I have no idea how the census people qualify revenue and expenditures, but I'd guess they are the most comprehensive definitions possible. Note that not a single state has greater expenditures than revenue (which isn't true). Because of this I decided to go with expenditures, as I think they are probably more realistic. Revenue probably includes things like federal aid. I guess in theory they have to spend less than they take in, it would be impossible to spend money they didn't have. It is just that they borrow the money to spend, and that would increase their revenue.
I sorted the chart by expenditures per capita. Number one is Alaska at $13,393.32 per person. Last is Texas at $3,725.24 per person.
State | Population | GDP/Capita | Total Revenue | Total Expenditure | Rev/Capita | Exp/Capita |
Alaska | 686,293 | $43,321.00 | $12,477,998,000.00 | $9,191,744,000.00 | $18,181.74 | $13,393.32 |
Wyoming | 532,668 | $49,719.00 | $5,844,703,000.00 | $4,536,373,000.00 | $10,972.51 | $8,516.32 |
Vermont | 621,270 | $38,880.00 | $5,437,494,000.00 | $4,993,860,000.00 | $8,752.22 | $8,038.15 |
New York | 19,490,297 | $48,076.00 | $178,908,359,000.00 | $151,338,991,000.00 | $9,179.36 | $7,764.84 |
Delaware | 873,092 | $40,852.00 | $7,432,535,000.00 | $6,751,452,000.00 | $8,512.89 | $7,732.81 |
Hawaii | 1,288,198 | $40,490.00 | $11,176,293,000.00 | $9,848,210,000.00 | $8,675.91 | $7,644.95 |
New Mexico | 1,984,356 | $32,091.00 | $16,781,588,000.00 | $14,907,060,000.00 | $8,456.94 | $7,512.29 |
Massachusetts | 6,497,967 | $50,735.00 | $49,425,934,000.00 | $44,048,424,000.00 | $7,606.37 | $6,778.80 |
Rhode Island | 1,050,788 | $41,008.00 | $8,417,797,000.00 | $7,071,396,000.00 | $8,010.94 | $6,729.61 |
New Jersey | 8,682,661 | $50,919.00 | $65,495,222,000.00 | $56,076,165,000.00 | $7,543.22 | $6,458.41 |
California | 36,756,666 | $42,696.00 | $299,948,562,000.00 | $233,578,021,000.00 | $8,160.39 | $6,354.71 |
Mississippi | 2,938,618 | $29,569.00 | $22,398,649,000.00 | $18,628,639,000.00 | $7,622.17 | $6,339.25 |
Connecticut | 3,501,252 | $56,248.00 | $25,492,170,000.00 | $22,115,190,000.00 | $7,280.87 | $6,316.37 |
Louisiana | 4,410,796 | $36,271.00 | $33,286,017,000.00 | $27,855,931,000.00 | $7,546.49 | $6,315.40 |
Minnesota | 5,220,393 | $42,772.00 | $38,745,022,000.00 | $31,880,478,000.00 | $7,421.86 | $6,106.91 |
Maine | 1,316,456 | $35,381.00 | $9,434,179,000.00 | $7,935,673,000.00 | $7,166.35 | $6,028.06 |
North Dakota | 641,481 | $39,321.00 | $4,786,348,000.00 | $3,777,523,000.00 | $7,461.40 | $5,888.75 |
Ohio | 11,485,910 | $35,511.00 | $86,429,629,000.00 | $66,207,138,000.00 | $7,524.84 | $5,764.20 |
Montana | 967,440 | $34,256.00 | $7,129,303,000.00 | $5,554,244,000.00 | $7,369.25 | $5,741.18 |
Washington | 6,549,224 | $42,356.00 | $47,030,140,000.00 | $37,116,177,000.00 | $7,181.02 | $5,667.26 |
Maryland | 5,633,597 | $48,091.00 | $34,848,081,000.00 | $31,610,548,000.00 | $6,185.76 | $5,611.08 |
Kentucky | 4,269,245 | $31,826.00 | $25,425,381,000.00 | $23,680,419,000.00 | $5,955.47 | $5,546.75 |
South Carolina | 4,479,800 | $31,884.00 | $27,530,567,000.00 | $24,824,628,000.00 | $6,145.49 | $5,541.46 |
Wisconsin | 5,627,967 | $37,314.00 | $40,164,298,000.00 | $30,895,963,000.00 | $7,136.56 | $5,489.72 |
Michigan | 10,003,422 | $35,299.00 | $63,070,866,000.00 | $54,745,355,000.00 | $6,304.93 | $5,472.66 |
Pennsylvania | 12,488,279 | $40,265.00 | $83,384,773,000.00 | $68,292,746,000.00 | $6,677.04 | $5,468.55 |
Oregon | 3,790,060 | $35,956.00 | $30,587,369,000.00 | $20,605,597,000.00 | $8,070.42 | $5,436.75 |
West Virginia | 1,814,468 | $30,831.00 | $11,945,313,000.00 | $9,766,972,000.00 | $6,583.37 | $5,382.83 |
United States | 304,059,724 | $39,751.00 | $1,992,826,296,000.00 | $1,634,801,176,000.00 | $6,554.06 | $5,376.58 |
Arkansas | 2,855,390 | $31,266.00 | $18,175,873,000.00 | $14,948,566,000.00 | $6,365.46 | $5,235.21 |
Iowa | 3,002,555 | $36,680.00 | $19,053,312,000.00 | $15,461,766,000.00 | $6,345.70 | $5,149.54 |
Alabama | 4,661,900 | $33,643.00 | $27,536,360,000.00 | $23,192,507,000.00 | $5,906.68 | $4,974.90 |
Oklahoma | 3,642,361 | $36,899.00 | $22,329,933,000.00 | $18,104,268,000.00 | $6,130.62 | $4,970.48 |
