States Without Sales Tax & How They Fund Their Government

Share this Article:

Most states lean heavily on sales tax to fund their government operations, but a select few take a different approach. These states have earned the nickname “NOMAD” because they do not collect state-level sales tax. Their tax models raise important considerations for transportation companies, especially those managing multistate operations. 


Understanding how these states operate offers insight into alternative revenue strategies and may influence decisions about business location, compliance, and tax planning.

Someone is getting taxed on a purchase.

What Are NOMAD States?

NOMAD refers to five U.S. states that do not collect a state-level sales tax: New Hampshire, Oregon, Montana, Alaska, and Delaware. Each of these states has adopted a tax structure that avoids the standard model used in most of the country. While the majority of states heavily depend on sales tax to support their budgets, NOMAD states fund their governments through other sources.


For transportation companies, these states represent a different set of rules and potential advantages. Without a state-level sales tax in play, indirect costs on certain purchases may be lower. This can impact pricing, procurement strategies, and multistate compliance efforts.


It’s important to note that while these states do not collect state sales tax, some may still impose local taxes or targeted fees. Understanding how each state operates individually is necessary for companies evaluating expansion, acquisition, or logistics planning across state lines.

The Sales Tax Trade-Off: How NOMAD States Fund Their Governments

Each NOMAD state replaces traditional state-level sales tax with alternative sources. These include income taxes, business taxes, excise taxes, and fees tied to property or industry. Though the methods vary, each state supports its operations without relying on general retail sales.

  • New Hampshire

    New Hampshire collects revenue through business profits taxes, interest and dividends taxes, and real estate transfer taxes. Local property taxes carry much of the weight, especially for funding schools and infrastructure.

  • Oregon

    Oregon relies on personal income taxes and corporate excise taxes. It also applies fuel and tobacco taxes to support transportation and health programs. Higher income tax rates offset the lack of sales tax.

  • Montana

    Montana uses individual and corporate income taxes, along with fuel and tobacco excise taxes. Local property taxes help fund education and local services. While there’s no state sales tax, some lodging and rental taxes apply.

  • Alaska

    Alaska depends on oil and gas royalties, severance taxes, and investment earnings. There’s no state sales or income tax. Some municipalities charge sales tax, but rates and rules vary by location.

  • Delaware

    Delaware raises revenue through corporate franchise taxes, gross receipts taxes, and business license fees. Its status as a preferred business registration state adds to its income, replacing the need for a general sales tax.

Implications for Transportation Companies

Transportation companies operating in NOMAD states may benefit from reduced indirect tax costs on purchases like fleet equipment, parts, and maintenance services. The lack of state-level sales tax can lower upfront expenses, depending on how transactions are structured and where they take place.


In Alaska, local jurisdictions have the authority to impose sales taxes. These rates and rules differ by location, so companies must track local requirements to avoid missteps. In Delaware, the absence of a retail sales tax is offset by a gross receipts tax that applies to many business activities, which can increase compliance needs.


Montana, Oregon, and New Hampshire do not impose state or local sales taxes, which can simplify purchasing decisions. For transportation companies that manage assets across multiple states, sourcing goods or services through these locations may lead to cost savings.



Still, the overall impact depends on the company's footprint, the nature of its transactions, and its existing compliance structure. A careful review of tax obligations in each state is key to identifying opportunities and avoiding overlooked liabilities.

Sales Tax Planning Beyond NOMAD States

While states with no sales tax may seem appealing, most transportation companies still operate across multiple jurisdictions that do collect it. Managing sales tax exposure in these states requires careful planning, especially when dealing with parts, equipment, and interstate services. Purchases made outside of NOMAD states may trigger use tax liabilities, depending on where the item is stored or used.

Storefront window displaying

Nexus rules can also create tax obligations in unexpected places. Even if a company is based in a NOMAD state, having drivers, terminals, or inventory in other states may require sales tax compliance elsewhere. Each state's thresholds and enforcement practices differ, adding complexity to routine business operations.


