Federal Tax Revenue by State: Donor and Recipient Rankings

In fiscal year 2024, only 19 states were net donors under the federal tax revenue by state donor vs. recipient states comparison, meaning their residents sent more to Washington than the federal government spent within their borders.¹ The other 31 states, plus the District of Columbia, took in more than they paid.

The gap between the two groups is large, and it does not line up neatly with population, wealth, or geography. A handful of states carry an outsized share of the federal tax bill, while others rely heavily on federal dollars flowing back through defense contracts, federal payrolls, Social Security, Medicaid, and disaster relief.

What Makes a State a Donor or a Recipient

The label comes from a straightforward calculation: total federal taxes paid by a state’s residents and businesses in a fiscal year, minus total federal spending directed to that state. A positive balance makes the state a donor; a negative balance makes it a recipient.

One methodological point shapes every number in this comparison. The IRS credits tax revenue to the state listed on the filed return, not to the state where the underlying economic activity took place. A company headquartered in one state but operating across the country has its entire federal corporate tax payment credited to the headquarters state. That accounting choice matters most for corporate taxes and is a big reason a few smaller states look unusually productive in the data.

The 19 Donor States in FY 2024

In raw dollars, three states dominated the donor list:¹

California paid $275.6 billion more than it received.
New York paid $76.5 billion more than it received.
Texas paid $68.1 billion more than it received.

Those totals reflect population size as much as anything else. California alone generated roughly $806 billion in gross federal collections in FY 2024, about 15.9% of the $5.07 trillion national total. Texas contributed roughly $416 billion, New York roughly $385 billion, and Florida roughly $325 billion. Together those four states supplied about 38% of all federal tax revenue.¹

Per capita, the donor rankings look different. Nebraska led at a net $9,531 per resident, followed by Minnesota at $8,702 and Washington State at $7,139.¹ These smaller states give more relative to their size than the raw-dollar leaders do.

The Biggest Recipient States

Recipient states pull in more federal spending than their taxpayers send in. Virginia is the clearest example in absolute terms: it received about $89 billion more than it contributed in FY 2024, driven by its proximity to Washington, D.C., and its heavy concentration of federal agencies and defense contractors.¹

On a per-person basis, states with smaller populations and large federal footprints post the highest recipient figures. Alaska drew $24,796 per resident in federal disbursements, and New Mexico drew $21,481 per resident.¹ Both states host significant military installations and federal land management operations, and both rely heavily on transfer payments like Social Security and Medicaid.

Low per capita tax contributions reinforce recipient status on the other side of the ledger. West Virginia contributed only $4,912 per resident in FY 2024, Mississippi $5,161, and New Mexico $6,033, all well below the national average of roughly $15,000 per person.¹ Lower average incomes and older populations both push the balance toward the recipient side.

Why the Per Capita Rankings Shuffle the Map

The states that give the most per person are not always the ones people expect. Massachusetts led all states with $21,933 in gross federal collections per resident, followed by Nebraska at $21,922 and Minnesota at $21,106. Washington, D.C., stood apart at $64,427 per resident, reflecting its concentration of high-earning professionals and federal contractors.¹

Two forces push these numbers around.

The first is income concentration. Federal individual income taxes follow a progressive rate structure, so a relatively small cluster of high earners can lift a state’s per capita total well above the national average. A high-earning household faces a marginal rate several times higher than a median earner, so places with financial and tech corridors punch above their weight without needing uniformly wealthy populations.

The second is corporate filing location. Nebraska’s per capita numbers come with a striking detail: over $10,000 per resident in FY 2024 came from business taxes alone, more than six times the national average.¹ Several large corporations file their federal returns from Nebraska addresses, and the IRS credits the full payment to that state even when the underlying business operates nationwide. Delaware and other headquarters states show similar effects.

What Moves a State Between Donor and Recipient

The balance is not fixed. A single fiscal year can push a state across the line for reasons that have nothing to do with tax policy.

Disaster spending is one driver. A major hurricane triggering FEMA payments can flip a state’s balance toward recipient status for that year. A new military base, a large defense contract, or a wave of federal infrastructure funding can do the same.

Demographics work more slowly but in the same direction. States with aging populations draw more Social Security and Medicare dollars, gradually pulling them further into recipient territory regardless of what their working-age residents pay in taxes. Industry mix also shapes the tax side of the equation: energy-producing states generate heavy corporate profits, financial hubs produce both high corporate returns and large individual income tax collections, and states dominated by government employment, agriculture, or retirement communities tend to contribute less because the federal tax base on those activities is smaller.

The Limits of the Donor Recipient Frame

The comparison captures a real pattern, but it can mislead if taken as a scorecard. Federal spending was never designed to match state-by-state tax contributions dollar for dollar. Social Security follows retirees. Medicaid follows low-income residents. Defense spending follows bases and contractors. Federal land management follows federal land. None of those flows track where the tax money originated, and none were meant to.

The IRS attribution rule adds another layer of distortion. Because corporate tax payments are credited to headquarters states, the donor totals overstate the contributions of a few states and understate the contributions of the many states where those companies actually employ workers and generate economic activity. Read the numbers as a rough map of the flow of federal dollars, not as a settled accounting of which states are subsidizing which.

1
USAFacts. Which States Contribute the Most and Least to Federal Revenue