← All Issues
💰

Economy & Taxes

Nevada's "third rail" — the tax debate no one wants to have

The Stakes

0%

State income tax

0%

Corporate income tax

#49

Education funding rank

$1.3B+

Given to Tesla/data centers

Nevada's tax structure is its economic identity. No income tax draws businesses and residents. But it also means chronic underfunding of education, healthcare, and infrastructure. The state relies on gaming taxes, sales tax, and the Commerce Tax (a modified gross receipts tax passed in 2015).

The 2014 "Education Initiative" (margin tax) was rejected 79-21% by voters. Any candidate proposing new business taxes is walking into a political minefield.

Where They Stand

🦁

Joe Lombardo

Republican • Incumbent

No New Taxes

Position

Maintains Nevada's status as a "business-friendly" state with no income tax. Supports continued tax incentives to attract large employers (data centers, Tesla expansion). Signed budgets without major tax increases. Opposes "job-killing" tax proposals.

The Tension

Lombardo claims fiscal conservatism but signed the largest budget in state history ($12B+). He opposes new taxes while approving massive tax breaks for corporations—effectively shifting the tax burden to individuals through sales and property taxes. His major donor Paul Bigelow benefits directly from the low-tax business environment.

Key Economic Actions

  • • Approved tax incentives for data center projects
  • • Signed record state budget ($12.6B)
  • • Vetoed bills that would increase business regulations
  • • Continued "Economic Development Authority" incentive programs
⚖️

Aaron Ford

Democrat • Attorney General

Status Quo+

Position

Maintains the Commerce Tax framework. Does not propose structural tax reform. Focuses on "consumer protection" and antitrust as economic policy—making corporations pay through litigation rather than taxation. Supported film tax credits and education scholarship tax credits during legislative tenure.

The Tension

Ford campaigns as anti-corporate but doesn't propose taxing corporations differently. His economic approach is litigation-based: sue corporations (opioids, tech), extract settlements, and distribute funds. This is reactive, not structural. Meanwhile, he owed $185K in personal taxes while buying a $468K home—undermining "fiscal responsibility" messaging.

Key Economic Actions

  • • $1.1B in opioid settlements recovered for Nevada
  • • Antitrust suits against Google, Live Nation/Ticketmaster
  • • Sponsored film tax credits (SB 94, 2015)
  • • Co-sponsored scholarship tax credits (SB 555, 2017)
🏛️

Alexis Hill

Democrat • Washoe County Chair

Tax Reform

Position

The outlier. Hill explicitly proposes a "margin tax" or gross receipts tax on businesses to fund education and services. Campaigns on ending tax incentives for corporations like Tesla. Argues Nevada's low-tax model creates a race to the bottom that harms working families.

The Tension

Hill's margin tax mirrors the 2014 Education Initiative—rejected 79-21% by voters. Has she calculated that the electorate has changed, or is this positioning for a primary fight rather than a general election win? She attacks "corporate welfare" for Tesla but facilitates local developers at the county level who fund her campaigns.

Key Economic Actions

  • • Proposed margin tax in gubernatorial announcement
  • • Campaigned against Tesla/data center tax breaks
  • • Supported Library Tax (which failed at ballot)
  • • Pro-development voting record at county level

The 2014 Warning

Question 3: The Education Initiative

In 2014, Nevada voters were asked to approve a 2% margin tax on businesses with revenue over $1 million. The funds would go to education.

NO 78.8%
YES 21.2%

Why It Matters for 2026

  • → Hill's margin tax is structurally similar to Question 3
  • → Opposition spending was $8M+ (business groups, casinos)
  • → Every county voted NO—including liberal Clark County
  • → "No new taxes" remains Nevada's default political instinct

Key question: Has Nevada changed enough since 2014 for a margin tax to succeed? Or is Hill's proposal political suicide in a general election?

The Incentive Question

Nevada has given over $1.3 billion in tax incentives to attract major employers. Are these investments that create jobs, or corporate welfare that enriches shareholders?

Company Incentive Value Jobs Promised Candidate Position
Tesla Gigafactory $1.3B (2014) 6,500 direct L: Support | F: Quiet | H: Oppose
Switch (Data Centers) $89M+ 1,000+ L: Support | F: Quiet | H: Oppose
Apple (Data Center) $89M 150 L: Support | F: Quiet | H: Oppose
Google (Data Center) $25M+ 50-100 L: Support | F: Quiet | H: Oppose

Lombardo's View

These incentives create jobs and diversify Nevada's economy beyond gaming.

Ford's View

Focus on consumer protection, not tax policy. Doesn't take strong position on incentives.

Hill's View

"No subsidies for billionaires." These companies would come anyway; we're giving away revenue.

Evidence Scorecard

Claim Evidence Weight
Lombardo is "fiscally conservative" Signed record $12.6B budget. No new taxes, but no spending cuts either. Partial
Ford has "recovered billions" $1.1B in opioid settlements is real. But that's one-time revenue, not structural change. True
Hill's margin tax would fund education Likely, but similar proposal failed 79-21% in 2014. Political viability is questionable. Untested
Tax incentives "pay for themselves" Mixed evidence. Jobs created, but at high cost-per-job. Counterfactual is unknowable. Debatable
← Housing
Crime & Safety →