This survey provides taxpayers' opinions and evaluations of the United States tax system. Respondents were questioned about their knowledge of and feelings toward several recent tax reforms. They were also asked about their impressions of the Internal Revenue Service and its programs, their experiences dealing with Internal Revenue Service agents, their opinions of the Internal Revenue Service's sharing of information with other government agencies, and the sources of their information on taxes. In addition, attitudes towards tax evasion and towards those who cheat on their taxes were probed. Demographic information on each respondent was also collected.

The enforcement record (eDIS vv, eEnforcement) contains the following information: — Information from the Tax Enforcement Orders: general data on the taxpayer from the tax register, the date of the decision, the number of the order, the date of service, the type of order (on the debtor’s cash receipts, on cash at banks and savings banks, on other pecuniary claims, on movable property, on securities), the type and amount of tax or other obligations and the manner of sale, the person who conducted the proceedings; — Information from the applications for enforcement on the debtor’s immovable property and the debtor’s share in the company and from property rights: general details of the taxable person from the tax register, the proposal number, the date of the proposal, the nature and amount of the tax or other tax liability, the person who conducted the proceedings, the court having jurisdiction over the proceedings, the number of the court order, the date of the court order.; — Information on the security of payment of tax in the course of tax enforcement proceedings: type of insurance (guarantee with entry in the register of a pledge or share of a shareholder), general data on the taxpayer from the tax register, the person who conducted the proceedings, the court with jurisdiction over the proceedings, the number of the court order, the date of the court order.

Data from the Register of Single Taxpayers: 1) tax number (for legal entity); 2) name for a legal entity or surname, first name, patronymic for an individual entrepreneur (hereinafter - sole proprietorship); 3) date (period) of election or transition to a simplified taxation system; 4) the rate of single tax; 5) group of taxpayers; 6) types of economic activity; 7) date of exclusion from the register of single tax payers. For individual entrepreneurs, the registration number of the taxpayer's registration card is not disclosed, due to the fact that such data are subject to the Law of Ukraine "On Protection of Personal Data" The register of single tax payers of the fourth group (legal entities) (published by a separate file from the main register of single tax payers) Data from the Register: 1) Tax number of legal entity 2) Name of legal entity; 3) Date (period) of election (transition) to a simplified system of taxation; 4) Payer Group 5) Types of economic activity 6)The date of exclusion from the register The single tax rate for taxpayers of the fourth group (legal entities) in the Register is not specified, since according to paragraph 293.9 of Article 293 of the Tax Code of Ukraine, the single tax rate is established depending on the category (type) of land, their location Agricultural producers (legal entities) for transition to a simplified taxation system or annual confirmation of the status of a single tax payer shall be submitted by February 20 this year: general and reporting tax returns on single tax for the current year, calculation of the share of agricultural commodity production; information (certificate) on the availability of land (paragraph 298.8.1 of paragraph 298.8 of Article 298 of the Tax Code of Ukraine).

This table presents an overview of the revenues of the environmental taxes and fees. The government charges several taxes and fees to support and finance environmental policy. The revenues of environmental taxes and fees can be attributed by taxpayer, distinguishing private households, industries and non-residents. The above mentioned revenues of environmental taxes and fees are presented in the following variables: -value in current prices, million euros.

Data available from: 1995

Status of the figures: Figures for the latest year are provisional. In order to obtain a consistent time series, the complete data set is (re)calculated every year. Therevenues of environmental taxes and fees data are consistent in time and in compliance with the Dutch national accounts. The alignment between the environmental accounts and the national accounts however, takes place using a wide variety of sources. This means that, although every year the system required to perform the various calculations are similar and consistent, variation can occur due to changes in particular sources and affect the full time series of the air emission accounts. In order to obtain consistent time series, every year the entire time series are (re)calculated, enabling that latest insights in the data are captured.

Changes as of 23 November 2018: Data for 2017 have been added. Data for previous years are adjusted according to the revision policy (see: Status of the figures).

When will new figures be published? New figures are published annually in November.

A. SUMMARY This dataset delineates parcels with “Taxable Commercial Space” - meaning parcels where one or more property owner(s) and/or commercial tenant(s) are required to file or pay the Commercial Vacancy Tax. The dataset includes the Block, Lot, Parcel Number and Parcel Situs Address for each commercial parcel within the named Districts. Information about each filing received for the parcel is included, such as Filer Type (Owner / Tenant), Filer Name, Parcel Situs Address from the Filing, and Tax Year filed. The dataset also includes whether a parcel is vacant, and if so, the tax rate applied. A single parcel may have multiple addresses and/or filings depending on the number of units and access points. Parcels marked as vacant either reported as vacant in the tax filing or were determined to be vacant by the Tax Collector. All information displayed is subject to audit by the Tax Collector.

