Using Current Senators to Denote 22 Red (Republican), 22 Blue (Democratic) and 6 Mixed states
Republican states (including 1/2 of mixed) contain 43% of population. Democratic states 57% of population.
https://www.infoplease.com/us/states/state-population-by-rank
Latest (2017) Analysis Shows Federal Revenues of $3.1T and Expenses of $3.7T (20% extra spending).
https://www.voanews.com/a/which-us-states-get-more-than-they-give/4809228.html
Some States Subsidize; While Others Are Subsidized

I have mapped this data onto the “Red vs. Blue” states list based on current senators.
Red (Republican) States Benefit Greatly
Democratic states pay 63% of all taxes, 5% more than their population share and 13% more than their senators’ (power) share.
Federal expenditures in Democratic states are 58% of the total, more than 4% less than their share of revenues contributed. Federal expenditures in Republican states are 42% of the total, more than 4% above their share of revenues contributed. Hence the total gap is almost 9% of the total.
The referenced article focused on two measures: net dollar subsidy (expenses > revenues) and net dollar subsidy per person.
I’m going to use a slightly different measure. The large (20%) difference between total expenditures and revenues skews these figures. I’d like to assume that the “equal” situation is one in which each party’s states pays the same ratio of revenues to expenses (or conversely, expenses to revenues). I’ve standardized the figures assuming that the “neutral” state receives 10.6% more expenditures than it pays in taxes, the same level as the Democratic states. Hence, by definition, the Democratic states, in total, are “neutral”. Their $2.155T expenditure is 10.6% higher than their $1.948T revenues.
The Republican states have $1.168T of revenues paid to the federal government but receive $1.555T of local expenditures. This is 33% more expenditures than revenues, a huge extra (22%) budget deficit. If the Republican spending was just 10.6% higher than revenues, it would be $1.292T, with a deficit of “just” $0.123T. This is $0.264T less than the actual deficit of $0.387T.
Subsidized States (>$10B)
6 Democratic states receive subsidies of more than $10 billion, totaling $180B.
Georgia (15), Michigan (16), New Mexico (17), Arizona (26), Maryland (29) and Virginia (78). Most of this is due to the DC employment and contracting bias.
Twice as many Republican states receive major subsidies, totaling $246B; $66B more than the Democratic states.
Indiana (10), Oklahoma (13), Arkansas (13), Louisiana (14), Tennessee (19), Mississippi (19), Missouri (19), South Carolina (21), Florida (26), North Carolina (26), Alabama (29) and Kentucky (38). Ironically, much of this excess spending was started when Democrats controlled southern states through much of the twentieth century.
Subsidizing States
Texas sends $19B more revenues to the federal government than it receives in expenditures, the only large subsidizing Republican state.
Seven Democratic states provide major subsidies to the federal government, totaling $218B, for a net subsidy versus Republican states (Texas) of $199B.
Washington (10), Illinois (19), Connecticut (20), Massachusetts (26), New Jersey (34), California (46) and New York (63). These states have the highest per capita incomes, so with a progressive income tax system, they pay a disproportionate share of federal taxes. (The state and local tax limit on deductions for federal taxes is a big issue in these states).
Summary
The Senate’s seats are based on geography, providing a major benefit to states with more rural and less urban/metro populations, benefitting the Republican party today more than in previous decades when Democrats were competitive in some of these states. Southern and rural states (Red, Republican) have lower incomes and receive more federal spending than coastal states (Blue, Democratic). In total, the Democratic states are paying 63% of taxes, while receiving 58% of federal expenditures, yet have just one-half of the senators and political power to determine taxing and spending policies. This discrepancy serves to reinforce the increasingly polarized political environment in the US.