Missouri voters overwhelmingly defeated a ballot measure that would have eliminated the state's individual income tax, rejecting it by a lopsided 84%, 16% margin even as the governor and Republican lawmakers championed the plan.
Amendment No. 5, which appeared on Tuesday's primary election ballot, would have phased out Missouri's graduated individual income tax, which currently ranges from 2% to 4.7%. The measure's sponsor, state Rep. Bishop Davidson, never named a replacement revenue source before voters went to the polls. They answered accordingly.
The result landed with roughly one-fifth of ballots tallied, but the 68-point gap left no room for a late reversal. In a deep-red state where GOP Gov. Mike Kehoe had personally backed the proposal, the defeat was not close enough to spin. Voters looked at the math, looked at the promises, and said no.
The stakes were enormous, and specific. Individual income taxes account for roughly 63% of Missouri's general revenue in fiscal year 2025. Wiping that out without a named replacement would have left schools, prisons, and social services scrambling for funding, opponents warned. The New York Post reported that the measure's backers offered no concrete plan to fill the gap.
Missouri currently collects an average of $5,286 per capita in state and local taxes annually. Nine other states, Alaska, Florida, Nevada, New Hampshire, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Washington, and Wyoming, have already phased out individual income taxes. But those states built their budgets around different revenue models from the start.
Florida offers the clearest comparison. Its state sales tax generates 79% of total tax revenue. New York, a state of similar population to Florida, still levies an income tax and draws just 26% of its revenue from sales taxes. The gap between those two models illustrates the trade-off Missouri voters were being asked to make, potentially shifting the burden onto consumption taxes that fall hardest on middle- and lower-income households.
The Missouri REALTORS group led the organized opposition, donating to two campaigns, "Missourians for Fair Taxation" and "Protect MO Taxpayers", that hammered the amendment in the weeks before the vote. KSHB 41 reported on the group's financial involvement in both campaigns.
Opponents argued that eliminating the income tax would benefit the state's highest earners most while forcing the state to raise sales taxes or cut services to compensate. That argument clearly landed with voters across party lines. An 84% rejection in a Republican-dominated primary electorate suggests the opposition cut well beyond Democratic voters.
Mary Jean Miller, a Missouri voter who cast her ballot against the measure, told KSHB 41 that the amendment felt like proponents had packed it with "buzzwords" designed to sell it on the surface.
"Package this up in a way that sounds really good, so long as you don't look too closely at it."
Miller's complaint points to a broader problem for the measure's backers: they asked voters to trust a plan that had no visible bottom line. Abolishing the revenue stream that funds nearly two-thirds of the state budget without specifying what fills the hole is not a tax cut, it is an IOU.
Gov. Kehoe endorsed the elimination of the income tax, and Rep. Davidson sponsored the amendment that put it before voters. But neither man, based on available reporting from the primary source, put forward a detailed replacement revenue framework before the vote. That left opponents free to fill the vacuum with worst-case scenarios, and voters had no counter-argument to weigh.
Missouri also remains out of step with some federal tax changes. The state did not conform to certain federal tax breaks included in the "One Big, Beautiful Bill," meaning Missouri residents still pay state taxes on tips and overtime even as federal policy moved to exempt them. That disconnect added another layer of frustration for taxpayers who might otherwise have been sympathetic to income tax relief.
The lesson is not that Missouri voters oppose tax cuts. It is that they oppose tax cuts built on faith alone. A serious proposal would have paired the elimination with a concrete, scored replacement plan, something voters could evaluate rather than fear.
Missouri's income tax rejection was part of a broader primary night that produced decisive outcomes in several states. In Virginia, the state Supreme Court had already struck down a Democrat-backed mid-decade redistricting referendum that voters approved last month, ruling the legislature made procedural errors in placing the constitutional amendment on the ballot. The rejected map would have created ten Democrat-favoring congressional districts and just one Republican-favoring seat, potentially netting Democrats up to four additional House seats. The state spent $5.2 million on the special election, while nearly $100 million total went toward campaigning on the measure, National Review reported.
RNC Chairman Joe Gruters did not mince words about the Virginia ruling.
"Democrats just learned that when you try to rig elections, you lose."
Meanwhile, in Washington state, Rep. Pramila Jayapal cruised through the top-two primary with 53% of the vote when the Associated Press called the race. Jayapal, a leading House progressive and former chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, has held the Seattle-based 7th Congressional District since 2017. Fox News reported her dominant showing reinforced her grip on one of the most reliably liberal seats in the country.
Several loose ends hang over the Missouri result. The 84%, 16% margin was reported with only about one-fifth of ballots counted. Final numbers may shift the margin slightly, though the scale of the defeat makes a reversal functionally impossible.
Less clear is what comes next for income tax reform in Jefferson City. Davidson and Kehoe invested political capital in a measure that their own primary voters buried. Whether Republican leaders return with a more detailed proposal, one that names the replacement revenue and scores the trade-offs, will determine whether this was a permanent defeat or an expensive lesson in legislative preparation.
Voters did not reject the idea of paying less in taxes. They rejected being asked to sign a blank check. If Missouri Republicans want to revisit income tax reform, they will need to bring the math next time, not just the buzzwords.