If you are a taxpayer and need to update the information displayed, you should re-file https://sftreasurer.org/CommercialVacancy or contact the Tax Collector for assistance.

If you wish to share information about a vacant property subject to the Commercial Vacancy Tax with the Tax Collector to assist with enforcement, visit https://sftreasurer.org/report-vacant-commercial-property

B. HOW THE DATASET IS CREATED This dataset delineates parcels with “Taxable Commercial Space” - meaning parcels where one or more property owner(s) and/or commercial tenant(s) are required to file or pay the Commercial Vacancy Tax. The dataset includes the Block, Lot, Parcel Number and Parcel Situs Address for each commercial parcel within the named Districts. Information about each filing received for the parcel is included, such as Filer Type (Owner / Tenant), Filer Name, Parcel Situs Address from Filing, Tax Year filed, whether the filer reported a vacancy, and if so, the tax rate applied. A single parcel may have multiple addresses and/or filings depending on the number of units and access points. The information displayed is reported by the taxpayers and subject to audit by the Tax Collector.

C. UPDATE PROCESS Data will be refreshed daily until further notice.

D. HOW TO USE THIS DATASET The Commercial Vacancy Tax dataset provides detailed information on commercial properties in San Francisco’s designated Neighborhood Commercial Districts and Neighborhood Commercial Transit Districts that are subject to the Commercial Vacancy Tax. This dataset includes key identifiers such as Block, Lot, Parcel Number, and Situs Address for each commercial parcel. It also lists information for each filing received from property owners, and tenants, including whether the filer reported a space as vacant and, if so, the applicable tax rate. Users can utilize this dataset to identify vacant commercial spaces and assess tax compliance.

E. RELATED DATASETS Registered business location – San Francisco San Francisco Property Information Map Assessor Block Maps

F. KNOWN USES The Commercial Vacancy Tax dataset is primarily used by the San Francisco Office of the Treasurer & Tax Collector to monitor compliance with the city’s Commercial Vacancy Tax ordinance. It supports enforcement by identifying Commercial Space that may be subject to the tax and verifying reported vacancy status. Additionally, researchers, journalists, and community organizations access the data to study the impacts of vacant storefronts.

The global tax collection software market is experiencing robust growth, driven by increasing government initiatives to modernize tax administration and enhance efficiency. The market, estimated at $2 billion in 2025, is projected to exhibit a Compound Annual Growth Rate (CAGR) of 12% from 2025 to 2033, reaching an estimated market value of approximately $6 billion by 2033. This growth is fueled by several key factors. Governments worldwide are increasingly adopting digital transformation strategies to improve taxpayer services, streamline tax processes, and reduce administrative costs. The rising adoption of cloud-based solutions, offering scalability and cost-effectiveness, further contributes to market expansion. Furthermore, the need for enhanced data analytics and fraud detection capabilities within tax systems is driving demand for sophisticated tax collection software. The market also benefits from increasing government investments in infrastructure and technology upgrades. However, market growth is not without challenges. Integration complexities with existing legacy systems can hinder adoption. Concerns around data security and privacy, particularly with sensitive taxpayer information, present a significant restraint. Moreover, the need for specialized expertise to implement and maintain these systems can be a barrier for smaller governmental entities. Despite these challenges, the long-term outlook for the tax collection software market remains positive, primarily driven by ongoing technological advancements and the increasing focus on efficient and transparent tax administration. The market's segmentation is largely defined by deployment type (cloud-based, on-premise), functionality (property tax, sales tax, income tax), and end-user (federal, state, local governments). Leading vendors like Harris Govern, LocalGov, Tyler Technologies, and others are actively shaping the market landscape through product innovation and strategic partnerships.

The statistic shows the tax on corporate profits as share of the GDP from 2009 to 2017 in Italy. According to data, the corporate tax in 2017 amounted at *** percent of the GDP.

