The Millionaire Tax Map: Which U.S. States Are Pushing Capital Out (and Where It Lands)

Published on: June 15, 2026

There is no border control between U.S. states. No customs, no visa, no exit interview. And that absence is precisely why the American experiment has become the world's clearest real-time laboratory for a single question every high-net-worth household eventually asks: what happens to wealth when you tax it harder?

The answer, written in a decade of IRS migration data, is that wealth moves. Quietly, legally, and at scale. Between 2015 and 2025, an exodus of residents cost New York and California more than $100 billion each in net adjusted gross income (AGI), with Florida and Texas absorbing much of the difference. In 2026, the policy debate that produced those numbers is intensifying, and the map of winners and losers is being redrawn in real time.

This article maps it: which states are tightening the screws on high earners, where the capital is landing, what the data actually proves (and doesn't), and what the U.S. pattern teaches anyone thinking about cross-border mobility.

The states pushing capital out

The states losing high-income residents share a profile: high top marginal income tax rates, and in several cases, new proposals to tax wealth or capital directly.

California, the highest stakes

California has the highest top marginal income tax rate in the country at 13.3% (12.3% plus a 1% mental-health surcharge on income above $1 million). Counting the state's reformed payroll levy, the effective top rate on wage income now runs closer to 14.4% as of recent estimates.

In 2026 the stakes rose sharply with the proposed California Billionaire Tax Act, a measure designed to tax accumulated wealth, including assets situated outside the state, with a residency snapshot date of January 1, 2026. The Tax Foundation has flagged the proposal as highly vulnerable to constitutional challenge and unlikely to actually prevent high earners from leaving. The signalling effect, however, was immediate: six of California's roughly 214 billionaires reportedly relocated before the residency cutoff, taking an estimated $27 billion in potential tax revenue with them. Google co-founder Larry Page bought a Miami estate and moved his family office out of the state; investor David Sacks decamped to Texas.

The deeper fiscal problem for California is concentration. According to IRS data, high-earning households leaving the state took more than $16 billion in annual income with them in 2022 alone. Since 2018, roughly 102,600 millionaires have left California.

New York, a decade of leakage

New York's top state rate reaches 10.9%, and New York City layers on up to 3.876% more, pushing combined state-and-local rates toward 15% before a single dollar of federal tax. The result is the steepest sustained AGI leak in the country: New York has lost roughly $111 billion in net adjusted gross income over the past decade. In 2025 alone, more than 1,800 millionaires changed their legal address to another state, and over 15,500 high-income earners left New York City between May 2024 and October 2025, with essentially all of the net outflow landing in no-income-tax states. Since 2018, around 61,400 millionaires have left New York State.

Washington, the surprise entrant

For most of its history Washington had no income tax at all. That changed: the state introduced a 7% tax on capital gains above roughly $278,000, then moved to progressive capital-gains rates of 7% and 9.9%, and passed a 9.9% tax on income above $1 million (effective 2028). The reaction was swift and symbolic, Starbucks founder Howard Schultz announced a move to Florida, and Starbucks announced a major new corporate office in Nashville, Tennessee. When the founder departs and the company expands elsewhere in the same window, the market reads it as a signal.

The wider list

California, New York, Washington, and Michigan have all advanced proposals targeting high earners, wealth taxes, exit-style provisions, and higher top rates. Illinois rounds out the trio of perennial losers alongside New York and California in the IRS migration tables, consistently shedding both people and AGI.

Where the capital lands

The destinations also share a profile: no broad-based personal income tax, and, critically for investors and founders, no state tax on capital gains.

Nine states levy no broad personal income tax in 2026: Florida, Texas, Nevada, Tennessee, Washington (with the capital-gains caveat above), Wyoming, South Dakota, Alaska, and New Hampshire (which finished phasing out its tax on interest and dividends in 2025).

For someone realising a large capital gain, the difference is not academic. On a $1 million long-term capital gain, a top-bracket California resident could pay roughly $133,000 in state tax (13.3% of the gain) that Florida, Texas, or Nevada generally do not charge. A California high earner can face a combined federal-plus-state-plus-NIIT capital-gains rate above 37%; a Florida resident on a comparable gain would typically face a combined rate closer to 24% (roughly 20% federal plus 3.8% NIIT), depending on their circumstances.

The flow shows up cleanly in the numbers. Since 2018, Florida has added roughly 133,000 millionaires and Texas roughly 61,400. Florida and Texas have been the principal beneficiaries of the $100 billion-plus net AGI that left New York and California over the past decade. The top three origin states for relocating millionaires, California, New York, and Illinois, map almost perfectly onto the top three destinations: Florida, Texas, and Nevada.

The important caveat: it isn't only about tax

A responsible reading of this data has to include the counter-argument, because the headline framing is contested.

