The state of Montana can be used as an example of how tax cuts pay off, argues Grover Norquist.
Montana cut income tax rates.
— Grover Norquist (@GroverNorquist) July 19, 2026
Critics predicted less revenue.
Instead? Income tax revenue more than doubled.
Lower rates. More growth. More jobs. More taxpayers. That's how pro-growth tax reform works.https://t.co/bMM5XdKeGf
Income taxes are the portion of an earner's gross (total without an elimination) compensation that he is obligated to pay the government prior to taking his earnings home. A 15 percent income tax rate on $1,000 of income means the earner pays $150 in income taxes before receiving what is not deducted for other purposes from the $850 remainder as net income. When tax rates increase, it leaves earners with fewer discretionary spending dollars. When income tax rates are cut, earners go home with more money for their own day-to-day lives.
The debate rages between those who argue the need for government revenues as a basis for higher taxes and those who argue that economic growth stimulated by lower taxes benefits all sectors of society while paying for itself. In this case, Norquist points to the state of Montana as an example of income tax cuts resulting in economic growth that benefited the government revenue needs of the state.
We live in a free society. That means the federal government, Congress in particular, while having the power to lay and collect taxes on incomes from whatever source derived, should not have to jack up income tax rates to get appropriate government revenues. It also means a responsibility rests on the shoulders of the people to maximize economic growth opportunities that come along, such as tax cuts, so that all are benefited, including the government.