Data, geospatial data resources, and the linked mapping tool and web services reflect data for two types of potentially qualifying energy communities: 1) Census tracts and directly adjoining tracts that have had coal mine closures since 1999 or coal-fired electric generating unit retirements since 2009. These census tracts qualify as energy communities. 2) Metropolitan statistical areas (MSAs) and non-metropolitan statistical areas (non-MSAs) that are energy communities for 2023 and 2024, along with their fossil fuel employment (FFE) status. Additional information on energy communities and related tax credits can be accessed on the Interagency Working Group on Coal & Power Plant Communities & Economic Revitalization Energy Communities website (https://energycommunities.gov/energy-community-tax-credit-bonus/). Use limitations: these spatial data and mapping tool may not be relied upon by taxpayers to substantiate a tax return position or for determining whether certain penalties apply and will not be used by the IRS for examination purposes. The mapping tool does not reflect the application of the law to a specific taxpayer’s situation, and the applicable Internal Revenue Code provisions ultimately control.

The global tax collection software market is experiencing robust growth, driven by increasing government initiatives to modernize tax administration and improve efficiency. The market's expansion is fueled by a rising demand for cloud-based solutions offering enhanced scalability, accessibility, and cost-effectiveness compared to on-premise systems. Large enterprises and SMEs alike are adopting these technologies to streamline tax processes, reduce errors, improve compliance, and enhance citizen engagement through self-service portals. Key trends include the integration of advanced analytics and AI for fraud detection and risk assessment, as well as the growing adoption of mobile-first solutions to broaden accessibility and convenience for taxpayers. While the initial investment in new software can be a restraint for some smaller municipalities, the long-term benefits in terms of cost savings and improved efficiency are increasingly outweighing this concern. The market is segmented by application (large enterprises and SMEs) and type (cloud-based and on-premise), with cloud-based solutions dominating due to their flexibility and scalability. North America currently holds a significant market share, primarily due to early adoption and technological advancements, but growth in the Asia-Pacific region is expected to accelerate significantly in the coming years, fueled by increasing digitization and government modernization efforts. Major players like Harris Govern, Tyler Technologies, and Accela are actively competing through innovation and strategic partnerships to consolidate their positions in this evolving market. The forecast period from 2025 to 2033 suggests continued strong growth, propelled by ongoing technological advancements and increasing government investments in digital transformation. While regional variations exist, the global market is poised for significant expansion. The competitive landscape is dynamic, with established players and emerging innovative companies vying for market share. The continued focus on enhancing cybersecurity and data privacy will remain a crucial factor for vendors to ensure the integrity and trust in their systems. The demand for integrated solutions that seamlessly connect with other government systems and citizen portals is also driving innovation and shaping the future trajectory of this market. The integration of blockchain technology offers promising potential to enhance transparency and security in tax collection, although adoption may still be in its early stages.

The Tax Management Software Marketsize was valued at USD 15.89 USD Billion in 2023 and is projected to reach USD 37.62 USD Billion by 2032, exhibiting a CAGR of 13.1 % during the forecast period. A tax management software is an application intended to help the user deal with his or her tax-related affairs more efficiently. It assists the users to conduct income tax computation, allowance and tax credits; in the process of checking on the legal requirements and tax consequences. The different categories of tax management software are personal tax software, this is the software used by the individual tax payers, business and small company tax software and the last one is the complex corporate tax environment. Primarily these features may comprise tax functionality that adds, files, stores and monitors compliance. It can include such processes as filing of tax returns, assisting with planning of the strategies for the management of taxes throughout the financial year, and avoidance of mistakes and tax audits. Recent developments include: December 2023 – Tax System, a tax compliance software provider in the U.K. and Ireland acquired TaxModel, a Dutch-based tax technology provider to expand their product suite to serve their customers present across the globe., February 2023 - Intuit Turbotax partnered with Asure Software Inc., a small business HR and payroll solution provider. The partnership would streamline the employee's tax filing process by reducing errors, saving time, and accelerating tax refunds., February 2023 - Avalara, Inc., a leading player in cloud-based tax management software, introduced a new automated property tax compliance solution named “Avalara Property Tax’’ for businesses and accountants, which helps to manage property tax compliance by reducing errors via automation., January 2023 - Thomson Reuters acquired a U.S.-based tax software company Sureprep LLC for USD 500 million. The acquisition aimed to deliver end-to-end tax automated and connected workflow solutions to the companies' mutual customers., August 2022 - Intuit Accountants launched Intuit Tax Advisor tool to provide tax advisory services to clients to save their time and help to develop personalized tax plans to enable growth for clients and their firms.. Key drivers for this market are: Need for Automated Solution to Manage Large Transactional Data to Drive the Market Growth. Potential restraints include: Increasing Reliance on Digital Communication and E-payment Methods Creating Data Security Concerns May Hamper Industry Growth. Notable trends are: Adoption of Advanced Technologies to Focus on Enforcement and Taxpayer Compliance for Efficient Customer-Centric Services.

