Trump Accounts: State Tax Treatment by State

9 jurisdictions: no personal income tax, so the question does not arise

These jurisdictions tax no wages or salaries; Washington taxes only long-term capital gains (RCW 82.87). There is no state income tax base for a Trump Account’s growth or distributions to sit in, so there is nothing for the state to conform to or diverge from, and no conformity date matters. Each is linked to the source that establishes it: Alaska, Florida, Nevada, New Hampshire, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Washington, and Wyoming.

The 42 jurisdictions that do tax individual income

“Follows §530A” asks only whether the state’s existing mechanism currently reaches the federal Trump Account rules. “Partly” means the state reaches some of §530A’s treatment but not all of it, or reaches it only for some taxpayers — the note on that row says which.

Where the mechanism alone doesn’t finish the question

19 of the 51 jurisdictions need more than their conformity type to answer for: either the state took its own separate action on top of its general conformity, or the answer is genuinely not settled. Both are recorded here rather than flattened into the table.

Alabama

No new Alabama statute names §530A. The Alabama Department of Revenue's November 2025 OBBBA Executive Summary directly analyzed the question and concluded that Alabama's existing conformity to IRC §408 (Ala. Code §40-18-25) reaches Trump Account distributions by cross-reference, since §530A treats a Trump Account as a §408(a) account. The same DOR analysis found the opposite result for two separate, differently-numbered provisions: Alabama does not conform to new IRC §128 (the federal exclusion for employer contributions to a Trump Account) or new IRC §139J (the exclusion for qualified general contributions), so an Alabama employee's W-2 wages still include an employer's Trump Account contribution even though it is excluded federally.

Source: Alabama Dept. of Revenue, "The One, Big, Beautiful Bill Act – Analysis and Tax Provisions – Executive Summary" (Nov. 10, 2025); Ala. Code § 40-18-25

Arizona

H.B. 4168 (57th Leg., 2nd Reg. Sess.), signed by Gov. Hobbs June 13, 2026, amended A.R.S. § 43-1022 to add a new paragraph (33): an explicit state-law subtraction from Arizona gross income for distributions from an account established under IRC §530A, for tax years beginning after December 31, 2025.

Source: A.R.S. § 43-105 (conformity date); A.R.S. § 43-1022(33) (added by H.B. 4168, 2026)

Arkansasnot fully settled

Arkansas does not have one general conformity date; it adopts specific, individually-numbered IRC sections at specific historical dates, all currently pre-2025, and a new provision applies only once the legislature separately adopts it. No 2025 or 2026 Arkansas act naming §530A or Trump Accounts was found, so on the current record Arkansas almost certainly does not follow the federal treatment — but that conclusion rests on the state's general adoption pattern rather than a statute or DOR notice addressing §530A by name, which is why this is flagged ambiguous rather than a flat no.

Source: Ark. Code Ann. § 26-51-404 et seq. (individual IRC provisions each adopted as of their own frozen historical date)

California

California's general conformity date does not reach §530A, but SB 180 separately conforms California to §530A for tax years beginning on or after January 1, 2026, with modifications. SB 180 (Stats. 2026, Ch. 85, approved by the Governor and filed with the Secretary of State July 13, 2026) added Rev. & Tax. Code §§ 17151.1, 17151.2, and 17509.5, conforming California to IRC §530A — with modifications, including a 2.5% California tax rate on certain distributions in place of the federal additional tax — for tax years beginning on or after January 1, 2026.

Source: Cal. Rev. & Tax. Code § 17024.5(a)(1)(Q); Cal. Rev. & Tax. Code § 17509.5 (added by SB 180, Stats. 2026, Ch. 85)

Georgia

H.B. 1199 (2026 Ga. Laws Act 375), signed by Gov. Kemp March 20, 2026, amended O.C.G.A. § 48-1-2(14) to move Georgia's IRC conformity date to federal law enacted on or before January 1, 2026 — applicable to tax years beginning on or after January 1, 2025 (Section 1 of the Act) and to the Act generally for tax years beginning on or after January 1, 2026 (Section 4). The amendment lists an exhaustive set of IRC sections Georgia decouples from, including one other OBBBA-created provision (§ 170(p)), but § 530A is not among them.

