|
Help save yourself -- join CLT
today! |
CLT introduction and membership application |
What CLT saves you from the auto excise tax alone |
Ask your friends to join too
|
CLT UPDATE
Wednesday, November 28, 2012
More tax hikes their answer to still more spending
|
Facing weaker than expected state tax revenues,
Governor Deval Patrick’s administration has curbed state hiring,
halted an automatic income tax reduction, and begun identifying cuts
in spending that may be necessary to balance the budget.
Recent tax collections have been unexpectedly
disappointing, failing to measure up to last year’s levels. In
October, revenues were $162 million short of budgetary estimates and
$48 million below the level reached in October 2011.
State revenues are running $256 million behind
budget and $33 million behind last year’s actual collection,
officials said. Together the numbers add to the picture of a slow
economic recovery and portend a daunting start to the new year for a
governor already struggling with a state drug lab crisis and a fatal
meningitis outbreak traced to a Massachusetts compounding
pharmacy....
Some tax-control advocates suspect that Patrick
is preparing to raise taxes in the budget he unveils in the new
year.
“They’re going to be looking at a tax increase,”
said Barbara Anderson, executive director of Citizens for
Limited Taxation. After last week’s report on the gaping deficit
in funding for the state’s transportation system, Anderson predicted
the Patrick administration would propose boosting not only the gas
tax but also the income tax to manage the rest of the budget.
“If there is a deficit, that’s what they’ll look
at. It’s the quickest, easiest, fastest money,” she said. “The
voters just voted in the same people who would be inclined to raise
taxes and against those who had taken pledges not to raise taxes. I
won’t be surprised.” ...
Ironically, the state had expected to issue an
income tax reduction in January, which would have been triggered
automatically by sustained growth. For only the second time in
recent years, the state was expected to shave the income tax by .05
percent, but the disappointing tax collections of the fall canceled
that plan.
Had the tax cut been implemented, revenues would
have dipped by another $57 million. That was one of the concerns
[Jay Gonzalez, secretary of the Executive Office for Administration
and Finance] reported to the governor last month, when he instituted
immediate financial controls to curb state spending. Other
uncertainties still remain....
Taxpayers recently weathered a 25 percent rise in
the sales tax and new taxes on alcohol; the Patrick administration
also gave cities and towns the right to boost meals taxes and local
hotel taxes and unsuccessfully called for boosting gas taxes and
taxing candy and soda.
The administration intends to release a plan in
early January to close the transportation finance gap.
Asked about the possibility of a gas tax
increase, Gonzalez said, “There are some people out there arguing
that’s what we should do...."
The Boston Globe
Monday, November 26, 2012
Mass. tax revenues decline; budget trims loom
Looks for ways to curb spending; automatic cut in taxes ruled out
Taxpayer advocates yesterday blasted the timing
of pay hikes awarded to House and Senate staffers, as the state
faces lower-than-expected revenues and put off a scheduled tax cut
just weeks after the election.
“It sends the wrong message,” said Jim Stergios
of the Pioneer Institute. “When there’s a shortfall of hundreds of
millions of dollars, that’s a time when taxpayers find it really
hard to swallow this.”
House Speaker Robert A. DeLeo handed out raises
of “at least 3 percent” to 460 staffers in the House of
Representatives last week. Senate President Therese Murray gave her
own staff pay hikes of 3 percent. Gov. Deval Patrick raised no
objections to the hikes....
Painful cuts to programs and services may be on
the way after October tax revenues came in lower than expected and
currently puts the state $256 million below expectations for the
year. That also means taxpayers won’t get a scheduled .05 percent
income tax cut they otherwise would have enjoyed if revenues had
been higher.
“The Legislature shouldn’t be giving their staff
pay raises,” said Barbara Anderson of Citizens for Limited
Taxation. “They should be dealing with mass deficits that are
going to get worse.” ...
Anderson questioned why the hikes came down just
weeks after the election, when Democrats beat Republicans in key
state and congressional races.
“Now they feel confident spending money on
whatever they want,” she said. “Let that be a lesson to the voters.
This is only the beginning.”
The Boston Herald
Tuesday, November 27, 2012
Beacon Hill raises blasted
DeLeo, Murray dole out dough
Folks on Beacon Hill are handing out raises in
one office while sketching plans for possible budget cuts and a
broad-based tax increase in another. Further evidence that the State
House crowd really does operate in an alternate universe....
