Say “No” to Oregon Republican Push for No Taxes on Tips

What’s in the water in Salem?

On one side you have a phalanx of Democrats proposing the ludicrous idea of paying strikers unemployment benefits, which would make Oregon the only State in the country to grant unemployment benefits to striking public and private sector workers.

Not to be outdone in making nonsensical proposals, now you have a raft of Republicans, mimicking President Trump, proposing that the state forego taxing tips.

Here’s a tip – exempting tips from state taxes is a bad idea.

In their determination to position themselves as supporters of the working man (and woman), 21 of Oregon’s House Republicans have proposed a bill, HB 3914, to end taxation of tips, which are generally perceived as discretionary payments determined by a customer that employees receive from customers.

As written, the bill would not count “service charges” as tips. A restaurant, for example, recently added an automatic service charge equal to 18% of my bill. Even if that was intended to cover for a “no tipping” policy, it would be part of the server’s wages because it was not discretionary.

The 129-word Oregon bill gets right to the point, “There shall be subtracted from federal taxable income any amount of tips properly reported as wages on the taxpayer’s federal income tax return.”  That would automatically subtract tips from taxable income in Oregon, too. 

The bill deserves a quick death.

According to the IRS, “All cash and noncash tips received by an employee are income and are subject to Federal income taxes. All cash tips received by an employee in any calendar month are subject to social security and Medicare taxes and must be reported to the employer.” So, tip income is taxable income.

Charges automatically added to a customer’s check by an employer and subsequently distributed to employees are not tips; they are “service charges”. These service charges, which are appearing more often on Oregon restaurant bills, are non-tip wages and are subject to Social Security tax, Medicare tax, and federal income tax withholding.

Many consumers think the expanding pressure on customers to leave tips is already out of hand. A no tax on tips policy would likely expand the use of tipped work even further, potentially leading to consumers being asked to tip on virtually every purchase everywhere. 

A  New York Times article about tipping generated a lot of comments, many of which lamented the seeming spread of tipping expectations to multiple businesses and regardless of the amount of actual service by an employee. “Collectively, we cringe when the iPad is swiveled into our face at the coffee counter or deli; we know it is extortion rather than appreciation for services rendered,” said one person.  

There’s also a sense that some businesses are customizing the tip configuration on screen to exploit customers. Most people tip between 15-20%. If you buy a $2.85 espresso and the screen offers 15%, 20% and 25% tip options, you are likely to hit 15%, generating a tip of 43 cents. If a business wants to jack that up, however, it can give you $1, $2, or $3 options on purchases below $10, instead of a percentage. If you pick $1, you have paid a 35% tip. Devious, but effective.

Despite the massive increase in tipping expectations in recent years at multiple businesses, tax experts say a relatively small share of the workforce depends on tips. Only about 2.5% of American workers are in occupations that depend on tips, according to the IRS.  Among those workers, 37% earn less than the federal standard deduction. So, they already don’t have to pay federal income taxes.

Other tipped workers benefit from the earned income tax credit (EITC) and/or child tax credit (CTC) to the extent that they don’t have any federal income tax liability. In addition, because tipped workers would keep more of their income, employers could use this law as a justification for lowering workers’ base pay if it is currently above the minimum wage.

In fact, exempting tips from taxation can actually lead to situations where low-income workers end up effectively losing income through losing eligibility to tax credits such as the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) and Child Tax Credit (CTC).

The Budget Lab at Yale, a non-partisan policy research center, estimates that less than 3 percent of families would benefit from a broad-based income tax deduction for tips in 2026, but it would still cost the federal government more than $100 billion over the next decade. Restricting eligibility to workers in the leisure and hospitality industries would reduce the cost by more than 40 percent, but that would still leave a big hit on the deficit unless taxes were raised elsewhere.

Even the liberal Oregon Center for Public Policy opposes the no tax on tips idea.

In October 2024, Daniel Hauser, Deputy Director of the Center, said that ending taxes on tips “makes the tax system less fair” because workers receiving tips would get a tax break, but not low-paid workers in general.

If you have two workers, one a bartender who earns about $10,000 of his $40,000 annual income in tips and the other a warehouseman who makes all of his $40,000 income in wages, it wouldn’t make sense to give the bartender a tax break but leave the warehouse worker hanging out to dry, Hauser argued. 

 It also “creates openings for people to think about, how can my income be categorized as a tip and get this tax break too?,” Hauser wrote.  Third, he said, “if the goal is to help the economic security of low-income workers, it’s not very effective…and there are much better ways for us to try and help low-income families in Oregon.” 

He’s right.


Oregon Democrats to Voters: ‘Let Them Eat Cake”

For all its screw-ups, Oregon is damn good at one thing, raising taxes and fees. 

One of the newest gambits, SB 687, would actually remove voters from the decision-making process.  Sponsored by State Senator Sen. Khanh Pham, D-Portland, and State Representatives Mark Gamba, D- Milwaukie and Zach Hudson, D – Troutdale, Wood Village, Fairview and North Gresham, the bill would allow a city or county to enact a fuel tax without going to voters first, eliminating a current requirement that local voters must approve city or county gas tax increases.

I guess in the sponsors’ view, voters just get in the way of sound policymaking.  

In a classic political gaffe, Gamba has already insulted voters, going so far as to tell OPB that voters too often act like “petulant children” standing in the way of taxes that are necessary to replace vital infrastructure like roads, sewage plants and libraries. “Someone needs to be the responsible adult in the room,” he told OPB. 

Oregon‘s tax system already ranks in the bottom half of states, coming in 30th overall on the 2025 State Tax Competitiveness Index and Portland enjoys the distinction of having the highest combined local income tax rate in the nation (4 percent), adding an extra layer of tax burden for residents of the state’s largest city.

You may be thankful Oregon forgoes a sales tax, but the Competitiveness Index points out it doubles down on other forms of taxation. The state has a complex and progressive individual income tax system with four tax brackets, a top marginal rate of 9.9 percent, and a personal exemption structured as a tax credit. Additionally, the tax brackets are not adjusted for inflation. 

The absence of a sales tax in Oregon is offset, the Index says, by an overly complex corporate tax system, which includes a 7.6 percent corporate income tax, a 0.57 percent gross receipts tax (the Corporate Activity Tax), and additional corporate taxes at the local level, particularly in the Portland area. Although gross receipts taxes typically do not allow any deductions from gross sales, the CAT provides a 35 percent deduction for either labor costs or the cost of goods sold. However, this does not significantly improve Oregon’s competitiveness in attracting businesses, as the state’s corporate tax system ranks among the worst in the nation, comparable to Delaware, the only other state to combine corporate income and gross receipts taxes.

Oregon’s property tax system is moderately competitive, the Index acknowledges, though the property tax burden relative to personal income is higher than in California and Washington. Additionally, the state imposes an estate tax with a maximum rate of 16 percent and the lowest estate tax exemption among states that levy the tax ($1 million), which further reduces the state’s competitiveness for high-net-worth individuals.

But what do the Democrats in the Legislature care? They have a supermajority in both  the Oregon House and Senate, so they’ll be able to increase taxes and fees without a single Republican vote. The hell with ordinary voters, I guess.