Are Massachusetts taxes regressive? Massachusetts State with Money Background
Editorial Staff

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

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

Even using ITEP’s biased analyses, Massachusetts is more progressive than most states

BOSTON – 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.

Among other flaws, the ITEP analysis excludes some of the most progressive elements of the tax code, uses outdated data, and even includes some regressive elements of the federal tax code in a state-level analysis. ITEP also makes broad and dubious assumptions that taxes levied on corporations and landlords are passed on to consumers, tenants, and workers.

Surtax proponents also ignore that ITEP’s most recent tax incidence analysis ranks Massachusetts as having a more progressive state tax code than 29 other states. Massachusetts’ Tax Inequality Index score was -3.10 in 2018, better than the -3.48 average score of the other 49 states and D.C.

“Even ITEP says that, compared to other states, Massachusetts has a relatively progressive tax code,” said Greg Sullivan, who co-authored Are Massachusetts taxes regressive? A common argument for a graduated income tax relies on a deeply flawed and outdated study with Andrew Mikula. “But ITEP’s analysis still relies on some faulty assumptions about who ultimately bears the burden of corporate and property taxes, which make the tax code seem artificially onerous for the poor.”

The new Pioneer study also emphasizes how Massachusetts gets a vastly disproportionate share of income tax revenue from the wealthy. The top 10 percent of Massachusetts taxpayers paid 38.2 percent more than the bottom 90 percent in 2017, and that figure would rise to 68.1 percent more if the surtax passes. The richest 0.5 percent of taxpayers currently pay 24 percent of state income taxes in the Commonwealth, and this would rise to 32.5 percent if the surtax is passed. This is significant because a heavy reliance on the wealthy to fill state coffers has been linked to high revenue volatility and other budget problems.

“An over-reliance on wealthy taxpayers, especially when cyclical revenue streams like capital gains taxes are factored in, can create significant risk for state budget writers during the next recession,” said Pioneer Institute Executive Director Jim Stergios. “Add to that the current trend, whereby Massachusetts is losing almost a billion dollars of wealth a year because of relocations to low- and no-tax states. Then factor in easier job mobility post-pandemic. The sum total is that tax increases are a risky move right now.”

Other think tanks have criticized ITEP’s work, including the Tax Foundation, which in 2018 accused ITEP of “cherry-picking” in order to “make every state’s tax code look significantly more regressive” than it actually is.

Pioneer reached out to ITEP to clarify certain aspects of their methodology, but they have failed to respond as of this writing.

About the Authors

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.

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.

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 Content

Survey of Business Sentiment: MA Income Tax Hike Would Lead to Employer Exodus

Nearly three quarters (73 percent) of Massachusetts business leaders think business associates will leave the state if a constitutional amendment appearing on the November ballot to hike taxes is successful, according to a survey conducted by Pioneer Institute.

As States Compete for Talent and Families, Massachusetts Experienced a Six-Fold Increase in Lost Wealth Compared to a Decade Earlier

With competition for businesses and talent heating up across the country, in 2020 Massachusetts shed taxpayers and wealth at a clip six times faster than even just a decade ago. Between 2010 to 2020, Massachusetts’ net loss of adjusted gross Income (AGI) to other states due to migration grew from $422 million to $2.6 billion, according to recently released IRS data now available on Pioneer Institute’s Massachusetts IRS Data Discovery website. Over 71 percent of the loss was to Florida and New Hampshire, both no income tax states.

Book Reveals How Tax Hike Amendment Would Damage Commonwealth’s Economic Competitiveness

If adopted, a constitutional amendment to hike state taxes that will appear on the ballot in November could erase the hard-earned progress Massachusetts has achieved toward economic competitiveness over the last 25 years and may not result in any additional education and transportation funding, according to a new book from Pioneer Institute, entitled Back to Taxachusetts?: How the proposed tax amendment would upend one of the nation’s best economies, which is a distillation of two dozen academic studies.

Study Documents The Design Challenges, Contracting Issues, And Delays Facing New MBTA Fare Collection System

This new study unearths previously unseen communications between the MBTA and its contractors, showing that the MBTA’s efforts to modernize its fare collection system, including allowing payments with credit cards and bringing “tap and go” technology to Commuter Rail and ferry lines, was riddled with technological challenges and difficulties overseeing contractors as early as 2019, culminating in a 3-year delay to the project’s full implementation.

Study: Legislature Likely to Reduce Spending on Education and Transportation from Other Revenue Sources, Replace Cuts with Surtax Money

Revenue from a ballot initiative to amend the state Constitution and raise income taxes on households and businesses by adopting a graduated income tax structure would supposedly provide resources for transportation and public education, but a new study published by Pioneer Institute finds that, were the tax amendment to pass, the money would be fungible and much of it likely spent on general budget measures.   

Study Finds Bus Rapid Transit Can Offer Cost-Effective Benefits

Bus rapid transit (BRT) incorporates unique features such as dedicated lanes to provide reliable and cost-effective service while reducing congestion and its detrimental environmental impacts, according to a new study published by Pioneer Institute.

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

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.

Study Raises Concern That Annual T Fare Evasion Costs Could Rise By More Than $30 Million Under AFC 2.0

According to the Federal Transit Administration (FTA), the MBTA’s $935.4 million fare collection system (AFC 2.0) that is scheduled to be implemented in 2023 will reduce fare evasion by $35 million over a decade. But the T announced in 2021 that evasion could actually increase by up to $30 million under AFC 2.0, and now a Pioneer Institute study warns that insufficient fare enforcement could drive that figure even higher under the new system.