Meanwhile everyone knows Patrick’s team is also
preparing a major tax hike proposal — the only question is what form
it will take. DeLeo, who has been a stalwart in the face of past tax
hike proposals, hasn’t ruled one out.
So this is the moment he chooses to dole
out post-election/pre-Christmas gifts?
DeLeo and Senate President Therese Murray might
well be asking: If not now, when? Is there ever an optimal
time for raising public employee salaries?
Maybe not. But we can think of the worst
time to do so, and that would be two weeks after the election, while
Beacon Hill is preparing the taxpayers to pay more for their
services.
A Boston Herald editorial
Tuesday, November 27, 2012
What are they thinking?
A coalition of groups is recommending a small
payroll tax be approved to help pay for chronically underfunded
public transit services in Massachusetts.
A report to be discussed with lawmakers at the
Statehouse on Tuesday also calls for a more equitable fare structure
that would give breaks to low-income riders. The report was prepared
by Public Transit-Public Good, a coalition that includes community
organizations and labor unions.
Associated Press
Tuesday, November 27, 2012
Groups seek new revenue for public transit
In a report released Tuesday, the groups
recommended a menu of potential solutions to the transportation
financing question facing lawmakers and Gov. Deval Patrick when the
Legislature starts a new two-year session in January, including a
new payroll tax on employers that would be applied based on
employees earning over $100,000.
The payroll tax proposal is one of the first
concrete ideas to be presented in advance of the Patrick
administration’s report on transportation financing due to the
Legislature in January, and even organizers acknowledge it could be
a tough sell on Beacon Hill. Under the proposal, employers would pay
to state government a percentage of the salary of workers earning
more than the threshold, with the money dedicated to transportation
financing. A tax of three-quarters of 1 percent would generate more
that $190 million annually, enough to cover annual debt payments for
the Big Dig and send $60 million a year to regional transit
authorities, according to the report.
State House News Service
Tuesday, November 27, 2012
Coalition calls for transportation payroll tax
All you motorists out there, consider yourselves
warned: Gov. Deval Patrick wants to tax you back to the Stone Age.
You can withstand a pay cut, right? Especially
when it’s for a good cause — otherwise, how are the hacks at the
State House going to be able to continue paying their fellow
coatholder Sheila Burgess $87,000 a year for whatever new
phony-baloney job they invent for her now that she’s no longer going
to be the “state highway safety director.”
This latest Beacon Hill trial balloon on higher
taxes was floated the day before Sheila Burgess, of Randolph and the
34 moving violations and assorted citations, became the 2012 poster
girl for the hackerama.
In the tax-hike story, the hacks claimed they
need at least a billion for the “infrastructure.” The reality is,
the infrastructure is Sheila Burgess and her fellow payroll
patriots. They’re very needy, and greedy.In the tax-hike story, the
hacks claimed they need at least a billion for the “infrastructure.”
The reality is, the infrastructure is Sheila Burgess and her fellow
payroll patriots. They’re very needy, and greedy.
Which is why the Democrats are whispering yet
again about a proposed tax on miles driven. But don’t worry — it’ll
“only” cost you .85 cents per mile ... in the first year. In June,
the last time they floated this new tax — excuse me, “funding
strategy” — the hacks pooh-poohed its impact. Since the average
motorist drives 14,800 miles a year, the Beacon Hill taxaholics
argued, even after the tax goes up to a penny a mile, it’ll “only”
cost you an extra $148 a year.
Chickenfeed, unless of course you were to ask an
illegal alien to pay $148 to go to UMass Amherst for a year. Then it
would be a hate crime, nativism, xenophobia, etc. etc.
Then there’s the state’s 21-cents-a-gallon gas
tax. An increase in the gas tax was voted down in 2009, but now the
hacks plan to “revisit” it....
There used to be a TV show called “You Asked for
It.” On Nov. 6, we asked for it, and now we’re going to get it, in
spades.
The Boston Herald
Wednesday, November 21, 2012
Give Dems an inch, they’ll take a mile ... tax
By Howie Carr
The never-ending saga of Taxachusetts is coming
to our wallets soon.
Whether or not there is a need for more revenue,
the fundamental problem is that Democrats have a delusional view
about our money. They believe what we don’t pay in taxes is an
expenditure on behalf of the state.
