Public Statement: SJC Decision on Prop 80

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on

LinkedIn

Pioneer Institute and its public-interest law initiative, PioneerLegal, applaud the decision of Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court (SJC) in Christopher Anderson et al. v. Maura Healey.

The SJC upheld decades of precedent in finding that Proposition 80, a ballot initiative that would have instituted a graduated income tax in Massachusetts, violates the “relatedness” provisions of state constitution, thereby precluding voters from expressing a unified statement on public policy.

The Institute, through PioneerLegal, filed an amicus brief with the SJC in support of the plaintiffs before the Court heard oral arguments in February. The Tax Foundation also signed onto the brief.

Pioneer research looked into key legal issues and the negative economic impact that would have resulted from adoption of the ballot measure. The Institute also shared facts with community and business leaders, elected officials, the media and the general public through social and traditional media channels.

Pioneer studies demonstrated that a proposed millionaires tax in Massachusetts would:

Accelerate the out-migration of businesses and high earners;
Ensnare an ever-increasing share of the population over time because it includes an inadequate inflation adjustment index;
Double the effective tax rate for high earners and exacerbate the measure’s economic damage because of the limit on deductions for state and local taxes included in the recent federal tax law;
Generate less than the projected $1.9 billion in annual revenue and increase the Commonwealth’s top capital gains tax rate from 25^th highest in the country to second;
Leave Massachusetts with the sixth highest capital gains rate in the world; and
Lead to a “Connecticut effect,” that is, slower growth, an employer exodus and declining tax revenue;
Finally, the Pioneer released a report thoroughly debunking the methodology of Stanford Associate Professor of Sociology Cristobal Young, whose research served as a singular point of reference for ballot proponents and media outlets that claimed “millionaires” don’t move out of high-tax states.

Alleviating these negative impacts would have taken a minimum of three years, since the measure would have amended the state constitution rather than just change state law. Massachusetts residents, employees and businesses are all beneficiaries of the SJC’s wise decision.

Stay Connected!

Related Posts

Two Things to Ponder About Quasi-Public Salaries

0 Comments

March 3, 2011

As the Governor continues his march through the quasi-publics…

Good Stuff in Transportation

0 Comments

February 17, 2011

It's easy to be cynical in this day and age, so we've put together…

Governor Patrick Found the Silver Bullet for Cost Containment?

1 Comment

February 17, 2011

Thoughts on Governor Deval Patrick’s speech this morning about…

Blame Game in Massachusetts Health Care

0 Comments

February 16, 2011

An interesting piece from Paul Levy over at Not Running a Hospital. …

“For small businesses, a hesitancy to hire”

0 Comments

February 14, 2011

An illustrative piece in the Boston Globe today by Megan Woolhouse…

WBUR RadioBoston: State Bets On The Future Of Industry

0 Comments

February 8, 2011

WBUR interviews Pioneer Executive Director Jim Stergios on whether the state should be targeting particular industries for tax incentives and other benefits.