Editorial Staff

Study: Methodology of Noted “Millionaire’s Tax” Researcher Excludes Vast Majority of Millionaires

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

The work of a Stanford University Professor whose research has formed the foundation of efforts, such as one scheduled to appear on the Massachusetts ballot in November, to impose surtaxes on high earners is flawed because it excludes the vast majority of millionaires, according to a new study published by Pioneer Institute.

Eight Reasons to Question Professor Cristobal Young’s Conclusions about Millionaire Migration

Professor Cristobal Young’s research has found that no more than 2.4 percent of U.S.-based millionaires changed their state of residency in any given year.  But his methodology, which he describes as “people who earned $1 million or more in year t and changed their state of residency between year t and t+1,” captures just a small fraction of U.S. millionaires.

The ballot measure, known as Proposition 80, would amend the state constitution to add a 4 percent surtax on all annual income over $1 million.

The Federal Reserve Board estimates that there were 14.7 million U.S. households with net worth of $1 million or more in 2016, but only 6.8 percent of them had incomes of $1 million or more that year.  During the same year, 92.3 percent of the 4.43 million households with net worth between $2.5 million and $10 million had incomes of less than $1 million, and would therefore be excluded from Professor Young’s research.

“There were 14.7 million U.S. households with net worth of $1 million or more in 2016,” said Pioneer Executive Director Jim Stergios. “But in 2015, just 438,370 taxpayers fit Professor Young’s criteria.”

When high net worth individuals do earn $1 million or more in a year, they tend to do it on an irregular basis.  According to IRS data, the majority of U.S. taxpayers who reported gross annual incomes of $1 million or more over a nine-year period did so just once during that time.  Less than 6 percent earned $1 million or more in each of the nine years.

Pioneer Institute Research Director Greg Sullivan, author of Eight Reasons to Question Professor Cristobal Young’s Conclusions about Millionaire Migration, finds that Professor Young underestimates the cumulative effect of millionaire migration.  If Proposition 80 is adopted and Massachusetts experiences a 1.5 percent annual net out-migration of millionaires, which is below Young’s 2.4 percent estimate, by 2038, the Commonwealth will receive less in total income and surcharge taxes from taxpayers with incomes of $1 million or more than it would have if the measure had not been adopted.

Florida, which has no income, capital gains or estate taxes, accounts for almost half the out-migration of adjusted gross income from Massachusetts, far more even than New Hampshire, which also has no income tax.  Professor Young argues that the evidence for migration of millionaires is largely driven by the Sunshine State and has written that “When Florida is excluded, there is virtually no tax migration.”

“Saying there’s virtually no tax migration when you exclude Florida is like saying that if you exclude Muhammad Ali, Louisville hasn’t produced many great boxers,” said Sullivan.

More evidence that Professor Young underestimates the impact of taxation on migration patterns of the wealthy is found in the fact that five jurisdictions with no capital gains taxes have the highest average capital gains income.  One would hardly expect Wyoming, Nevada, Florida, Washington, and U.S. citizens living abroad to lead in this area, which is evidence that millionaires move to these jurisdictions to realize large capital gains distributions.

About the Author

Gregory W. 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.

About Pioneer

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

Pioneer Institute Study Finds Massachusetts Saw Four-Fold Loss of Income to Net Outmigration

Net loss accelerated in recent years; main reasons include high taxes, housing and healthcare 

Massachusetts Job Market Bears Watching

The Bureau of Labor Statistics' most recent national jobs report…

McAnneny October Monthly Musings – Ballot Initiatives

Election season is upon us.  In a few short weeks, voters will…

Pioneer Institute Study Finds Wide Range of Approaches to Compliance with MBTA Communities Law

Lexington’s approach seen as a model BOSTON – As Massachusetts’…

Is Massachusetts at a Turning Point – 10 Data Points That Give Me Pause

Massachusetts tops the charts in many studies.  Best public…

Wrap Up of the Massachusetts Legislative Session – Or Is It??

The Massachusetts Legislature meets for two years beginning in…

What’s Included in Massachusetts’ $5.2 Billion Housing Bond Bill?

On August 1, 2024, the Massachusetts state legislature finalized…

 The Largest Groups Driving Massachusetts’s Migration

With Massachusetts losing billions in taxable income every year due to out-of-state migration, it is important to understand the demographics causing the biggest losses.

Pioneer Institute Statement on the Project Labor Agreement Provision in the Massachusetts Economic Development Bill

Governor Healey should veto a provision in the recently passed…

Massachusetts Affordability and Competitiveness Ranking is in Freefall

Each year, CNBC ranks the 50 states on 10 broad categories of…

Migration to Massachusetts in 2022: Where Are People Going?

With thousands moving to Massachusetts every year, they bring income and assets that can affect the local economy. However, people from different regions of the country tend to favor different parts of Mass more or less, though the more urban area around Boston is al

The Economic Development Bill Starting to Take Shape; It Makes Big Bets on Life Sciences, Clean Technology and Applied AI

The Massachusetts Senate debated S.2856, its version of the biennial…

Study: U.S. Immigration System Limits Benefits Foreign Students Could Provide

Slow, inefficient system that discourages entrepreneurship puts U.S. at a competitive disadvantage

At a Glance: Who Moved to Massachusetts in 2022? 

State-to-state migration can have serious impacts on the local economy. Migrants to Massachusetts come from all over the country, but significant portions of both new taxpayers and new taxable income come from just a few sources, such as New England, New York, Florida, and California.

Is Free Community College What Massachusetts Needs?

The Massachusetts Senate proposed making community college tuition free for all residents of the Commonwealth as part of its FY2025 budget. Pioneer explores whether this program is what Massachusetts needs to prepare its residents for gainful employment and how it interacts with the state's extensive workforce development infrastructure.

Unemployment in Massachusetts by Race

Unemployment rates vary based on racial groups. Most minority groups face higher unemployment rates in Massachusetts than the majority White population.

The Housing Crisis has a Hand in Massachusetts Out-migration Trends

Recently published IRS data shows that net out-migration from…

Latest IRS Migration Data Show Exodus from Massachusetts Continues

Massachusetts shed more than double the amount of adjusted gross income (AGI) in 2022 than any year prior to 2020, making it fifth among states in net AGI out-migration behind only California, New York, Illinois and New Jersey, according to data released Thursday by the Internal Revenue Service.