Hence, it is costing Bacon Hill tax dollars
because we keep more of our savings and paychecks.
While normal people think a tax expenditure is
paying for the plowing of roads or police protection, for Democrats
it is the noncollection of our money....
In Massachusetts you’ll never pay enough taxes,
because the Democrats believe it is their money first and you are
lucky that they let you keep any.
The Boston Herald
Monday, November 26, 2012
Dems think state loses if you save $$
By Holly Robichaud
State Rep. James Lyons has renewed his fight to
prevent state benefits from being paid to illegal immigrants.
Gov. Deval Patrick issued an executive order last
week that permits undocumented aliens to pay the same tuition rate
at state colleges and universities as legal Massachusetts residents
if they have obtained work permits.
Lyons, R-Andover, said he and other Republican
legislators have filed a bill that would restrict all state benefits
to United States citizens and legal immigrants. Last year, Lyons
demanded that the Patrick administration report how much was spent
during the fiscal year on health services for illegal immigrants.
In October 2011, the administration gave a figure
of $270 million, Lyons said.
“My role is to protect the hard-earned tax
dollars of working people,” Lyons said. The governor has been
talking about increasing taxes, according to Lyons.
The Eagle-Tribune
Sunday, November 25, 2012
Rep. Lyons seeks to kill state aid for illegal immigrants
Political campaigns are often referred to by
politicians as long, grueling and taxing. But when election
seasons come to an end, campaign finance accounts sit still
until the next election cycle – untaxed.
But now, state Rep. Dan Winslow, R-Norfolk,
is hoping to change that. He has drafted a plan that would tax
what’s left in elected state and municipal officials’ war chests
at 25 percent following each election cycle.
He plans to introduce the legislation in
January.
Winslow, who won his House seat in 2010 on
the promise of tax cuts, said the Legislature is likely to focus
on raising revenues in its next session.
Winslow said politicians should be willing to
help raise revenues themselves before suggesting gas- and
sales-tax hikes, which he thinks may be on the table next year.
The Patriot Ledger
Tuesday, November 20, 2010
Mass. legislator wants to tax money left in campaign war chests
|
|
Chip Ford's CLT
Commentary
In the
last CLT Update I wrote:
Trying to keep up with the tsunami of
ridiculous government waste, corruption, and giveaways is
becoming a full-time job of itself and then some.
There's barely enough time in a day to
simply collect and collate it, never mind making any sense
of it.
Trying to gather it into one place like
this, for others like you to begin to comprehend
— without it becoming
overwhelming is — well, it's
becoming almost impossible.
The onslaught continues, and nobody can make this
stuff up!
This Update was intended to go out yesterday
afternoon, but the taxpayer abuses and Bacon Hill outrages kept
coming in. Keeping up with it all in a timely manner is no longer
possible; a new strategy here is necessary, a daily cut-off point.
There is more coming in the morning, so I've ended this here at
midnight before I need to make this Update even longer.
Just three weeks have passed since the last
election and we taxpayers are being swamped by ridiculous government
waste, blatant corruption, unconscionable giveaways and a bevy of
tax hikes and new tax proposals to keep Bacon Hill business-as-usual
fully-funded. The Good Life to which the Takers have become
accustomed is accelerating, ramping up on the backs of society's
producers, bankrupting both the state and its taxpayers. After
all, they won the election in a near-sweep and now are
claiming the spoils of war.
The state's fiscal stability is too desperate to
keep the 23-years old promise and roll back the income tax, by even
five-one hundredths of one percent, but it's sound enough to give
out pay raises to political friends.
As for yet another tax to fund the MBTA,
first a little history:
In 1974 voters approved a constitutional
amendment, "Highway tax use for mass transit," which since has
allowed highway fees and taxes paid by motorists to be used to fund
the MBTA as well. This has provided us with poor roads,
highways and bridges and poor mass transit still in financial
distress.
In the CLT Update of June 20 ("Per
Mile Travel Tax" — Will you have a voice?), I wrote:
I realize that the MBTA has been skimming
large amounts out of those highway funds paid directly by
motorists — along with receiving a statutory penny of the five
that has been collected from the 5% sales tax since 1999.