Sales tax planning involves more than checking tax rates. It includes reviewing exemption certificates, understanding sourcing rules, and confirming how specific items are taxed across jurisdictions. For companies without in-house tax departments, this can quickly become difficult to manage.

Staying ahead of these rules helps avoid penalties, protect margins, and streamline multistate operations. Strong sales tax consulting support can give companies a clearer picture and a more effective strategy.

How Transportation Tax Consulting Supports You

Transportation Tax Consulting helps companies navigate the complexity of multistate sales tax regulations. For those operating in or around NOMAD states, we evaluate purchasing strategies, tax exposure, and local regulations to identify cost-saving opportunities and reduce risk. Our experience across trucking, rail, aviation, and maritime sectors allows us to provide insights tailored to your business model and operational footprint.


We assist in determining where obligations exist, which exemptions apply, and how to document transactions properly. For companies expanding into new states or restructuring operations, we offer planning strategies that align tax compliance with long-term goals. This includes helping clients understand local sales tax ordinances in places like Alaska and gross receipts taxes in Delaware.


Many transportation companies do not have a dedicated tax department. Our role is to fill that gap by offering specialized expertise and practical solutions. Through detailed analysis and industry-specific knowledge, we help reduce indirect tax costs, support compliance, and recover missed sales tax refunds when applicable.

Key Takeaways

NOMAD states include New Hampshire, Oregon, Montana, Alaska, and Delaware. These states do not collect state-level sales tax and instead raise revenue through income taxes, business fees, or resource-based income. For transportation companies, this can lower indirect tax costs on certain purchases.


Some local taxes and other obligations still apply. Alaska allows municipalities to charge sales tax, and Delaware imposes a gross receipts tax that applies to many business activities. These rules can affect pricing, margins, and compliance requirements.


Transportation Tax Consulting helps your business navigate these complexities with precision and industry-specific insight. Contact us today to schedule a consultation and take the next step toward reducing your sales tax burden.

Share with Us:

