Republican Tax Expert Warns Ken Paxton's Economic Plan Is 'Counterproductive'
Key Takeaways
- •Paxton’s economic agenda includes deductions for medical expenses, healthy lifestyle choices and first-time homebuyers.
- •The column says most taxpayers would not benefit because they do not itemize deductions.
- •Since the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, the share of taxpayers who itemize has fallen from about 30% to about 10%.
- •Former House Speaker Paul Ryan’s former tax counsel, George Callas, described the proposals as ineffective and counterproductive.
- •Mintz concluded that Paxton’s plan reflects political messaging more than substantive policy.

A Houston Chronicle column featuring analysis from a Republican tax expert cautioned that Attorney General Ken Paxton's economic agenda is unlikely to win voter approval.
Editor Evan Mintz, writing Monday, acknowledged that Paxton deserves some credit for focusing on the economy and the challenges facing ordinary Americans. However, he delivered a blunt assessment: "Paxton's economic agenda won't help, and it might actually make things worse."
Paxton's proposals align with broader Republican priorities, including tax cuts for out-of-pocket medical expenses, a $5,000 deduction for healthy lifestyle choices, and a $50,000 deduction for first-time homebuyers. The central problem, Mintz noted, is that most Americans would not benefit from such tax cuts because they do not itemize their returns. Since the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act roughly doubled the standard deduction, the share of taxpayers who itemize has fallen from around 30 percent to about 10 percent, meaning deduction-based relief like Paxton's reaches only a narrow slice of filers.
To evaluate the plan, Mintz consulted George Callas, who served as senior tax counsel to former House Speaker Paul Ryan. "That's all to say: This guy bleeds Republican red, and he knows tax policy," Mintz wrote.
Callas characterized Paxton's proposals as "not only ineffective, but counterproductive," noting that the agenda is far from innovative. "He's not a pioneer here."
Mintz provided historical context, explaining that Democrats have traditionally used the tax code to favor specific causes or distribute benefits to voters, while Republicans historically prioritized an economically efficient, pro-growth tax code — "even if they didn't always live up to their own ideals." That dynamic, he said, shifted during the Trump era.
According to Callas, "It's all downstream from Trump's lack of interest in good tax policy and successful campaigning on 'no tax on blank.'"
Callas argued that if Paxton genuinely wanted to address the affordability crisis, he should pursue a different set of policies: "end the war in Iran to let petroleum and fertilizer flow again, remove Trump's tariffs that drive up the prices of everyday goods, and pass an immigration bill that ensures the agricultural, construction and healthcare industries have the workers they need to grow food, build homes and keep Americans healthy."
None of those measures appear on Paxton's political agenda.
Mintz concluded by framing the current political landscape as no longer a divide between Democratic and Republican tax philosophies, but rather between those committed to substantive policy and those focused on politics and grand promises. "Paxton's Texas Promise Agenda shows he's clearly in the latter."
Sources: Houston Chronicle