The sales tax was subsequently hiked to 6.25% a decade later, at
least in part to make up for the revenue shifted to the MBTA and
school building assistance program, both of which come directly
out of the sales tax. (Both the MBTA and the Massachusetts
School Building Assistance Authority [MSBA] each has received 20
percent of 5% sales tax collections, leaving only 60% of sales
tax revenue for other uses — thus the need for the 2009 sales
tax increase.)
Still that is not enough. What that
greatly increased cost has bought us is still poor roads, highways,
and bridges and poor mass transit still in financial distress, and
Bacon Hill still looking for more from taxpayers and motorists.
Michael Graham (WTKK FM-96.9 and Boston Herald
columnist) wrote in his blog today (MA
Unions, Liberal Activists Push New Payroll Tax On “The Rich,” a.k.a.
“YOU.”):
The rich now means “workers earning more than
$100,000.” Whether you ever ride the T or drive through the Big
Dig—it doesn’t matter. The plan is for you to pay.
Hey, you’ve got plenty of money! Why, living in Massachusetts on
$100,000—particularly for a young, recent college grad with
student loans and a new mortgage—means living like a king!
So get ready to pay up, Richie Rich—There’s an MBTA union hack
who needs your money!
Michael had Barbara on his radio program
yesterday afternoon as a guest to discuss this latest money grab.
One guarantee she made was that if this new tax is imposed
nothing will change, again. The Bacon Hill pols need
perpetually degraded roads and highways, collapsing bridges, and a
dysfunctional transit system so they can always extort more money
from taxpayers and motorists in the future.
Boston Herald columnist and Republican consultant
Holly Robichaud earlier on his program noted that the MBTA now has
over 600 employees who make over $100,000 in annual salaries.
With more money extracted from us they can hire
even more cronies, coat-holders, and political allies at high
salaries — just as they've done all
along with more, more, ever more while the transportation system
continues to deteriorate.
We're not sure this latest idea would even pass
state constitutional muster. Our state constitution allows for only
a flat income tax, though the tax-borrow-and-spend crowd has tried
on many occasions over the decades to amend that with a graduated
income tax. CLT was founded in 1974 to defeat it on the 1976 ballot;
CLT defeated it again when it was on the 1994 ballot. We're
investigating this situation.
The only good news I've dug up in the past few
days is the fighting spirit of just re-elected state Reps. Jim Lyon
(R-Andover) and Marc Lombardo (R-Billerica) —
both still battling for the taxpayers against Gov. Deval Patrick's
giveaways to illegal aliens, and joining with Rep. Shauna O'Connell
to keep the pressure on even more EBT Card reform.
Another positive idea was introduced by state
Rep. Dan Winslow (R-Norfolk) "that would tax what’s left in elected
state and municipal officials’ war chests at 25 percent following
each election cycle."
I haven't come across any novel ideas benefitting
taxpayers coming from any Democrat in the Legislature yet. I'll let
you know if I ever do.
Taxpayers have got a busy year ahead if we're to
survive.
|
 |
 |
|
Chip Ford |
|
If you still haven't renewed your membership this year,
and you want CLT to be here next year to keep
fighting for you,
help keep CLT alive through this year.
If you haven't, please respond quickly —
help CLT survive to keep fighting for you.
You can make a contribution by
credit card right now by clicking the "Join US!" link
below
|
|
|
|
|
The Boston Globe
Monday, November 26, 2012
Mass. tax revenues decline; budget trims loom
Looks for ways to curb spending; automatic cut in taxes ruled out
By Stephanie Ebbert
Facing weaker than expected state tax revenues, Governor Deval
Patrick’s administration has curbed state hiring, halted an
automatic income tax reduction, and begun identifying cuts in
spending that may be necessary to balance the budget.
Recent tax collections have been unexpectedly disappointing, failing
to measure up to last year’s levels. In October, revenues were $162
million short of budgetary estimates and $48 million below the level
reached in October 2011.
State revenues are running $256 million behind budget and $33
million behind last year’s actual collection, officials said.
Together the numbers add to the picture of a slow economic recovery
and portend a daunting start to the new year for a governor already
struggling with a state drug lab crisis and a fatal meningitis
outbreak traced to a Massachusetts compounding pharmacy.