Source: O.C.G.A. § 48-1-2(14), as amended by H.B. 1199 (2026 Ga. Laws Act 375)

Maine

P.L. 2025, ch. 650 (LD 2212/H.P. 1491), approved by the Governor April 10, 2026, amended 36 M.R.S. § 111(1-A) to move Maine's IRC conformity date from December 31, 2024 to December 31, 2025, applicable to tax years beginning on or after January 1, 2025, and expressly ties the update to federal Public Law 119-21 (OBBBA) by name. The Act separately decouples from specific other OBBBA provisions (domestic research-expensing under § 174A, bonus depreciation for qualified production property under § 168(n), the GILTI-to-NCTI relabeling, opportunity zones under § 1400Z-2, and the QSBS gain exclusion under § 1202) but does not decouple from § 530A.

Source: P.L. 2025, ch. 650, Sec. K-1 (enacted chapter law amending 36 M.R.S. § 111(1-A)); codified statute page not yet updated to reflect this amendment as of verification

Massachusettsnot fully settled

Massachusetts fixes most of the Code at January 1, 2024, which predates §530A, but adopts §§401 through 420 and §72 as in effect for the taxable year. §530A is not on the current-year list. No Massachusetts statute or DOR release found addresses whether the current-year §408 reaches an account that exists only by §530A.

Source: Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 62, § 1(c)

Michigan

MCL 206.12(3) lets the taxpayer elect the Internal Revenue Code in effect for the tax year. A taxpayer who makes that election reaches §530A; one who does not is on the January 1, 2025 Code, which predates it. Treasury's February 25, 2026 decoupling notice lists five decoupled provisions (IRC 163(j), 168(k), 168(n), 174 and 174A, and 179); §530A is not among them.

Source: Mich. Comp. Laws § 206.12(3), as amended by 2025 Public Act 24; Michigan Treasury Notice, "Decoupling Michigan Income Taxes from Certain Internal Revenue Code Provisions" (Feb. 2026)

Minnesota

HF3754 (2026 session) would separately exclude up to $2,500 of employer/government/nonprofit contributions to Trump Accounts from Minnesota gross income; as of a March 17, 2026 House Taxes Committee action it was laid over for possible omnibus-bill inclusion, and its final enactment status could not be confirmed in the text of the enacted 2026 omnibus tax bill.

Source: Minn. Stat. § 289A.02, subd. 7, as amended by 2026 Minn. Laws ch. 128, § 1

Mississippinot fully settled

No Mississippi statute or Department of Revenue notice names Trump Accounts or § 530A. Mississippi's existing individual retirement account provision, Miss. Code Ann. § 27-7-16, deducts contributions to "an ... individual retirement account ... which meets the requirements of a qualified plan under the provisions of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended" — a generic, self-updating cross-reference rather than a fixed date or a specific IRC subsection number — and a companion exclusion in § 27-7-15(4) reaches Roth IRA and qualifying retirement-plan distributions the same way.

Mississippi has no single blanket IRC conformity date — unlike most states, it conforms selectively, provision-by-provision, across several sections of Title 27, Chapter 7. Its individual retirement account hook is not tied to a frozen historical date or a specific numbered IRC subsection; it self-updates to whatever currently qualifies as an IRA-type plan under federal law. Because 26 U.S.C. § 530A(a) itself provides that a Trump Account is treated in the same manner as an individual retirement account under § 408(a), except as §530A or Treasury guidance provides otherwise, Mississippi's existing generic IRA cross-reference likely extends automatically to the core tax-deferred treatment. But § 530A layers on account-specific departures from ordinary IRA rules — mostly-nondeductible contributions up to $5,000/year, a federal $1,000 pilot seed deposit, excludable employer contributions up to $2,500, and distinct pre-18 distribution rules — none of which any Mississippi statute, regulation, or DOR guidance addresses, and no 2025 or 2026 Mississippi legislation touched this area. That gap, not a missing "Trump Account" label, is what keeps this determination at partial/ambiguous rather than a clean yes — this is the general-conformity method applied to a state whose mechanism is selective rather than rolling or fixed-date.