Under the new QDS framework departments’ spending data is published every quarter; to show the taxpayer how the Government is spending their money. The QDS grew out of commitments made in the 2011 Budget and the Written Ministerial Statement on Business Plans. For the financial year 2012/13 the QDS has been revised and improved in line with Action 9 of the Civil Service Reform Plan to provide a common set of data that will enable comparisons of operational performance across Government so that departments and individuals can be held to account. Q1 2012/13 is the first set of this new data collection and comprises of different categories and subsets. As collection proceeds, we expect to be able to make meaningful comparisons on what Departments are spending.

The QDS breaks down the total spend of the department in three ways: by Budget, by Internal Operation and by Transaction. At the moment this data is published by individual departments in Excel format, however, in the future the intention is to make this data available centrally through an online application.

Over time we will be making further improvements to the quality of the data and its timeliness. We expect that with time this process will allow the public to better understand the performance of each department and government operations in a meaningful way.

The QDS template is the same for all departments, though the individual detail of grants and policy will differ from department to department. In using this data: 1. People should ensure they take full note of the caveats noted in each Department’s return. 2. As the improvement of the QDS is an ongoing process data quality and completeness will be developed over time and therefore necessary caution should be applied to any comparative analysis undertaken.

Departmental Commentary

The Cabinet Office departmental family includes the Civil Service Commission. The figures for the Government Procurement Service are not included in the figures for Quarter 1.

Individuals; Tax filers and dependants by total income, sex and age groups (final T1 Family File; T1FF).

This table presents income shares, thresholds, tax shares, and total counts of individual Canadian tax filers, with a focus on high income individuals (95% income threshold, 99% threshold, etc.). Income thresholds are based on national threshold values, regardless of selected geography; for example, the number of Nova Scotians in the top 1% will be calculated as the number of taxfiling Nova Scotians whose total income exceeded the 99% national income threshold. Different definitions of income are available in the table namely market, total, and after-tax income, both with and without capital gains.

Current and historical data on India's tax revenue - source-wise and state-wise collections, GDP contribution, taxpayer ratio, and comparison with global peers.

description: The Millennium Challenge Account-Philippines' (MCA-P) implementation of the Revenue Administration Reform Project (RARP) is expected to improve tax administration, increase tax revenue collection and reduce incidence of corruption among various agencies involved in the tax administration processes including the Department of Finance (DOF), the Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR) and the Bureau of Customs (BOC). One of the main objectives of the RARP evaluation is to measure via a baseline and endline changes brought about by the project components on the following: (1) efficiency of tax administration, (2) tax revenue, and (3) incidence of corrupt activities in the DOF, BOC, and BIR. Given the non-random nature of RARP interventions across different components, the RARP evaluation will be primarily based on a quantitative analysis and a qualitative assessment of implementation of various components of RARP. The quantitative analysis component of RARP evaluation will attempt to identify changes in critical indicators before and after the implementation of the RARP by comparing the baseline values with the post intervention data to be obtained from the follow up round(s) of taxpayers' and personnel survey and other administrative sources whenever feasible to get such data. In an ideal situation, the most rigorous evaluation would have been a randomized design where participating offices are randomly assigned to receive one or more components of RARP and then their performances over time are compared with the counterfactual (in this case, the offices not exposed to RARP components). However, based on the information received from MCA-P regarding the (non-random) selection of offices for treatment and implementation of RARP components such as eTIS, AATs, and RIPS, and the lack of a plausible counterfactual, it was determined that a rigorous randomized impact evaluation was not possible for this study. Thus, the evaluation involves a comparison of 2014 baseline data and 2015 follow-up data from surveys of businesses, individual taxpayers, and personnel from the DOF, BIR and BOC. MCA-P engaged the services of a data collection firm, Social Weather Stations (SWS) which collected the baseline and follow-up data. This data was subjected to a data quality review and then shared with NORC for analysis. The baseline data was collected during July 2014 - December 2014. The follow-up data was collected during September 2015 - January 2016. Statistical analysis was used to identify whether there exist any statistically significant differences between the baseline and the follow-up values. Though the RARP Activities of chief concern for Study V have not yet been completely deployed, it is expected that this evaluation will help MCC to learn about the process of implementation of different components of the RARP and its influences on the tax administration and compliance.; abstract: The Millennium Challenge Account-Philippines' (MCA-P) implementation of the Revenue Administration Reform Project (RARP) is expected to improve tax administration, increase tax revenue collection and reduce incidence of corruption among various agencies involved in the tax administration processes including the Department of Finance (DOF), the Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR) and the Bureau of Customs (BOC). One of the main objectives of the RARP evaluation is to measure via a baseline and endline changes brought about by the project components on the following: (1) efficiency of tax administration, (2) tax revenue, and (3) incidence of corrupt activities in the DOF, BOC, and BIR. Given the non-random nature of RARP interventions across different components, the RARP evaluation will be primarily based on a quantitative analysis and a qualitative assessment of implementation of various components of RARP. The quantitative analysis component of RARP evaluation will attempt to identify changes in critical indicators before and after the implementation of the RARP by comparing the baseline values with the post intervention data to be obtained from the follow up round(s) of taxpayers' and personnel survey and other administrative sources whenever feasible to get such data. In an ideal situation, the most rigorous evaluation would have been a randomized design where participating offices are randomly assigned to receive one or more components of RARP and then their performances over time are compared with the counterfactual (in this case, the offices not exposed to RARP components). However, based on the information received from MCA-P regarding the (non-random) selection of offices for treatment and implementation of RARP components such as eTIS, AATs, and RIPS, and the lack of a plausible counterfactual, it was determined that a rigorous randomized impact evaluation was not possible for this study. Thus, the evaluation involves a comparison of 2014 baseline data and 2015 follow-up data from surveys of businesses, individual taxpayers, and personnel from the DOF, BIR and BOC. MCA-P engaged the services of a data collection firm, Social Weather Stations (SWS) which collected the baseline and follow-up data. This data was subjected to a data quality review and then shared with NORC for analysis. The baseline data was collected during July 2014 - December 2014. The follow-up data was collected during September 2015 - January 2016. Statistical analysis was used to identify whether there exist any statistically significant differences between the baseline and the follow-up values. Though the RARP Activities of chief concern for Study V have not yet been completely deployed, it is expected that this evaluation will help MCC to learn about the process of implementation of different components of the RARP and its influences on the tax administration and compliance.