The news is consistent with reports showing that the recovery, which
had been on its way in Massachusetts, is slowing down. In recent
months, the Massachusetts unemployment rate has climbed slightly and
the state’s economic growth, which had been outpacing the nation,
fell behind.
The dropoff in tax revenues is not dramatic, compared to the recent
recession, but it is a disheartening trend in the wrong direction.
After years of belt-tightening, fiscal observers were hoping to have
more room to breathe in the coming year’s budget and to begin
restoring some of the spending cuts that had been made to programs.
Now they see no relief in sight.
“If this were happening at the beginning of a recession, it would be
seen as . . . not a dramatic shortfall,” said Michael Widmer,
president of the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation. “But when it
comes in year five of this extended fiscal crisis, it’s a serious
issue.”
As a result, Patrick’s budget chief has imposed constraints on
discretionary spending and asked agency heads to start identifying
spending cuts.
“I think there’s a strong likelihood that we will very soon be
revising the budget estimates downward and make some budgetary
reductions,” said Jay Gonzalez, secretary of the Executive Office
for Administration and Finance.
“We’re in a position to act quickly,” if cuts become necessary, said
Gonzalez, noting that his office is analyzing potential cuts and
developing recommendations. He also contacted non-executive
agencies, such as the judiciary, to ask them to identify spending
reductions.
Some tax-control advocates suspect that Patrick is preparing to
raise taxes in the budget he unveils in the new year.
“They’re going to be looking at a tax increase,” said Barbara
Anderson, executive director of Citizens for Limited Taxation.
After last week’s report on the gaping deficit in funding for the
state’s transportation system, Anderson predicted the Patrick
administration would propose boosting not only the gas tax but also
the income tax to manage the rest of the budget.
“If there is a deficit, that’s what they’ll look at. It’s the
quickest, easiest, fastest money,” she said. “The voters just voted
in the same people who would be inclined to raise taxes and against
those who had taken pledges not to raise taxes. I won’t be
surprised.”
Ironically, the state had expected to issue an income tax reduction
in January, which would have been triggered automatically by
sustained growth. For only the second time in recent years, the
state was expected to shave the income tax by .05 percent, but the
disappointing tax collections of the fall canceled that plan.
Had the tax cut been implemented, revenues would have dipped by
another $57 million. That was one of the concerns Gonzalez reported
to the governor last month, when he instituted immediate financial
controls to curb state spending.
Other uncertainties still remain.
The so-called “fiscal cliff” — the spending cuts and tax increases
that would kick in if the president and Congress fail to reach
consensus on federal debt reduction — threatens to send the nation
into another recession and Massachusetts into a deeper problem.
If the federal standoff is not resolved, Massachusetts is estimated
to lose another $300 million in tax revenue this year and $1 billion
next year, as well as $200 million in direct federal funding,
Gonzalez said.
The spending cuts that would take effect in the new year would also
disproportionately hurt Massachusetts, since some of the state’s top
industries rely on funding from the federal government. Defense
dollars in Massachusetts would drop $1.2 billion andNational
Institutes of Health funding would drop almost $200 million,
Gonzalez said.
The state has some cushion, because it has built up its so-called
rainy day fund, to $1.65 billion, the third highest in the country,
Gonzalez said. Budget officials will not rely on that fund to
sustain much of the budget, but could tap it for some relief, he
said.
Initial revenue numbers for November suggest a somewhat brighter
outlook. The numbers for the first half of the month were up 6.3
percent over the same period a year earlier. But Gonzalez cautioned
that midmonth results can be deceiving.
Taxpayers recently weathered a 25 percent rise in the sales tax and
new taxes on alcohol; the Patrick administration also gave cities
and towns the right to boost meals taxes and local hotel taxes and
unsuccessfully called for boosting gas taxes and taxing candy and
soda.
The administration intends to release a plan in early January to
close the transportation finance gap.
Asked about the possibility of a gas tax increase, Gonzalez said,
“There are some people out there arguing that’s what we should do.
The governor proposed that a few years ago. And that didn’t go very
well.”
Gonzalez said it would be “premature” to conclude that the
administration would seek additional broad-based tax increases.
“We’re in the middle of budgetary planning process for fiscal year.
Certainly the slowdown in economic growth is projected to last for a
while, so we need to take that into account in developing a revenue
estimate for the next fiscal year, and there’s no doubt we’ll have
challenges for the next fiscal year.”