Source: Miss. Code Ann. § 27-7-16 (IRA/pension-trust contribution deduction); § 27-7-15(4)(k)-(l), (ff) (retirement/IRA distribution exclusions)

New Jerseynot fully settled

New Jersey's Gross Income Tax Act does not start from federal AGI or federal taxable income at all; N.J.S.A. § 54A:5-1 instead defines New Jersey gross income as sixteen separately enumerated statutory categories. The Division of Taxation's own published guidance on IRA treatment (Tax Topic Bulletin GIT-2) confirms New Jersey does not allow a deduction for IRA-type contributions — they are taxed as ordinary income when made, tracked as basis, and only the account's earnings are taxed on withdrawal.

New Jersey is the other state, alongside Pennsylvania, whose income tax genuinely does not conform to the Internal Revenue Code through a rolling/fixed-date/selective cross-reference mechanism — it computes gross income from its own enumerated categories, one of which (pension/annuity/IRA distributions) structurally covers a Trump Account as a § 408(a)-type custodial account for a minor. Applying New Jersey's own published, checked IRA rule rather than analogy: personal contributions would likely be immediately taxable New Jersey income (no deduction), with only investment growth taxed later on withdrawal through the same basis-apportionment method New Jersey already uses for other IRAs. No New Jersey statute, bill, or Division of Taxation notice addresses Trump Accounts or § 530A directly, and open questions remain — most notably whose income the federal $1,000 pilot seed deposit or an employer's Trump Account contribution would be for New Jersey purposes. That is a real, unresolved gap, which is why this is flagged partial/ambiguous rather than a clean determination.

Source: N.J.S.A. § 54A:5-1 (Gross Income Tax Act, enumerated income categories); N.J. Div. of Taxation, Tax Topic Bulletin GIT-2, "IRA Withdrawals" (Rev. 12/18)

New Mexico

SB 151 (signed ~March 11, 2026) decouples only the corporate income tax base from certain OBBBA provisions (bonus depreciation, the §163(j) interest limitation, GILTI/NCTI-style income); it does not touch personal income tax conformity and does not mention Trump Accounts or §530A.

Source: NMSA 1978 § 7-2-2(J)

New York

The enacted FY2026-27 Budget Act (signed May 28, 2026) decouples New York from only two specific OBBBA provisions (§168(n) qualified production property depreciation; §174/§174A research expensing), retroactive to tax years beginning in 2025. Neither addresses Trump Accounts or §530A.

Source: N.Y. Tax Law § 607(a)

Oregonnot fully settled

Oregon runs a two-track system: most cross-references use a static date, but clause (2) makes the definition of taxable income itself track federal law on a rolling, current-tax-year basis — and that is the clause that governs IRA-style deferral, which operates through the computation of taxable income. A 2026 bill (SB 1507) decoupled Oregon from unrelated items only (vehicle-loan-interest deduction, QSBS exclusion, bonus depreciation), not retirement-account treatment. No Oregon DOR guidance names §530A specifically, and the dual-date structure is genuinely intricate enough to warrant a second read of ORS 316.012's current text before treating this as settled.

Source: ORS 316.012

South Carolina

H.3368 (2025-2026 session) would have advanced the conformity date to December 31, 2025 (capturing OBBBA); it passed the House 121-0 on March 10, 2026 but was rejected by the full Senate 16-27 on March 31, 2026, and had not been revived as of September 2, 2026.

Source: S.C. Code Ann. § 12-6-40(A)(1)(a); South Carolina H.3368 legislative history

Vermontnot fully settled

Act 164 (H.933) of 2026 retroactively updated Vermont's IRC conformity for tax year 2025 to adopt OBBBA, while explicitly excluding four named provisions (domestic research-expensing under IRC §174A, qualified production property depreciation under §168(n), the §250 FDII/GILTI deduction changes, and the §1202(a) exclusion of gain on qualified small business stock). §530A is not among the listed exceptions.

