Editorial Staff

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

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

Legislature could devote new revenue to public education and transportation, but cut funding from existing sources by the same amount

BOSTON – While supporters of a Massachusetts 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.

Total state education and transportation funding is currently around $8.5 billion annually.  Under the proposed amendment, the Legislature could dedicate the nearly $2 billion in additional revenue supporters of the graduated income tax claim it would generate to education and transportation, but cut funding from other sources from $8.5 billion to $6.5 billion, leaving total state spending in those areas exactly where it had been before.

“As a practical matter, every dollar the graduated income tax generates could be siphoned off to some other purpose without violating the text of the proposed constitutional amendment,” said Kevin Martin, author of “The Graduated Income Tax Amendment – A Shell Game?”

The Massachusetts Constitution requires a flat income tax rate.  On five occasions in the last 60 years, voters were asked to amend the constitution to eliminate the ban on a graduated tax rate.  Each time they refused.

In the runup to the 2018 election cycle, proponents of a graduated income tax attempted to overcome the unpopularity of their cause by earmarking new revenue from a 4 percent rate hike on annual income over $1 million for public education and transportation spending.

The proposed constitutional amendment never made it to the voters. The Commonwealth’s Supreme Judicial Court (SJC) ruled in Anderson v. Healey that the proposed amendment violated a ban on citizen-initiated ballot questions that combine unrelated subjects, as the amendment proposed both a new graduated income tax and a directive that any additional revenues would go to two disparate spending areas.

The court’s assertion of a constitutional ban on combining unrelated subjects does not apply to constitutional amendments proposed by the Legislature. In 2019, Beacon Hill tax hike supporters responded to the court’s decision by voting to approve the graduated income tax in a constitutional convention vote. If passed at a second constitutional convention, the measure will be placed as a question on the 2022 statewide ballot.

Attorney General Maura Healey’s own brief in 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.”

When the late SJC Chief Justice Ralph Gants asked the Attorney General’s counsel during oral argument whether she agreed that, if the graduated income tax passed, it “may or may not result in any increase in education or transportation spending,” counsel responded that the Chief Justice’s understanding was correct.

More recently, during legislative debates on the proposed ballot measure, an amendment was offered that would have required the new tax revenues to be spent incrementally on education and transportation, over and above what already is spent. That amendment was defeated.

“Massachusetts’ flat income tax rate of 5 percent has served the state well. The Bay State has outcompeted our regional rivals and drawn in jobs and investment from higher-tax jurisdictions like New York, Connecticut, and California,” said Pioneer Executive Director Jim Stergios. “The debate on the graduated tax is simply this: does the Legislature care more about attracting jobs and investment to the private sector, which represents 97 percent of Massachusetts workers, or will they bow to the wishes of powerful public sector unions who represent 3 percent of Massachusetts workers? The question is especially important now given how hard-hit private sector employment was by the pandemic.”

About the Author

Kevin Martin is a partner and co-chair of the Appellate Litigation Group at Goodwin Procter LLP in Boston, where he has practiced since 2001.  He was counsel for the plaintiffs in Anderson v. Healey, the 2018 decision in which the Supreme Judicial Court excluded the graduated income tax from that year’s ballot.  Prior to joining Goodwin, Kevin clerked for U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia (2000-2001), and Judge Laurence Silberman on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit (1999-2000).  From 2010-2011, he served as deputy independent counsel representing the SJC in an investigation into corruption in the Massachusetts Probation Department.  He currently is vice chair of the board of directors of the New England Legal Foundation.  Kevin graduated from Columbia Law School in 1999 and Georgetown University’s School of Foreign Service in 1996.

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

Pioneer Statement on Continuing Slide in Massachusetts’ Revenue

The Commonwealth’s tax collections continue to slide, totaling $3.594 billion in January, $268 million below what the state collected in January 2023, and short of the revised benchmark by $263 million. Massachusetts state government must live within its means by reducing FY2025 spending. The days of fiscal surpluses, unprecedented increases in year-over-year spending, and flowing federal aid have come to an end.

Pioneer Statement on Decline in State Revenues

The Commonwealth’s finances have stumbled hard in recent months, and based on a report the Department of Revenue (DOR) sent to the Legislature in January, the trend shows no signs of easing. Massachusetts needs a renewed emphasis on fiscal discipline and pro-growth policies to make the state economically competitive again.

Skill-based immigration could ease labor shortage

A recent Biden administration executive order that amends the Schedule A list, which identifies occupations experiencing labor shortages and allows immigrants in those occupations to expedite their employment in the U.S., could positively impact the hiring of skilled international workers for years to come — a welcome development as the country and Massachusetts struggle to attract talent amidst a worsening labor shortage.

My Musings on Massachusetts’ Fiscal Picture

Since the start of FY2024 on July 1, 2023, the state has experienced six straight months of revenues falling short of expectations. The single biggest factor is the unprecedented growth of the state budget since FY2021. The $15 billion increase in state spending contextualizes the seemingly modest projected revenue growth of 1.6 percent for FY2024 by highlighting that the base is very inflated.

The Massachusetts Workforce: Abundant Resources, Steep Challenges

Massachusetts features a strong workforce training system with abundant resources yet faces challenges in matching jobs and applicants, training youth, and attracting sufficient numbers of skilled immigrants, according to a pair of studies from Pioneer Institute.

Statement on Massachusetts Falling from 34th to 46th on Tax Foundation’s 2024 Business Tax Climate Index

Massachusetts policymakers should pay close attention to the latest evidence of the Commonwealth’s declining competitiveness. Last week, the Tax Foundation published its 2024 State Business Tax Climate Index, which showed Massachusetts’ ranking falling more than any other state, from 34th to 46th.

Pioneer Institute Statement on the State Legislature’s FY2024 Tax Relief Package

The recent advancement of a tax bill H. 4104, that is expected to be enacted by the Legislature this week after languishing for more than 20 months, puts Massachusetts taxpayers one step closer to realizing some tax relief. However, it may be too little to tackle the Commonwealth’s affordability and competitiveness challenges.

Poll: MA Voters Oppose Legislative Proposals to Change Tax Rebate Law

A strong majority of registered Massachusetts voters oppose a plan recently announced by state legislative leaders that would change the way tax rebates are distributed in Massachusetts under a state law approved by voters in 1986, according to a new poll sponsored by Pioneer Institute and the Massachusetts High Technology Council.

A Tale of Two Massachusetts: Wealth and Labor Differences Between East and West

This blog compares the income, wealth, and property values of western Massachusetts to those of eastern Massachusetts, highlighting the west's potential for growth.

Senate Tax Package Misses the Mark on Competitiveness

The Senate tax package, S.2397, is heavy on provisions that reduce the tax burden for certain taxpayers, thereby helping those that qualify for the expanded credits and deductions. The bill, however, is light on provisions that will improve the Commonwealth’s competitiveness.

Study: Immigrant Entrepreneurs Benefit N.E. Economy, Despite Facing Obstacles to Growth

BOSTON – Immigrants in Massachusetts and New England are more likely to be self-employed, but the businesses they own tend to be in different industries than those owned by the U.S. born, according to a new study published by Pioneer Institute.
Image by Freepik

A Model for Occupational Licensing Reform in the Bay State

Licensing for many professions squeezes the supply of services, artificially inflating prices and creating wage premiums. One study from the Institute for Justice put the wage premium relative to an environment without any occupational licensing at a whopping 22 percent in Massachusetts.