|Part 1:The states in the region surrounding Kansas exhibit a variety of tax structures. The states differ considerably in per capita intensity of taxation, and in the breakdown of tax collections between state governments and local authorities. The states have also made different choices about the types of taxes to employ, which has serious implications for the fairness and stability of their tax systems. In terms of per capita tax revenues, the higher taxed states in the region, Colorado, Iowa, Kansas, and Nebraska, collected revenues between 1800 and 2000 USD during 1990. Kansas, with tax revenues of 1846 USD per capita, ranked 27th in the nation, substantially below the national average of 2011 USD. The lower taxed states in the region, Missouri and Oklahoma, each collected less than 1600 USD per capita in 1990; they ranked 45th and 39th in the nation respectively. There is no simple relationship between the amount of funds collected at the local level and the degree of support for locally provided services. With the exception of Nebraska and Missouri, all of the states in the region redistribute a substantial amount of funds from state to local jurisdictions, primarily to support education, and secondarily to support public welfare programs. Changes in the structure of taxes made by the 1992 Kansas legislature will work to increase the amount of state funding versus local funding for educational services.Part 2:Throughout the 1980s, state and local governments played an increasingly active role in trying to attract and retain jobs. Their efforts were particularly intense in areas which experienced declines in traditional manufacturing and extractive industries due to changes in global competitive conditions. Tax policy was a major focus of the attempt to stimulate a healthy economy both nationally and in the states. Much of the push for state tax reform during the 1980s was directed toward the use of special tax credits and abatements. Tax incentives, along with other inducements such as industrial revenue bond financing, dominated much of the state and local involvement in efforts to encourage business growth. State and local governments have spent considerable time and money developing and implementing both general tax reforms and specific tax incentive programs. Ironically, there is considerable debate about whether the general level of state and local taxation, or any of the specific abatement programs, influence job and investment growth. The issue has been examined numerous times and in numerous ways. But the results of academic studies of the issue are inconclusive.