Public Statement on Massachusetts High Technology Council’s Challenge to the Graduated Income Tax Ballot Language

Share on Facebook
Share on Twitter
Share on

In a letter released earlier this week, the Massachusetts High Technology Council called for Massachusetts Attorney General Maura Healey to ensure that the language of a tax hike amendment scheduled to appear on the state ballot next year is sufficiently transparent. The Attorney General is charged with presenting an accurate and transparent summary of all ballot initiatives.

If approved by voters, the ballot question would place a 4 percent surtax on households and thousands of Massachusetts businesses that in any one year have income exceeding $1 million. Proponents of the initiative claim the measure would raise an additional $2 billion annually for education and transportation.

As the MHTC letter and a Pioneer report issued in March demonstrate, the reality isn’t that simple.

In 2018, the SJC struck down an identically worded version of the tax proposal.  During oral argument, lawyers for the Attorney General and those arguing that the proposed amendment’s wording was unconstitutional responded affirmatively when the late Chief Justice Ralph Gants asked if, under the proposal, it was possible for legislators to divert current education and transportation funds to other purposes and simply make up the shortfalls with the revenues from the new tax.

Tellingly, states that have passed new taxes ostensibly meant to increase investments in specific priority areas have done exactly that.  In California, which approved a new tax in 2012 supposedly “dedicated” to education, overall education funding remained largely unchanged because funds previously dedicated to education were diverted to other purposes.

In Massachusetts attempts to require that new revenues associated with the tax amendment go to education and transportation have been rebuffed. In fact, state lawmakers have twice rejected proposals to direct all new tax revenues to education and transportation.

People deserve to know what they’re voting for.  A description of next year’s ballot initiative that misleads voters into believing that a “yes” vote will automatically increase overall education and transportation funding in Massachusetts falls short of that basic standard.

Get Updates on Our Economic Opportunity Research

Related Posts:

Inadequate Inflation Adjustment Factor Will Subject Increasing Numbers of People to So-Called “Millionaires” Tax

Would take particular toll on those relying on home value appreciation…

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

Passage of November 2018 ballot measure will make Massachusetts…

Proposition 80 Will Increase Out-Migration of High Earners and Businesses

Passage of November 2018 ballot measure would jeopardize Massachusetts’…

Study: New Federal Tax Law Would Exacerbate Economic Damage of Prop 80

This report earned media coverage on WGBH radio, WBZ radio,…

Study: Proposition 80 Would Give MA 2nd Highest Combined State & Federal Capital Gains Tax Rate in U.S.

Read coverage of this report in the Boston Herald: "Study: ‘Millionaire’s…