Forecasting the 2026 Transportation Turn-Around

By Matthew Bowles • January 14, 2026
The North American transportation industry enters 2026 carrying the scars of a prolonged freight downturn—but also the structural changes needed for recovery. After years of excess capacity, margin compression, and muted demand, the sector now shows clear signs of recalibration. Carriers have reduced fleets, shippers have adjusted sourcing strategies, and regulators continue to reshape compliance expectations. These forces converge in 2026, positioning the transportation industry for a measured but meaningful turn-around. This recovery will not resemble past freight booms. Instead, it will reward disciplined operators, data-driven decision-making, and companies that have restructured their cost bases during the downturn. The transportation companies that survive 2024 and 2025 emerge leaner, more technologically enabled, and better aligned with shipper expectations. Capacity Discipline Resets the Market The freight downturn forced capacity out of the system. Smaller carriers exited the market, owner-operators parked trucks, and larger fleets delayed equipment purchases. This contraction laid the groundwork for stabilization. By early 2026, the imbalance between supply and demand narrows substantially. Truckload capacity tightens first. Fleet bankruptcies and consolidations reduce overcapacity that plagued the market since 2022. Railroads, having already optimized precision scheduled railroading models, benefit from improved network fluidity and intermodal growth. Even last-mile and regional carriers experience steadier volumes as e-commerce normalizes at sustainable growth rates. Carriers that remain in operation in 2026 operate fewer assets but deploy them more efficiently. This discipline supports gradual rate improvement without triggering inflationary spikes. Shippers gain predictability, while carriers regain pricing power grounded in service reliability rather than desperation. Demand Stabilizes and Broadens Freight demand does not surge overnight, but it stabilizes across multiple sectors in 2026. Manufacturing reshoring and near-shoring initiatives continue to generate freight tied to domestic production rather than volatile overseas imports. Automotive, energy, and industrial materials lead early volume gains. Consumer spending shifts away from discretionary goods toward durable and essential products. This shift favors freight lanes tied to construction materials, food distribution, and industrial inputs. Retail replenishment cycles shorten, creating steadier, more predictable freight flows. Importantly, shippers move away from panic-driven overordering. Inventory strategies improve as companies integrate better forecasting tools and supply chain visibility. This change reduces extreme demand swings that previously destabilized carrier networks. Intermodal and Rail Gain Strategic Ground Rail and intermodal transportation play a central role in the 2026 recovery. Rising driver costs, environmental pressures, and congestion concerns push shippers to reconsider long-haul truckload dependence. Intermodal offers cost stability and emissions advantages that resonate with corporate sustainability goals. Railroads continue investing in terminal automation, crew optimization, and service consistency. These investments pay dividends as volume returns. Intermodal lanes expand beyond traditional coastal corridors, serving interior manufacturing hubs and distribution centers. For trucking companies, intermodal does not represent competition—it represents partnership. Drayage providers, regional carriers, and integrated logistics firms find new opportunities supporting rail growth. Companies that align truck and rail strategies position themselves for diversified revenue streams. Technology Separates Winners from Survivors The downturn forces transportation companies to confront inefficiencies they once ignored. By 2026, technology adoption moves from optional to essential. Carriers leverage telematics, route optimization, predictive maintenance, and real-time visibility to protect margins. Artificial intelligence and advanced analytics reshape pricing, network planning, and fuel management. Companies that invested early use data to anticipate demand shifts rather than react to them. Shippers reward these carriers with longer-term contracts and collaborative planning relationships. Back-office systems also mature. Automated billing, tax compliance tools, and audit-ready reporting reduce administrative burden. These improvements allow management teams to focus on growth rather than survival. Labor Pressures Ease but Do Not Disappear Driver availability improves modestly in 2026, but labor remains a structural challenge. Carriers benefit from reduced turnover as fewer competitors chase the same drivers. Improved scheduling, regional routes, and home-time