Editorial Staff

Study: Graduated Income Tax Proponents Rely on Analyses That Exclude the Vast Majority Of “Millionaires” to Argue Their Case

/in , , , , /by Editorial Staff
Share on Facebook
Share on Twitter
Share on
LinkedIn
+

Past Research Drastically Undercounts Households Subject to Surtax Proposal

BOSTON – Advocates for a state constitutional amendment that would apply a 4 percent surtax to households with annual earnings of more than $1 million rely heavily on the assumption that these proposed taxes will have little impact on the mobility of high earners. They cite analyses by Cornell University Associate Professor Cristobal Young, which exclude the vast majority of millionaires, according to a new study published by Pioneer Institute.

“Professor Young’s wealth migration analyses don’t capture the full breadth of tax flight by million-dollar earners,” said Andrew Mikula, co-author of “Missing the Mark on Wealth Migration: Past Studies Drastically Undercounted Millionaires.” “High-net worth households that do financial planning could move to another state before they sell million-dollar assets. They fly under the radar in Cristobal Young’s work because most of them don’t earn more than $1 million in the year before they leave.”

The graduated income tax proposal advanced by the Massachusetts Teachers Association, the Service Employees International Union, and other union, advocacy, and religious groups, defines earnings as including salary and capital gains on the sale of assets, which makes net worth a critical component of households subject to the tax.

The methodology of Professor Young, who has made a point of weighing in on the Massachusetts graduated income tax in Commonwealth magazine, suffers from three major flaws.

First, he only counts those who earned $1 million in the year before they moved. This approach ignores those who move in anticipation of earning a seven-figure annual income from selling high-value assets.

Second, he fails to consider the 850,000 U.S. households with net worth more than $10 million that earn less than $1 million annually. Three-fifths of households with more than $10 million in net worth had annual incomes of less than $1 million. Cumulatively, these households have trillions of dollars in unrealized capital gains that, if sold, may be subject to a graduated income tax such as is proposed in Massachusetts.

Third, Professor Young ignores the role of tax policy in attracting migrants to Florida, which does not have income, capital gains, or estate taxes. Instead, he treats Florida as a mere outlier, claiming that “when Florida is excluded, there is virtually no tax migration” in the United States.

“That’s akin to saying that if you exclude Muhammad Ali, Louisville, Kentucky hasn’t produced any great boxers,” said Greg Sullivan, who co-authored the Pioneer report with Mikula.

According to IRS data, Florida had a migration inflow of 122,341 returns from taxpayers with adjusted gross income (AGI) over $200,000 (the highest income category) from 2012 to 2018, with an average return of $647,305. Net of those who left the state, Florida’s inflow returns over the period totaled $62.6 billion in taxable income among the wealthy.

Looking at all returns, Massachusetts is a significant source of wealth migration to the Sunshine State. Massachusetts experienced a net outflow of $20.7 billion in AGI from 1993 to 2018, with nearly half of it going to Florida. Almost three quarters of the AGI outflow went to either Florida or New Hampshire, another no-income tax state.

Finally, Young concludes that 2.4 percent of millionaires move each year. Advocates are wrong — and policymakers would be irresponsible — to downplay that finding. Even without correcting for Young’s undercount of millionaire households, the cumulative effect of an annual loss of high-net-worth taxpayers can add up to big numbers over a decade or more, exacerbating the already considerable exodus of Massachusetts residents to Florida and other low-tax states.

During a constitutional convention this or next year, Massachusetts legislators will decide whether or not to advance the graduated income tax amendment to the statewide ballot in November 2022.

About the Authors

Gregory Sullivan is Pioneer’s Research Director. Prior to joining Pioneer, Sullivan served two five-year terms as Inspector General of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and was a 17-year member of the Massachusetts House of Representatives. Greg is a Certified Fraud Investigator, and holds degrees from Harvard College, The Kennedy School of Public Administration, and the Sloan School at MIT.

Andrew Mikula is Economic Research Analyst 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 Posts:

Report Ranks Boston No. 1 in Income Inequality: What Does It Mean?

1 Comment
/
A report published last week by the Brookings Institution ranked…

GE comes to Boston: Here’s why

0 Comments
/
The Globe's Shirley Leung gets it right in her piece this afternoon…

An Uncertain Future for Ridesharing Services in Massachusetts

0 Comments
/
Last week, the Los Angeles City Council approved a new policy…

Problem: Overpriced Textbooks, Solution: Opensource Material

2 Comments
/
Last week, NBC news announced that textbooks prices have…

The Boston Globe: Create work with on-the-job training

0 Comments
/
The value of work cannot be overstated. If you love what you’re…

The Convention Center Expansion was a House of Cards

0 Comments
/
In a piece by Jack Encarnacao in the Boston Herald, Richard…

Status Report on the Job Creation Impact of the Life Sciences Act of 2008

6 Comments
/
This is the second in a continuing series of status reports published…

A Road to Financing

0 Comments
/
This manual was prepared as part of the Urban Business Alliance (UBA)- a unique initiative of Pioneer’s Center for Urban Entrepreneurship that helps low- and moderate-income entrepreneurs by bolstering the skills of the community-based business advisors they look to for assistance.

Study: Refocus on Workfare to Lift Mass. Residents from Poverty

Two decades after welfare reform, only 7.3 percent of Mass. recipients…

Rebuilding the Ladder to Self- Sufficiency: Workfare and Welfare Reform

0 Comments
/
The full implementation of welfare reform in Massachusetts required a waiver from the federal government. The commonwealth requested such a waiver to allow for the work requirement, time limits, job training, and the centralization of its public assistance system. The waiver was granted for all except time limits.

A Challenge to Economic Freedom: Declining Labor Participation

0 Comments
/
Even with lower unemployment rates in Massachusetts and the U.S.,…

A Challenge to Economic Freedom: Declining Labor Participation

0 Comments
/
The fact is that the unemployment rate doesn't tell the whole story. Strictly defined as the percentage of the population who are out of work and actively seeking employment, this metric provides a very narrow lens through which to evaluate labor market performance. A look at labor participation rates — the labor force as a percentage of the civilian non-institutional population — helps paint a more accurate picture.