New Study Finds Pandemic-Spurred Technologies Lowered Barriers to Exit in High-Cost States

Share on Facebook
Share on Twitter
Share on
LinkedIn
+

Read coverage of this report in the Boston Herald, The Boston Globe, and State House News Service.

BOSTON – Both employers and households will find it easier to leave major job centers as technologies made commonplace by the COVID-19 pandemic have led to a rethinking of the geography of work, according to a new study published by Pioneer Institute.

“The pandemic has changed the calculus on whether telecommuting is worth it, for both employers and workers,” said Andrew Mikula, author of “Barriers to Exit Lowered in High-Cost States as Pandemic-Related Technologies Changed Outlook.”

The study draws on survey data projecting that a third of workers could be permanent telecommuters by the end of 2021 and discusses implications of these trends for transportation, municipal finance, and wealth migration. While worst-case scenarios could bring a level of disinvestment in places like New York City not seen since the 1970s, even a mid-range scenario suggests a significant relocation of jobs and potentially wealth.

Before COVID-19, many high earners and large companies were already leaving New York and Silicon Valley. Coupled with the role of prominent vacation spots in providing a haven for those of means, more business- and tax-friendly areas like Florida, Texas, and Arizona are the clear winners of these trends. As demonstrated in a recent Pioneer study, “Do the Wealthy Migrate Away From High-Tax States?”, relocation of jobs and wealth from Massachusetts has been largely to Florida and New Hampshire.

“These trends are not new, but the pandemic has served as an accelerant,” said Pioneer Institute Executive Director Jim Stergios. “Policymakers who care about recovering the pandemic’s lost jobs will need to create a more business-friendly environment. That means a focus on policies related to taxes, regulation, and the additional costs we are imposing on small employers.”

Policymakers face risks on both sides of the employment equation. Both employees and employers see benefits from remote work. Polls show that a quarter of workers would be willing to take a 10-percent pay cut for the opportunity to work remotely, perhaps a small price to pay to be able to escape the exorbitant cost of living in Boston or New York. Research shows that remote work also reduces the direct costs associated with working in an office environment, such as parking, food, and travel for employees, by an average of $4,000 annually.

For employers, savings average $11,000 per worker, largely because of productivity gains and less need for real estate.

Some argue that the attraction of urban amenities and the productivity advantage of large cities will outweigh the added expenses and short-term public health concerns. Still, surveys suggest that a sizable segment of business executives, office workers, and other professionals will choose to operate remotely for the foreseeable future.

The response from policymakers will be telling and likely determine a set of winners and losers in the new post-pandemic economic reality. Some policymakers will double down on the burdensome tax and regulatory environments that started the taxpayer exodus in the first place; others will take action to offset the obvious financial and quality-of-life benefits of remote work. Based on the policy path taken, employers and employees will make their own decisions about job location and investments.

About the Author

Andrew Mikula is a Research Assistant at Pioneer Institute. Mr. Mikula was pre­viously a Lovett & Ruth Peters Economic Opportunity Fellow at Pioneer Institute and studied economics at Bates College.

About Pioneer

Pioneer’s mission is to develop and communicate dynamic ideas that advance prosperity and a vibrant civic life in Massachusetts and beyond.

Pioneer’s vision of success is a state and nation where our people can prosper and our society thrive because we enjoy world-class options in education, healthcare, transportation, and economic opportunity, and where our government is limited, accountable and transparent.

Pioneer values an America where our citizenry is well-educated and willing to test our beliefs based on facts and the free exchange of ideas, and committed to liberty, personal responsibility, and free enterprise.

Get Updates on Our Economic Opportunity Research

Related Research

Massachusetts Legislature Procrastinates Once Again

There are less than seven weeks left to the Massachusetts Legislature’s…

Study Finds Prevalence of Entrepreneurship Tied to Regulatory Environment, Portion of Immigrants

The prevalence of entrepreneurship is linked to both the regulatory environment and the portion of foreign-born immigrants in a jurisdiction, according to a new study published by Pioneer Institute.

Thoughts on Outmigration and Competitiveness

?Thoughts on Out Migration and Competitiveness   A…

Study Finds Supply Shortage at the Heart of Greater Boston Housing Crisis

Construction costs, land use regulation and zoning among…

Commentary On The Senate Ways And Means Committee FY2025 Budget 

The Senate Ways and Means Committee (SWM) released its FY2025 budget on May 7th.  This spending plan totals $57.9 billion, an increase of $1.8 billion over the FY2024 General Appropriations Act (GAA).  Like the Governor’s and House’s versions of the budget, the SWM budget is based on the consensus revenue estimate of $41.5 billion in tax revenue - a decrease of $208 million from last year’s consensus figure.

Pioneer Statement on Continuing Slide in Massachusetts’ Revenue

The Commonwealth’s tax collections continue to slide, totaling $3.594 billion in January, $268 million below what the state collected in January 2023, and short of the revised benchmark by $263 million. Massachusetts state government must live within its means by reducing FY2025 spending. The days of fiscal surpluses, unprecedented increases in year-over-year spending, and flowing federal aid have come to an end.

Pioneer Statement on Decline in State Revenues

The Commonwealth’s finances have stumbled hard in recent months, and based on a report the Department of Revenue (DOR) sent to the Legislature in January, the trend shows no signs of easing. Massachusetts needs a renewed emphasis on fiscal discipline and pro-growth policies to make the state economically competitive again.

Skill-based immigration could ease labor shortage

A recent Biden administration executive order that amends the Schedule A list, which identifies occupations experiencing labor shortages and allows immigrants in those occupations to expedite their employment in the U.S., could positively impact the hiring of skilled international workers for years to come — a welcome development as the country and Massachusetts struggle to attract talent amidst a worsening labor shortage.

My Musings on Massachusetts’ Fiscal Picture

Since the start of FY2024 on July 1, 2023, the state has experienced six straight months of revenues falling short of expectations. The single biggest factor is the unprecedented growth of the state budget since FY2021. The $15 billion increase in state spending contextualizes the seemingly modest projected revenue growth of 1.6 percent for FY2024 by highlighting that the base is very inflated.

The Massachusetts Workforce: Abundant Resources, Steep Challenges

Massachusetts features a strong workforce training system with abundant resources yet faces challenges in matching jobs and applicants, training youth, and attracting sufficient numbers of skilled immigrants, according to a pair of studies from Pioneer Institute.

Pioneer Institute Statement on the State Legislature’s FY2024 Tax Relief Package

The recent advancement of a tax bill H. 4104, that is expected to be enacted by the Legislature this week after languishing for more than 20 months, puts Massachusetts taxpayers one step closer to realizing some tax relief. However, it may be too little to tackle the Commonwealth’s affordability and competitiveness challenges.

Poll: MA Voters Oppose Legislative Proposals to Change Tax Rebate Law

A strong majority of registered Massachusetts voters oppose a plan recently announced by state legislative leaders that would change the way tax rebates are distributed in Massachusetts under a state law approved by voters in 1986, according to a new poll sponsored by Pioneer Institute and the Massachusetts High Technology Council.