Overview

The publication of the data and story is EMBARGOED until 3:01 a.m. ET on Monday, April 4, 2022. It is intended for print publication on or after April 4. The data may be used for reporting immediately.

This dataset includes a combined set of congressional earmarks tied to the $1.5 trillion federal spending bill passed in March 2022.

The source documents were released by the relevant appropriations committees as PDF files. The AP has extracted the information and compiled a spreadsheet with all 4,975 listed projects. Each row lists the federal agency and program that administers the money. There’s also a description of the project — sometimes frustratingly vague — and its location, the amount approved and the House and Senate members who requested them.

The data can be searched and sorted to see who got what. Many projects were requested by multiple lawmakers, but there’s no double-counting — each project is listed only once. Some projects may have lawmakers from only one chamber doing the requesting, while others can have members from both the House and Senate. If a lawmaker’s name does not appear at all in the dataset, that means they didn’t receive projects.

The data accompanies a story published on April 4, 2022 that detailed the spending earmarked by members of Congress in the latest federal funding bill passed and signed by the President. The story found:

• "Home-district projects for members of Congress are back, sprinkled across the government-wide $1.5 trillion bill President Joe Biden signed recently. The official tally shows amounts modest by past standards yet spread widely around the country — and that understate what lawmakers are claiming credit for.
• The bipartisan measure, financing federal agencies this year, contains 4,975 such projects worth $9.7 billion, according to an Associated Press examination of items attributed to specific lawmakers in documents accompanying the bill. The listed projects, long called earmarks, ranged from $4,000 for evidence detection equipment for Huntington, West Virginia, to $350 million to help restore Florida’s vast but imperiled Everglades.

• The projects' reemergence after an 11-year hiatus, with transparency requirements and other curbs, marks a revival of expenditures that let lawmakers tout achievements to voters and help party leaders build support for legislation. While still vilified by some, especially conservatives, as emblems of influence peddling and wasteful spending, they've been embraced by lawmakers from both parties, who cite Congress’ constitutional power of the purse and say they know their local needs."

  Findings

• There were 4,975 earmarked projects worth a total of $9.7 billion included.

• Retiring Sen. Richard Shelby attained $126 million for two campuses of the University of Alabama, his alma mater, including for an endowment for its flagship Tuscaloosa campus to hire science and engineering faculty. There was also hundreds of millions to improve the city of Mobile's seaport and airport, part of a total $648 million he amassed for his state.

• Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., had 203 projects for New York, ranging from $27 million to upgrade Fort Drum's water systems to $44,000 for neighborhood improvements in the city of Geneva, the AP found. Facing what should be easy reelection this fall, Schumer totaled $314 million, including at least $23 million for hospitals, violence prevention and other programs in his home borough of Brooklyn.

• Of five senators facing tough reelection races this fall, three Democrats received at least $81 million each in projects: Sens. Mark Kelly of Arizona, Catherine Cortez Masto of Nevada and Raphael Warnock of Georgia. Two others, Sens. Maggie Hassan, D-N.H., and Ron Johnson, R-Wis., requested and received none.

• While House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., wasn't listed as getting any projects, his top two lieutenants were. No. 2 leader Steve Scalise, R-La., got $31 million, including $5 million for Louisiana State University aerospace research. No. 3 GOP leader Elise Stefanik, R-N.Y., won $35 million, including sharing credit with Schumer and Gillibrand for improving Fort Drum's $27 million water project.

  About This Data

  The original source of the data was 10 PDF files which can be found here: https://www.appropriations.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/AG CPF CDS FINAL FOR STATEMENT.pdf https://www.appropriations.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/CJS_CDS_V6.pdf https://www.appropriations.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/Defense_CDS.pdf https://www.appropriations.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/EW_CDSV5.pdf https://www.appropriations.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/FSGG Printed CDS Table.pdf https://www.appropriations.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/HOMELAND_CDS.pdf https://www.appropriations.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/INT_CDS_V3.PDF https://www.appropriations.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/LHHS_CDS_V3 (GPO Turn 3-5).pdf https://www.appropriations.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/MilCon_CDS.pdf https://www.appropriations.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/THUD_CDS_V5.pdf

Each file contained earmarks tied to a certain appropriations subject area or funding steam, such as agriculture, defense or transportation.

The AP extracted the information from these documents and then combined them into a single dataset. Several of the documents included additional columns that were not present in the majority of the appropriations tables, and yet others included columns with different names and/or that were filled in with slightly different information.

The AP reconciled and consolidated these disparate columns together to create a dataset including the most relevant pieces of information in a standardized way.

Please note the source documents identified requesting members of congress by their name alone, and that multiple House or Senate requestors were listed together in a single column. The AP did not change that method for this data release. This means you can filter by a member's name to see all of his or her earmarks, however you won't be able to create "top 10 members" or "top 10 states" rankings using the file alone as it is provided. (For the initial story accompanying this data release, the AP also relied on separate work by the nonprofit group Taxpayers for Common Sense who had conducted work to standardize and match up the member names to states and legislative votes. Reporters may contact them as well to obtain the TCS dataset if you should wish.)

​

Included Data

earmarks_combined - An Excel spreadsheet containing the earmarked projects

Additional Data Queries

Filter by project location

Filter by requestor in either chamber

Filter by Senate requestor

Filter by House requestor

Total dollars earmarked by appropriations category

Using This Data

Notes and suggestions for reporters on using this data for their own stories

Caveats

• Please note the source documents identified requesting members of congress by their name alone, and that multiple House or Senate requestors were listed together in a single column. The AP did not change that method for this data release. This means you can filter by a member's name to see all of his or her earmarks, however you won't be able to create "top 10 members" or "top 10 states" rankings using the file alone as it is provided. (For the initial story accompanying this data release, the AP also relied on separate work by the nonprofit group Taxpayers for Common Sense who had conducted work to standardize and match up the member names to states and legislative votes. Reporters may contact them as well to obtain the TCS dataset if you should wish.)
• Some earmarks may have resulted from a request by the Biden White House itself, though only a small number of the appropriations documents provided information on those instances. The AP’s standardized dataset includes only the ultimate total requested for the project, even if in some instances part or all of that earmark originated with the Biden administration. While this affects only a small number of records, some notable instances include the $350 million Everglades restoration project, requested by Rep. Brian Mast, R-Fla., and at least $99 million that Sen. Shelby procured was also proposed by the president.
• Location information can be a bit fluid in how it was documented by the appropriations committees. Sometimes a city,

In total, about 59.9 percent of U.S. households paid income tax in 2022. The remaining 40.1 percent of households paid no individual income tax. In that same year, about 47.1 percent of U.S. households with an income between 40,000 and 50,000 U.S. dollars paid no individual income taxes.