Editorial Staff

Proposition 80 Won’t Generate $1.9 Billion Annual Projected Revenue

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

Passage of November 2018 ballot measure will make Massachusetts far less competitive

BOSTON – Passage of Proposition 80, the tax hike proposal scheduled to appear on the November 2018 Massachusetts ballot, will fail to generate the level of revenue growth projected by its backers, according to a new Pioneer study.

Download "Proposition 80 Will Not Raise $2 Billion"

The ballot measure would add a 4 percent surtax on any annual taxable income over $1 million. In “Proposition 80 Will Not Raise $2 Billion and the Money Won’t Be Free,” Pioneer Institute Research Director Greg Sullivan warns that proponents’ projected revenue gains are based on a small pool of taxpayers, some of whom are likely to relocate outside the state if the proposal passes.

According to Massachusetts Department of Revenue data, the majority of the tax revenue Proposition 80 is expected to raise would derive from just 897 of the 19,565 taxpayers who would be subject to the measure. Over time, if even a third of those 897 chose to move, annual revenue from the tax would fall from an anticipated $1.9 billion to $1.1 billion.

The report further finds that there is a high likelihood that they will relocate, given that states with lower tax rates have historically held a distinct advantage in attracting and retaining businesses and wealthy taxpayers.

From 2011–12 to 2014–15, the eight states with no income tax saw a net positive migration of adjusted gross income (AGI) of $65 billion, more than 60 percent of which came from the small percentage of taxpayers with annual AGIs of $200,000 or more. During that same period, the eight states with the highest marginal income tax rates experienced negative AGI migration of $44.23 billion, over 60 percent of which resulted from the relatively small number of migrants with annual incomes of $200,000 or more.

“Those who argue that state tax rates don’t impact where high earners choose to live and where businesses choose to locate inhabit an alternate reality,” said Pioneer Institute Executive Director Jim Stergios. “Proposition 80 backers paint it as a harmless way to boost revenue, but its adoption would pose a direct threat to business and job creation in Massachusetts.”

IRS records show that over 70 percent of Massa­chusetts’ 16,100 taxpayers with AGI over $1 million in 2015 received income from partnerships and sub-chapter S corpo­rations. Proposition 80 would raise the combined federal/state tax rate on partnership and sub-S corporations from 26th to between the second and fourth highest in the U.S.

Large, medium and small businesses alike will face adverse consequences. Small business­es account for nearly half of total employment in Massachusetts. The report features case studies illustrating Proposition 80’s potential impact on three Massachusetts firms:  The RMR Group Inc. in Newton, Cape Cod Lumber in Abington, and Copilabs, Inc. in Lawrence.

About the Author

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 holds degrees from Harvard College, The Kennedy School of Public Administration, and the Sloan School at MIT.

###

Pioneer Institute is an independent, non-partisan, privately funded research organization that seeks to improve the quality of life in Massachusetts through civic discourse and intellectually rigorous, data-driven public policy solutions based on free market principles, individual liberty and responsibility, and the ideal of effective, limited and accountable government.

Get Updates on Our Economic Opportunity Research

Related Posts

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.

Hoover Institution’s Dr. Eric Hanushek on COVID-19, K-12 Learning Loss, & Economic Impact

0 Comments
/
This week on “The Learning Curve," Gerard and Cara talk with Dr. Eric Hanushek, the Paul and Jean Hanna Senior Fellow at Stanford University’s Hoover Institution. They discuss his research, cited by The Wall Street Journal, on learning loss due to the pandemic, especially among poor, minority, and rural students, and its impact on skills and earnings.

Report Contrasts State Government and Private Sector Employment Changes During Pandemic

Massachusetts state government employment has been virtually flat during COVID-19 even as employment in the state’s private sector workforce remains nearly 10 percent below pre-pandemic levels, according to a new study published by Pioneer Institute. The study, “Public vs. Private Employment in Massachusetts: A Tale of Two Pandemics,” questions whether it makes sense to shield public agencies from last year’s recession at the expense of taxpayers.

A wealth tax, a SCOTUS case, and a likely Mass. exodus

0 Comments
/
Op-ed in The Boston Globe: A case New Hampshire filed with the US Supreme Court last October against the Commonwealth of Massachusetts could have a huge impact on state finances nationwide. It also raises the stakes as the Massachusetts Legislature considers amending the state constitution to eliminate the state’s prohibition against a graduated income tax and to hike taxes on high earners.

Study Finds Massachusetts Graduated Income Tax May Be a “Blank Check” and Not Increase Funding for Designated Priorities

Advocates claim a proposed 4 percent surtax on high earners will raise nearly $2 billion per year for education and transportation, but similar tax hikes in other states resulted in highly discretionary rather than targeted spending, according to a new policy brief published by Pioneer Institute. That same result or worse is possible in Massachusetts because during the 2019 constitutional convention state legislators rejected — not just one, but two — proposed amendments requiring that the new revenues be directed to these purposes.

Post-Pandemic Prospects: Tech Leaders’ Prescription for Preserving a Healthy Economy

0 Comments
/
Host Joe Selvaggi talks with Chris Anderson, President of the Massachusetts High Technology Council, about the reasons why Massachusetts has a thriving tech sector, what challenges his members have faced in the pandemic, and what he sees as the most prudent path toward future prosperity in the commonwealth.

Report: Proposed Graduated Income Tax Might Not Increase State Education and Transportation Spending

While supporters of a state constitutional amendment that would impose a 4 percent tax rate hike on annual income over $1 million claim additional revenue from the surtax will fund public education and transportation needs, the amendment in no way assures that there will be new spending on these priorities. In fact, without violating the amendment, total state education and transportation funding could stay the same or even fall, according to a new review published by Pioneer Institute.

New Study Highlights Economic Fallout from California’s 2012 Tax Hike

A 2012 income and sales tax increase in California, named “Proposition 30,” stifled business activity, accelerated out-migration among the wealthy, and ultimately reduced the state’s tax base, according to a new study published by Pioneer Institute that aims to share empirical data about the impact of tax policy decisions.

Wealth Migration Trends: Remote Work Technology Empowers Workers to Live Anywhere

0 Comments
/
Host Joe Selvaggi talks with Pioneer Institute’s Andrew Mikula about his recent research into migration trends of high-income individuals, how pandemic-related technologies may accelerate that movement, and what challenges these changes present for policy makers.