Topeka ? If you think your federal taxes are high, perhaps this will provide some solace: A new report shows Kansas is among the states that receive more federal dollars than they send to Washington, D.C.

Kansas receives $1.13 in spending from the federal government for every $1 it sends in taxes to the federal treasury, according to a report released Monday by the Tax Foundation.

That puts Kansas right in the middle — 25th — of all the states.

The effects can be seen everywhere. In Lawrence, the money helps pay for the T and Kansas University research. Across the state, agriculture subsidies help keep farmers afloat, while federal road money keeps highways built and maintained.

New Mexico was the No. 1 beneficiary among states, receiving $2.37 in federal spending per $1 in federal taxes.

In fact, residents of states like Kansas, New Mexico and others benefiting from federal spending could thank the taxpayers of New Jersey, Connecticut and New Hampshire, who are getting back the least. New Jersey received only 62 cents for each dollar paid in federal taxes.

But the District of Columbia outdistanced all states by far, receiving $6.44 per $1 spent in taxes, according to the study.

Among states bordering Kansas, only Colorado residents paid more in federal taxes than they received in federal spending, getting back 78 cents per $1 in taxes.

Nebraska ranked 23rd, receiving $1.19 in federal spending for each $1 in federal taxes; Missouri ranked 17th at $1.34; and Oklahoma 11th at $1.52.

The federal government contributed million for a transit center, buses and equipment when Lawrence established the T.

What it means

The Washington, D.C.-based foundation compared the federal tax burden in each state with Census Bureau data on federal spending in each state.

“We’re trying to show how the federal fiscal system does not treat every state equally,” said Scott Moody, a senior tax economist with the foundation.

But what that means is different to different people.

Moody said the federal tax system was a “drag” on states that were losing more tax dollars than they were gaining in federal spending.

¢Tax Foundation’s report

The nonpartisan, nonprofit foundation supports a flat tax system where everyone pays the same rate regardless of income. The current system of increasing rates as income rises penalizes the wealthy. In the long run that hurts everyone because the wealthy then have less money to invest in the economy, Moody said.

“The economic theory is pretty clear that by treating taxpayers differently, you’re actually discouraging economic production by higher-income groups,” he said.

But David Burress, a research economist at the Policy Research Institute at Kansas University, disagreed.

Kansas University's biodiversity information technology initiative received .275 million, just part of 14.7 million in federal funding in 2002.

A flat tax rate would be impractical to apply because it would mean getting rid of deductions that have become staples of society, such as deductions for children and home ownership.

“The best tax approach is to have a very broad base and low rates,” he said.

Keeping tabs

Burress also wondered how accurate the foundation’s numbers were because keeping track of federal spending was extremely difficult under the best of circumstances. Recent audits have shown billions of dollars unaccounted for.

“The majority of the federal government is out of control,” he said. “They don’t know where the money goes.”

More than 112,000 Kansans received a total of about billion in farm subsidies from the federal government in 2001.

Karl Peterjohn, executive director of the Kansas Taxpayers Network, also downplayed the foundation’s report, calling it a “wealth indicator.”

States where people generally earn more money, he said, also pay more in taxes. Instead of feeling sorry for states that receive less in return, he said we should realize that those “are generally the ones with the most dynamic and growing economies.”

Meanwhile, Peterjohn noted, states receiving the most from the federal government “are those where you would find the most poverty.”

“It proves a lot of federal programs don’t work,” he said.

But Burress maintained it was better to be in Kansas’ position as a beneficiary. Federal dollars, he said, have a multiplier effect that improves the economy.

The city received .6 million for runway reconstruction and upgrades to the apron, taxiway and lighting at Lawrence Municipal Airport.

Where it goes

According to the report, Kansas received about $17 billion in federal funds last year. Kansas residents and businesses paid about $15 billion in federal taxes, the report said.

The biggest percentage of the return dollars — 34.9 percent — was in the form of retirement benefits, while 20.6 percent returned as grants to local governments.

The existence of federal tax dollars at work can be seen just about everywhere in the nation. In Lawrence, their impact is visible from the city’s bus system to improvements at the airport and grants to Kansas University.

Federal government resource expenditures at KU have grown from $64.9 million in 1998 to $114.7 million in 2002, according to the university.

The Environmental Working Group, which tracks federal farm subsidies, reported Kansas farms received about $1 billion in federal subsidies in 2001.

Plus the fight for federal dollars keeps politicians busy.

On Monday, for example, U.S. Sen. Pat Roberts, R-Kan., issued a statement detailing hundreds of millions of dollars of federal expenditures for military aircraft in Wichita and even a $3.5 million grant for bioterrorism research at KU.

“The study reconfirms the old political assertion there are 535 faucets in Washington and every member of Congress is trying to make sure that they are getting their fair share for their state,” Peterjohn said.

Troy Jantz, Lawrence, a pilot instructor at the Lawrence Municipal Airport, checks his plane before a flight. Federal funds coming into Kansas are responsible for a new, longer runway at the airport. Jantz was at the airport Monday.