In the sense that the Inca and Aztec did, no. Both of those cultures could rightly be called empires, as they subjugated/conquered/absorbed/bribed other groups and polities to form a single political body. The ruling Inca ethnic group used the mit'a system to maintain control, integrate the other cultures, and help create an imperial infrastructure. However, there has never been any single Maya state. The Maya were certainly a distinct cultural and linguistic group, but the Classic Yucatan was a constantly shifting expanse of city-states. The biggest centers (Tikal, Kalakmul, Yaxchilan...) each had their time as the most powerful, but usually through domination of trade routes, installation of their own dynasty in defeated cities, and an accumulation of allies and vassals. Even then, they were rarely w/o competition.

That being said, what about taxes within a city? Two theories used to be most prevalent: either the ruling elite were so removed in wealth that they had their own economic system outside the agrarianism of the common folk, or the elites maintained their wealth through a redistribution economy in which they collected goods from specialized producers and distributed them to citizens. The rising theory, to which I am partial, supports a more market based economy: specialized producers exchange goods with other producers to acquire their needs. Elites facilitated this exchange in urban marketplaces, and would likely have placed a tax on participation or trade to make a profit/maintain a stable economy.

Diane Z. Chase and Arlen F. Chase (2014). ANCIENT MAYA MARKETS AND THE ECONOMIC INTEGRATION OF CARACOL, BELIZE. Ancient Mesoamerica, 25, pp 239-250.

Marilyn A. Masson and David A. Freifdal (2012). An argument for Classic era Maya market exchange. Journal of Anthropological Aracheology, 31.4, pp455-484.