predictability become retention tools rather than perks. Wage inflation moderates, but benefit costs and compliance obligations continue to rise. Companies that invested in driver engagement, safety programs, and technology-enabled workflows retain talent more effectively. Those that rely solely on pay increases struggle to compete. Management labor also tightens. Skilled dispatchers, safety professionals, and compliance specialists command premium compensation. Firms that train internally and build career pathways gain an advantage. Regulatory Complexity Shapes Strategic Planning Regulation does not slow in 2026. Instead, it becomes more targeted and data-driven. Environmental reporting, fuel tax compliance, and cross-jurisdictional audit activity increase. Governments leverage improved data systems to identify under-reporting and misclassification. Carriers and shippers respond by integrating compliance into strategic planning rather than treating it as a reactive function. Tax strategy, entity structuring, and transaction analysis become board-level discussions. Transportation companies that proactively address fuel tax exposure, sales and use tax risks, and multistate compliance protect margins during the recovery. Those that ignore these issues face audits that erase hard-earned gains. Mergers and Acquisitions Accelerate The recovery phase invites consolidation. Strong balance sheets, improved cash flow, and normalized valuations drive merger and acquisition activity in 2026. Strategic buyers pursue regional density, specialized equipment, and technology capabilities rather than raw scale. Private equity re-enters the market selectively. Investors favor companies with disciplined growth strategies, compliance maturity, and diversified customer bases. Transactions emphasize operational integration rather than financial engineering. For smaller carriers, acquisition offers an exit strategy after years of volatility. For larger platforms, consolidation strengthens negotiating power with shippers and vendors while spreading fixed costs across broader networks. Shippers Redefine Partnerships Shippers approach 2026 with lessons learned from supply chain disruption. They prioritize reliability, transparency, and collaboration over transactional rate shopping. Procurement teams shift from quarterly bids to multi-year partnerships tied to performance metrics. Transportation providers that demonstrate operational discipline and compliance credibility earn preferred-carrier status. These relationships support steady volume commitments that benefit both parties. Shippers also invest in internal transportation expertise. They understand tax exposure, regulatory risk, and modal strategy more deeply. This sophistication raises expectations for carriers but also creates opportunities for value-added services. Financial Health Improves Gradually The 2026 turn-around does not restore peak profitability immediately. Instead, margins improve incrementally as cost structures normalize and pricing stabilizes. Fuel price volatility remains a risk, but hedging strategies and surcharge mechanisms improve. Cash flow strengthens as bankruptcy risk declines and payment cycles stabilize. Lenders regain confidence, enabling refinancing and selective capital investment. Equipment purchases resume cautiously, favoring fuel-efficient and technology-enabled assets. Carriers that survived the downturn with disciplined balance sheets gain flexibility to invest in growth without overleveraging. A Different Kind of Recovery The transportation industry’s 2026 recovery reflects evolution rather than expansion. Companies succeed by applying lessons learned from adversity. They value data over intuition, discipline over speed, and partnerships over transactions. This turn-around favors organizations that invested during the downturn—whether in technology, compliance, people, or process improvement. The market rewards preparedness, not speculation. While uncertainty remains, the direction is clear. Capacity aligns with demand. Shippers stabilize volumes. Technology enhances execution. Regulation rewards transparency. Together, these forces create a foundation for sustainable growth. Conclusion: Preparing for the Turn-Around The 2026 transportation turn-around will not lift all participants equally. It will elevate companies that acted decisively during the downturn and challenge those that waited for conditions to improve on their own. Transportation leaders who plan now—by strengthening compliance, refining networks, investing in technology, and deepening shipper relationships—position their organizations to lead the next cycle. The recovery will arrive quietly, but its impact will be lasting for those ready to seize it. The question is no longer whether the transportation industry will turn around. The question is which companies will emerge stronger when it does.

