues were down 7 percent since the pre-recession peak.

Those numbers all pale next to Maryland, where tax revenues were up 21 percent.

Although the Pew report looked at first quarter 2019 figures, a state report showed revenue collection in Pennsylvania continued on an upward track through Oct. 31.

Pennsylvania Revenue Secretary Dan Hassell reported that the state collected $2.7 billion in general fund revenue in October, or $119.7 million more than projected.

Deb Erdley is a Tribune-Review staff writer. You can contact Deb at 724-850-1209, [email protected] or via Twitter .

Categories: News | Pennsylvania | Top Stories
TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.