The nonpartisan Massachusetts Budget and Policy Center points out that most people leaving high-tax states earn under $200,000, and that overall affordability, housing costs above all, is a stronger driver of relocation than top-bracket surtaxes. On this view, the millionaire-exodus narrative overstates the role of marginal tax rates and understates the role of a $400,000 median home in Austin versus a $1.4 million one in San Jose.

There is also a hidden cost to the destination states that rarely makes the headlines: no-income-tax states recover revenue elsewhere. Texas and New Hampshire carry among the highest property tax rates in the country; a $400,000 Texas home can generate $8,000–$10,000 in annual property tax. Nevada and Washington lean on above-average sales taxes. The "$130,000 raise" from escaping California's income tax is real for a high earner, but the true comparison is total tax burden, income, property, and sales combined, not the income-tax headline alone.

Finally, exit is getting harder to execute cleanly. High-tax states audit former residents aggressively. New York in particular scrutinises departures, and establishing a genuine new domicile generally requires more than a change of mailing address. States look at factors such as days of physical presence (many apply a 183-day statutory-residence test), where your home, identification and ties are, and supporting documentation. The rules are state-specific and fact-intensive. Some states are now floating exit-tax mechanisms explicitly designed to make leaving costly. The door is open, but the threshold is watched.

What the U.S. map teaches a global investor

The American interstate market is the closest thing the world has to a controlled experiment in tax-driven mobility, because the frictions are so low. No language barrier, no visa, no currency change, just a moving truck and a new driver's licence. And even with frictions near zero, the response is not instant or total: most people stay, affordability often matters more than tax, and the act of leaving carries audit risk and offsetting costs.

Scale that lesson up to the international level and two things follow. First, the direction of the U.S. pattern almost certainly holds across borders, capital is mobile and responds to where it is treated best, which is exactly what the global picture (London's non-dom exodus, the UAE's record inflows) confirms. Second, the friction is far higher internationally: residency rules, tax treaties, currency exposure, and exit charges turn a domestic move into a multi-jurisdiction decision. The principle transfers; the execution gets much harder.

For a high-net-worth household, the practical conclusion is the same at both scales. Do not optimise for a single headline rate. Map the full picture, income tax, capital gains, property and consumption taxes, residency requirements, and the cost and risk of the move itself, before deciding where capital, and the family, should sit.

Frequently asked questions

Which U.S. states are losing the most wealthy residents?

California, New York, and Illinois consistently lead the IRS migration tables for both population and AGI loss. Over the past decade, New York and California each lost more than $100 billion in net adjusted gross income.

Which states are gaining the most high earners?

Florida and Texas are the dominant destinations, followed by Nevada, Tennessee, and other no-income-tax states. Since 2018, Florida has added roughly 133,000 millionaires and Texas roughly 61,400.

Do no-income-tax states really save you money?

For high earners, often substantially: for a top-bracket Californian, avoiding the 13.3% state rate on a $1 million gain could save around $133,000, though the actual figure depends on your individual circumstances. But these states recover revenue through higher property and sales taxes, so the honest comparison is total tax burden, not the income-tax headline.

What is the California Billionaire Tax Act?

A 2026 proposal to tax accumulated wealth, including out-of-state assets, using a January 1, 2026 residency snapshot. The Tax Foundation considers it highly vulnerable to constitutional challenge. Several billionaires reportedly relocated ahead of the cutoff.

Can a state stop a wealthy resident from leaving?

Not by preventing the move, but states can make it expensive and contested. High-tax states audit former residents aggressively, and clean exits generally require establishing genuine domicile elsewhere (often 183+ days of physical presence) with thorough documentation.

The U.S. tax map is a preview, not just a domestic story. It shows in high resolution what happens everywhere capital can move: raise the cost of staying, and a measurable share of the wealthiest, most mobile households will go, taking their tax base, and often their businesses, with them. The same forces play out across borders, only with higher friction and bigger stakes.

JanusHermes lets you weigh those cross-border trade-offs in one place, comparing markets, residency pathways, and the real cost of ownership across 50+ countries before you move capital or a household.

Sources: IRS interstate migration data; National Taxpayers Union Foundation; Tax Foundation; Kiplinger; Massachusetts Budget and Policy Center; Visual Capitalist; WalletHub 2026 tax-burden analysis. Tax rules change frequently and vary by individual circumstance.

JanusHermes is the global real estate investment platform for cross-border investors, covering 50+ countries in 11 languages. This content is for information only and is not tax, legal, or investment advice. Consult a qualified tax professional before making residency decisions.

A note on the numbers: where no source is named, the market figures in this article (prices, yields, costs) are indicative estimates compiled from publicly available market data and industry reporting at the time of writing. Markets move and rules change, so treat them as a starting point and verify current figures with official sources before acting on them.