Transportation 2025 Year Review: Bankruptcies, Acquisitions, Mergers, and Closures

By Matthew Bowles • January 5, 2026
The transportation industry exited 2025 fundamentally reshaped. What began as a prolonged freight recession evolved into a structural reset driven by sustained margin pressure, tightening capital, regulatory complexity, and heightened scrutiny of compliance and operating discipline. Bankruptcies rose sharply, voluntary closures accelerated, and consolidation activity reached levels not seen since prior downcycles. For Transportation Tax Consulting (TTC) and its clients, 2025 reinforced a central truth: financial survival and transaction success increasingly depend on tax strategy, compliance execution, and operational visibility—not just freight volumes. Bankruptcies Accelerated as Structural Costs Outpaced Revenue Carrier bankruptcies climbed again in 2025 after already elevated filings in 2023 and 2024. Industry estimates and court filings indicate that U.S. trucking bankruptcies in 2025 increased by more than 35% year over year , driven primarily by small and mid-sized fleets. Key drivers included: Spot market exposure: Spot rates remained 20–30% below 2021 peaks for much of the year Insurance inflation: Premiums rose another 10–15% for many carriers Equipment replacement pressure: Emissions-compliant equipment increased capital requirements Tax and compliance exposure: Multistate fuel tax, sales/use tax, and employment classification issues surfaced during audits and distressed transactions The bankruptcy trend chart above illustrates the steady rise in carrier failures since 2021, culminating in 2025 as financially weakened operators ran out of options. From TTC’s perspective, many bankruptcies revealed unaddressed tax liabilities —including unpaid fuel taxes, misapplied sales tax exemptions, and unremitted payroll taxes—that significantly reduced recovery value and complicated restructurings. Closures Reflected Strategic Exits, Not Just Failure Beyond formal bankruptcies, thousands of carriers voluntarily exited the market in 2025. Owner-operators and family-owned fleets increasingly chose to shut down operations rather than refinance debt, absorb compliance costs, or invest in new technology. Common closure drivers included: Aging ownership with no succession plan Rising administrative burden tied to tax filings, registrations, and audits Difficulty maintaining compliance across multiple jurisdictions Limited access to affordable insurance and credit Brokerages and small logistics providers also closed quietly as digital platforms and large intermediaries consolidated shipper relationships. For TTC clients, these closures often triggered unexpected exposure , including: Orphaned fuel tax accounts Unresolved audit notices Asset disposition sales tax issues Nexus questions following market exits Closures reinforced the importance of exit planning , even for companies not pursuing bankruptcy or sale. Mergers Increased as Scale Became a Risk-Management Tool Mergers gained momentum in 2025 as carriers sought density, efficiency, and purchasing power. Unlike prior cycles focused on rapid geographic expansion, most mergers emphasized: Terminal consolidation Lane density optimization Overhead reduction Back-office centralization Private equity-backed platforms led much of this activity, targeting compliance-ready operators with clean tax profiles and documented processes. The M&A activity chart above illustrates the steady increase in transportation transactions through 2025, reflecting both defensive and opportunistic consolidation. TTC observed a clear trend: buyers increasingly demanded tax diligence early in the process . Transactions stalled—or valuations adjusted—when targets lacked clean fuel tax filings, sales tax documentation, or employment tax compliance. Acquisitions Became More Disciplined and Asset-Focused Acquisitions in 2025 shifted toward selective, strategic deals rather than full-platform rollups. Buyers focused on: Asset purchases out of bankruptcy Specialized fleets (temperature-controlled, bulk, dedicated) Contract-heavy operators with predictable revenue Asset-only acquisitions allowed buyers to avoid assuming historical tax and compliance liabilities, a strategy TTC frequently supported through transaction structuring and liability isolation . Technology-driven acquisitions also expanded, particularly in logistics software and compliance automation. These deals aimed to reduce long-term administrative risk while improving reporting accuracy. Shipper Behavior Accelerated Consolidation Pressure Shippers played a direct role in reshaping the market. In 2025: Large shippers reduced carrier counts by an estimated 15–25% Contract rebids emphasized compliance, reporting, and audit readiness Dedicated and hybrid fleet models gained share Carriers unable to demonstrate fuel tax accuracy, emissions compliance, and regulatory consistency increasingly lost freight—even when rates were competitive. For TTC, this trend underscored the growing link between tax compliance and revenue retention . Regulatory and Tax Complexity Influenced Winners and Losers Regulatory pressure intensified throughout 2025. State revenue agencies increased audit activity, particularly around: Fuel tax reporting Sales and use tax on equipment, parts, and leases Worker classification and payroll tax compliance Carriers entering mergers, acquisitions, or restructurings faced heightened scrutiny of historical filings. TTC frequently supported clients by: Quantifying historical exposure Resolving legacy liabilities pre-transaction Structuring deals to mitigate successor liability Supporting post-merger integration of tax processes Companies that invested in compliance infrastructure earlier in the cycle emerged as preferred acquisition targets . Workforce Disruption and Realignment Industry restructuring displaced thousands of drivers and staff. While consolidation absorbed some talent, uncertainty persisted in regions heavily affected by closures. However, acquiring firms that executed clean integrations —including payroll tax alignment and benefit compliance—retained talent more effectively and avoided post-close disruptions. TTC Perspective: 2025 Was a Compliance Wake-Up Call From Transportation Tax Consulting’s vantage point, 2025 clearly demonstrated that: Tax exposure materially impacts valuation Compliance failures accelerate distress Clean filings enable faster, more favorable transactions Proactive advisory reduces downside risk Bankruptcies, mergers, acquisitions, and closures were not isolated financial events—they were compliance stress tests . Looking Ahead: Discipline Defines the Next Cycle The transportation industry enters 2026 leaner, more consolidated, and more disciplined. Capacity rationalization improved long-term fundamentals, but success will favor companies that: Maintain strong compliance frameworks Integrate tax strategy into growth planning Prepare early for transactions and exits Treat tax and regulatory management as strategic assets  The turbulence of 2025 cleared excess capacity—but it also elevated the role of advisors who understand transportation’s unique tax and compliance landscape.

