Editorial Staff

Pioneer Supports Legal Challenge to Misleading Tax Ballot Language, Releases Video

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

Summary language fails to point out that new surtax revenue could just replace cuts, not increase overall education and transportation spending

BOSTON – Pioneer Institute supports the diverse and bipartisan group that filed a complaint with the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court (SJC) challenging the summary language meant to provide an accurate description of the tax hike amendment to voters. The language was approved by the Attorney General and Secretary of the Commonwealth when a similar amendment was proposed in 2018, and unless the lawsuit is successful, will likely appear on the Massachusetts ballot in November.

The amendment to the state Constitution would add an additional 4 percent tax on all annual income over $1 million.  The proposed summary language put forward by the Attorney General and the Secretary states that the revenue from the tax will be dedicated to fund public education and transportation and, in doing so, neglects to disclose that while receipts from the tax would be directed to those areas, the legislature would be free to redirect current funding for public education and transportation to other priorities. It does not require an additional cent to be spent on our schools, roads, bridges and public transportation.

“Proponents may willfully mislabel this tax, but the AG and the Secretary should not,” said Jim Stergios, executive director of Pioneer Institute.  “In 2018, even the Attorney General’s office, which was defending the proposal before the SJC argued that it was ‘just a tax’ – it wouldn’t necessarily increase spending on transportation and education.”

A 2018 effort to bring the amendment before voters ended when the SJC found that the proposed amendment violated a ban on citizen-initiated ballot initiatives that combine unrelated subjects; in this case a new graduated income tax and a directive about where revenue from the tax would be spent. That ban does not apply to constitutional amendments proposed by the legislature, and in 2019 and 2021 the legislature voted to put the tax amendment on the November 2022 ballot.

Pioneer today is also releasing a video from arguments presented during the 2018 oral arguments. In it, the lawyer arguing the Attorney General’s case in support of the tax amendment explicitly agrees, in response to a question from the late SJC Chief Justice Ralph Gants, that the amendment might not result in any overall increase in education and transportation.

Moreover, Attorney General Healey’s own brief from the 2018 case reads, “the Legislature could choose to reduce spending in specified budget categories from other sources and replace it with new surtax revenue.”

Today’s complaint is based on the argument made in the 2021 Pioneer Institute White Paper, “The Graduated Income Tax Amendment – A Shell Game?“  The study was authored by Kevin Martin, the attorney who prepared and filed today’s complaint for the plaintiffs.

“It’s hard to dismiss the possibility of legislators simply using the surtax money to backfill education and transportation cuts when they twice rejected amendments that would have required that the revenue be over and above what’s already been appropriated,” said Pioneer Research Director and former Massachusetts Inspector General Greg Sullivan.

During their debates on the proposed ballot measure, legislators made their intentions crystal clear regarding how new tax revenues will be spent by rejecting two amendments that would have required that the new revenues be invested in addition to existing expenditures.  Both amendments were defeated – one by a 154-39 vote, the other by a 156-40 margin.

“As an employer, I’m most concerned about the devastating impact this tax hike would have on businesses and re-investment in growth,” said Cape Cod Lumber CEO Harvey Hurvitz.  “But the thing that’s troubling about it is that it’s not even about education and transportation investments.”

About Pioneer

Pioneer Institute develops and communicates dynamic ideas that advance prosperity and a vibrant civic life in Massachusetts and beyond. Success for Pioneer is when the citizens of our state and nation prosper and our society thrives because we enjoy world-class options in education, healthcare, transportation and economic opportunity, and when our government is limited, accountable and transparent. Pioneer believes that America is at its best when our citizenry is well-educated, committed to liberty, personal responsibility, and free enterprise, and both willing and able to test their beliefs based on facts and the free exchange of ideas.

Get Updates on Our Economic Opportunity Research

Related Content

Welcome to New Hampshire Sign: Live Free or Die

Study Warns that New Hampshire Tax Policies Would Exacerbate Impacts of a Graduated Income Tax

Drawing on migration patterns between Massachusetts and states like Rhode Island and Tennessee, Pioneer Institute is releasing a study showing a direct correlation between personal income tax rates and household domestic migration patterns between 2004 and 2019. The study suggests that instituting a graduated income tax will shrink the tax base and deter talented workers and innovative employers from coming to and staying in the Bay State.

Study Finds SALT Deduction Cap, Graduated Income Tax Will Combine to More Than Double Tax Burden on Some Households

A provision of the federal Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 strictly limiting deductions for state and local taxes (SALT) will greatly exacerbate the adverse effects of a proposal to create a constitutionally mandated graduated income tax, according to a new study published by Pioneer Institute.

This Is No Time for a Tax Increase

This is no time to threaten Massachusetts’ prospects for an immediate economic recovery and the long-term competitiveness of the Commonwealth’s businesses. As Massachusetts lawmakers prepare to vote on whether to send a proposed constitutional amendment that would impose a 4 percent surtax on residents who earn $1 million or more in a year to the statewide ballot in 2022, Pioneer Institute urges them to recognize that tax policy sizably impacts business and job location decisions and that jobs are more mobile than ever.
Are Massachusetts taxes regressive? Massachusetts State with Money Background

Study Finds Deep Flaws in Advocates’ Claims that the Massachusetts Tax Code is Regressive

Proponents of a state constitutional amendment to add a 4 percent surtax on all households with annual income above $1 million frequently cite 2015 data from the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy, which argues that the Massachusetts tax code is regressive, but a new study published by Pioneer Institute debunks many of the underlying assumptions used in ITEP’s 2015 report.

Study Says Interstate Tax Competition, Relocation Subsidies Exacerbate Telecommuting Trends

A spate of new incentive and subsidy programs seeking to lure talented workers and innovative businesses away from their home states could constitute an additional challenge to Massachusetts’ economic and fiscal recovery from COVID-19, according to a new study published by Pioneer Institute.

Study Warns Massachusetts Tax Proposal Would Deter Investment, Stifling the “Innovation Economy”

A state constitutional amendment promoted by the Massachusetts Teachers Association and the Service Employees International Union adding a 4 percent surtax to all annual income above $1 million could devastate innovative startups dependent on Boston’s financial services industry for funding, ultimately hampering the region’s recovery from the COVID-19 economic recession, according to a new study published by Pioneer Institute.

Study Shows the Adverse Effects of Graduated Income Tax Proposal on Small Businesses

The state constitutional amendment promoted by the Massachusetts Teachers Association and the Service Employees International Union to add a 4 percent surtax to all annual income above $1 million will adversely impact a significant number of pass-through businesses, ultimately slowing the Commonwealth’s economic recovery from COVID-19, according to a new study published by Pioneer Institute.

Study: Graduated Income Tax Proposal Fails to Protect Taxpayers from Bracket Creep

The state constitutional amendment proposed by the Service Employees International Union and the Massachusetts Teachers Association to add a 4 percent surtax to all annual income above $1 million purports to use cost-of-living-based bracket adjustments as a safeguard that will ensure only millionaires will pay. But historic income growth trends suggest that bracket creep will cause many non-millionaires to be subject to the surtax over time, according to a new study published by Pioneer Institute.

New Study Warns Graduated Income Tax Will Harm Many Massachusetts Retirees

If passed, a constitutional amendment to impose a graduated income tax would raid the retirement plans of Massachusetts residents by pushing their owners into higher tax brackets on the sales of homes and businesses, according to a new study published by Pioneer Institute. The study, entitled “The Graduated Income Tax Trap: A retirement tax on small business owners,” aims to help the public fully understand the impact of the proposed new tax.

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

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.