North Carolina | 9,222,414 | $34,439.00 | $51,841,493,000.00 | $44,009,293,000.00 | $5,621.25 | $4,771.99 |
Virginia | 7,769,089 | $42,876.00 | $47,155,581,000.00 | $36,774,042,000.00 | $6,069.64 | $4,733.38 |
New Hampshire | 1,315,809 | $42,830.00 | $7,171,927,000.00 | $6,226,121,000.00 | $5,450.58 | $4,731.78 |
Kansas | 2,802,134 | $37,978.00 | $14,998,530,000.00 | $13,183,436,000.00 | $5,352.54 | $4,704.78 |
Utah | 2,736,424 | $30,291.00 | $15,863,997,000.00 | $12,774,196,000.00 | $5,797.35 | $4,668.21 |
Illinois | 12,901,563 | $42,397.00 | $71,255,039,000.00 | $59,302,221,000.00 | $5,522.98 | $4,596.51 |
Idaho | 1,523,816 | $32,133.00 | $9,095,154,000.00 | $6,895,319,000.00 | $5,968.67 | $4,525.03 |
Indiana | 6,376,792 | $34,103.00 | $32,429,387,000.00 | $28,809,586,000.00 | $5,085.53 | $4,517.88 |
South Dakota | 804,194 | $37,375.00 | $4,920,193,000.00 | $3,571,741,000.00 | $6,118.17 | $4,441.39 |
Nebraska | 1,783,432 | $37,730.00 | $9,986,412,000.00 | $7,829,584,000.00 | $5,599.55 | $4,390.18 |
Arizona | 6,500,180 | $32,953.00 | $29,875,612,000.00 | $28,332,841,000.00 | $4,596.12 | $4,358.78 |
Georgia | 9,685,744 | $33,975.00 | $45,067,031,000.00 | $41,843,352,000.00 | $4,652.92 | $4,320.10 |
Colorado | 4,939,456 | $42,377.00 | $26,881,361,000.00 | $21,243,982,000.00 | $5,442.17 | $4,300.87 |
Missouri | 5,911,605 | $35,228.00 | $32,728,288,000.00 | $25,318,686,000.00 | $5,536.28 | $4,282.88 |
Nevada | 2,600,167 | $40,353.00 | $14,183,611,000.00 | $10,755,326,000.00 | $5,454.88 | $4,136.40 |
Tennessee | 6,214,888 | $34,330.00 | $29,469,615,000.00 | $24,992,628,000.00 | $4,741.78 | $4,021.41 |
Florida | 18,328,340 | $39,070.00 | $95,044,996,000.00 | $72,773,050,000.00 | $5,185.68 | $3,970.52 |
Texas | 24,326,974 | $38,575.00 | $114,728,001,000.00 | $90,623,748,000.00 | $4,716.08 | $3,725.24 |
Here's what the census people had to say about all this:
No ranking table was produced for 2005 and onward. Ranking tables for previous years should be interpreted with caution. An analysis based on rankings or per capita statistics can be misleading and misinterpreted because of subtle yet important differences in state government organization and economic structure. For example, using total taxes or per capita taxes as a measure of tax burden on the citizens of that state can be misleading because different states use different approaches to taxation, comparing only the total taxes collected by each state is not enough to understand the economic impact of those states’ taxes – one must also understand how those taxes are collected. Comparing taxes across states can be difficult. The Census Bureau’s statistics on tax revenue reflect taxes a state collects from activity within the state, not necessarily from its people within a state. Alaska, for instance, does not have general sale taxes or individual income taxes, but it does collect severance taxes from companies that extract oil and natural gas. Like Alaska, Florida also does not collect individual income taxes, but unlike Alaska, Florida instead relies heavily on a general sales tax, which, because of its tourist industry, is partially supported by visitors from outside Florida. In that sense, both Alaska and Florida use “exported taxes” – taxes collected from people or organizations that may reside outside their state.
Similarly, ranking expenditures totals or comparing per capita expenditures are equally challenging since some states directly administer activities that, in other states, are undertaken by local governments, with or without state fiscal aid. The share of government sector financial totals contributed by a state government, therefore, differs materially from one state to another. For example, comparing a state’s direct expenditures on Cash Assistance Payments to Individuals in New York to Oregon may lead to an inaccurate conclusions since all cash assistance payments to individuals in New York State are made by local governments while in Oregon they are made by the state government only. Thus a strict ranking or per capita analysis that does not take into account these structural relationships between the state government and the local governments within each state can lead to an invalid analysis and incorrect conclusion.