Essential but Not a Utility: Why Motor Carriers for Hire Occupy a Regulatory Gray Area

By Matthew Bowles • December 20, 2025
During the COVID-19 pandemic, government leaders across the United States delivered a clear message: motor carriers are essential . While offices closed and travel stopped, trucks kept moving. They delivered food, medical supplies, fuel, and consumer goods that allowed the economy—and daily life—to continue. Yet once the crisis subsided, trucking returned to its familiar regulatory position: critical to society, but treated as a competitive service rather than a public utility. This contradiction raises an important question—especially in unidirectional states where freight flows heavily in one direction: If motor carriers are essential, why are they not considered public utilities? The answer lies not in the importance of trucking, but in history, law, and economic philosophy. Motor Carriers Function as Essential Infrastructure Motor carriers for hire form the backbone of the American supply chain. In unidirectional states—those shaped by ports, agriculture, energy production, or geographic constraints—trucking does far more than move freight. It sustains local economies, supports national commerce, and ensures access to basic goods. These states often suffer from structural imbalances. Trucks haul freight in one dominant direction and return empty or underutilized. That imbalance increases costs, discourages market entry, and makes service less reliable during downturns. Despite these challenges, motor carriers must still meet public expectations for reliability. Grocery stores must stay stocked. Hospitals must receive supplies. Manufacturers must ship products. Functionally, trucking in these states resembles a public utility—even if the law does not say so. Essential Does Not Mean Public Utility During COVID, governments used the word essential deliberately. The designation allowed drivers to keep working, relaxed certain compliance rules, and ensured access to fuel and infrastructure. It solved an immediate problem: keeping freight moving during an emergency. Public utility status, however, creates permanent obligations. Utilities must: Serve all customers in a defined area Provide continuous service Operate under regulated pricing Accept limits on market exit COVID policy addressed short-term continuity. Public utility classification would have required a permanent restructuring of the trucking industry. Policymakers avoided that step. Deregulation Changed Trucking’s Legal Identity Before 1980, interstate trucking looked much closer to a public utility. Regulators controlled: Market entry Routes Rates Service obligations The Motor Carrier Act of 1980 dismantled that system. Congress chose competition over regulation, believing market forces would lower costs and improve efficiency. That decision permanently altered trucking’s legal status. COVID did not reverse deregulation. It merely confirmed that deregulated carriers still perform an essential public function—without public utility protections. Why Motor Carriers Are Not Treated Like Utilities Several structural differences keep trucking outside the public utility framework: No Obligation to Serve Motor carriers may choose their customers, lanes, and freight. Public utilities cannot. Market-Based Pricing Trucking rates fluctuate with supply, demand, fuel, and capacity. Utility rates are regulated for stability and cost recovery. No Infrastructure Ownership Utilities own and maintain their infrastructure. Motor carriers rely on publicly funded highways they do not control. Full Market Risk Carriers absorb economic volatility, fuel swings, and downturns. Utilities recover costs through regulated rates. These differences explain why policymakers resisted utility classification—even after calling trucking essential. The Policy Contradiction COVID Exposed The pandemic revealed a fundamental contradiction: Motor carriers are too important to fail Yet they receive none of the protections given to public utilities During COVID, carriers absorbed extreme risk while keeping the economy running. Utilities, by contrast, benefited from guaranteed revenue mechanisms and regulatory certainty. In unidirectional states, this imbalance becomes more pronounced. When carriers exit unprofitable lanes, communities feel the impact immediately. Supply chains falter. Costs rise. Access declines. Why the Public Utility Debate Matters Now The question is no longer whether trucking is essential—that point is settled. The real question is whether current policy appropriately reflects trucking’s role in the economy, especially where market forces alone fail to ensure reliability. Recognizing motor carriers as public utilities does not require heavy-handed rate control or elimination of competition. It could mean: Targeted protections in critical corridors Policy frameworks that recognize structural freight imbalances Regulatory consistency aligned with public benefit Long-term investment stability for carriers serving essential markets Conclusion Motor carriers for hire occupy a unique space in the American economy. They operate as private businesses, but society depends on them like public utilities. COVID made that reality undeniable. In unidirectional states and critical freight corridors, trucking already functions as essential infrastructure. The law simply has not caught up. As supply chains face growing strain, the conversation is shifting—from whether trucking is essential to whether policy should finally reflect that truth. The future of transportation policy will depend on how—and whether—regulators resolve this tension.