Vermont is technically a fixed-date state, but its Legislature retroactively updated the 2025 conformity date/scope specifically to reach OBBBA, naming only four excluded provisions — §530A is not among them, implying it is captured by default. But the Department of Taxes' own OBBBA guidance page never mentions §530A or Trump Accounts by name, so this is an inference from the absence of a listed exception rather than an affirmative statement.

Source: 32 V.S.A. § 5824, as amended by 2026 Act 164 § 60; Vermont Department of Taxes, "H.R. 1 Reconciliation Bill (OBBBA) Conformity" guidance

Virginianot fully settled

HB 29 (Chapter 7, 2026 Acts of Assembly, signed Feb. 20, 2026) replaced Virginia's prior rolling conformity with fixed-date conformity as of December 31, 2025 (after OBBBA), while decoupling from roughly 13 specific federal provisions (special depreciation, NOL carrybacks, OID rules, certain itemized-deduction limits, R&E amortization, §179 limits, and others). IRC §530A is not among the listed decoupling items.

Virginia's new fixed conformity date postdates OBBBA, and the enumerated decoupling list in both the statute and the Department of Taxation's own bulletin does not include §530A — so by the statute's structure, Trump Account treatment should be captured. But neither source explicitly names §530A or Trump Accounts, so this is inferred from the absence of an exception rather than a direct statement.

Source: Va. Code § 58.1-301; Virginia Dept. of Taxation, Tax Bulletin 26-1 (Feb. 20, 2026)

West Virginia

West Virginia's 2026 amendment to W. Va. Code §11-21-9(a) gives effect to federal changes made after December 31, 2024 and before January 1, 2026. OBBBA falls in that window, so general conformity reaches §530A. No West Virginia statute or Tax Division notice names §530A.

Source: W. Va. Code § 11-21-9(a)

District of Columbianot fully settled

DC is separately in the middle of a live, unresolved institutional dispute with Congress, but that dispute does not reach § 530A. The DC Council's Temporary Conformity Act (D.C. Act 26-217, companion to emergency D.C. Act 26-214) decouples DC from roughly 13 specific OBBBA provisions (none of them § 530A) for tax years beginning as of January 1, 2025 — TY2025 only, before § 530A first applies. Congress passed a joint resolution (H.J.Res.142, signed Feb. 18, 2026) disapproving that Act, but DC's Attorney General has opined the disapproval came one day after the Home Rule Act's 30-day review deadline and therefore has no legal effect. As of September 2, 2026, no DC legislation — enacted or pending — decouples from § 530A for TY2026, the first year it applies.

DC's baseline rule is rolling conformity, and no enacted or pending DC legislation decouples from § 530A for TY2026 specifically — so far as the Trump Account question itself, this is a determinate answer. But it sits alongside a genuine, ongoing institutional fight between the DC Council and Congress over a separate, TY2025-only conformity decoupling (D.C. Act 26-214/26-217): the Council maintains that act remains valid because Congress's disapproval resolution (H.J.Res.142) was enacted after the Home Rule Act's 30-day review window closed, while Congress's position, embodied in the resolution itself, is that the decoupling should be nullified. Neither side's list of affected provisions has ever named § 530A, since that TY2025 dispute predates § 530A's TY2026 effective date entirely — but it signals real, live uncertainty about DC's tax-conformity posture that could produce new legislation before the 2026 filing season. Flagged ambiguous for that reason. The Federal Tax Desk has not read H.J.Res.142 or the Attorney General's opinion in their official text; the dates above come from news reports.

Source: D.C. Code § 47-1801.04(28) (definition of "Internal Revenue Code of 1986," rolling conformity); D.C. Act 26-214, "D.C. Income and Franchise Tax Conformity and Revision Emergency Amendment Act of 2025"