The Boston Herald
Tuesday, November 27, 2012
Beacon Hill raises blasted
DeLeo, Murray dole out dough
By Chris Cassidy
Taxpayer advocates yesterday blasted the timing of pay hikes awarded
to House and Senate staffers, as the state faces lower-than-expected
revenues and put off a scheduled tax cut just weeks after the
election.
“It sends the wrong message,” said Jim Stergios of the Pioneer
Institute. “When there’s a shortfall of hundreds of millions of
dollars, that’s a time when taxpayers find it really hard to swallow
this.”
House Speaker Robert A. DeLeo handed out raises of “at least 3
percent” to 460 staffers in the House of Representatives last week.
Senate President Therese Murray gave her own staff pay hikes of 3
percent. Gov. Deval Patrick raised no objections to the hikes.
“The Senate and House have to manage their budgets just as I have to
manage mine,” Patrick said. “So as long as they manage within that
budget, that’s up to them.”
Painful cuts to programs and services may be on the way after
October tax revenues came in lower than expected and currently puts
the state $256 million below expectations for the year. That also
means taxpayers won’t get a scheduled .05 percent income tax cut
they otherwise would have enjoyed if revenues had been higher.
“The Legislature shouldn’t be giving their staff pay raises,” said
Barbara Anderson of Citizens for Limited Taxation.
“They should be dealing with mass deficits that are going to get
worse.”
DeLeo was unavailable for comment yesterday, but spokesman Seth
Gitell said most House staffers make between $34,000 and $42,000 and
that the pay hikes amount to a total of $764,000 or 2.16 percent of
the House budget. The House payroll will be almost 10 percent less
than it was in February 2009, he said.
“They felt that after four-plus years with no increase, the House,
due to sound fiscal management, could provide this cost of living
adjustment,” Gitell said. No additional funds are needed to cover
the pay hikes, he said, because House members made a variety of cuts
during the years, including trimming staff, taking furloughs and
axing cleaning and paper expenses — plus, taxpayers no longer fund
the cost of staffers’ Massachusetts Bar membership. For both House
staffers and Murray’s aides, Gitell and Murray said, it’s their
first pay hike in four years.
Murray told the Herald her staffers have made sacrifices and deserve
the raises, which she said came after favorable performance reviews
in the fall.
“It all comes out of one place and that’s taxpayers,” countered
Stergios.
Anderson questioned why the hikes came down just weeks after the
election, when Democrats beat Republicans in key state and
congressional races.
“Now they feel confident spending money on whatever they want,” she
said. “Let that be a lesson to the voters. This is only the
beginning.”
The Boston Herald
Tuesday, November 27, 2012
A Boston Herald editorial
What are they thinking?
Folks on Beacon Hill are handing out raises in one office while
sketching plans for possible budget cuts and a broad-based tax
increase in another. Further evidence that the State House crowd
really does operate in an alternate universe.
House Speaker Robert DeLeo last week gave out 3 percent raises to
all 460 (non-elected) employees of the House, while some Senate
employees are getting raises, too. And under normal circumstances we
would have little objection to cost-of-living increases for
employees who have gone several years without one — in the case of
the House, since 2008. A spokesman for DeLeo said the raises can be
absorbed in the current budget, and that overall House payroll today
is 10 percent lower than it was in 2009.
Still, these can’t really be considered “normal circumstances,” can
they?
For starters, the current budget may soon be torn up.
State tax revenues are trailing projections (and how reliable those
projections were is an issue well worth exploring) as well as
trailing last year’s actual collections. Gov. Deval Patrick’s budget
team is preparing mid-year budget cuts in executive branch agencies
and calling on the other branches to do the same.
Meanwhile everyone knows Patrick’s team is also preparing a major
tax hike proposal — the only question is what form it will take.
DeLeo, who has been a stalwart in the face of past tax hike
proposals, hasn’t ruled one out.
So this is the moment he chooses to dole out
post-election/pre-Christmas gifts?
DeLeo and Senate President Therese Murray might well be asking: If
not now, when? Is there ever an optimal time for raising
public employee salaries?
Maybe not. But we can think of the worst time to do so, and
that would be two weeks after the election, while Beacon Hill is
preparing the taxpayers to pay more for their services.
Associated Press
Tuesday, November 27, 2012
Groups seek new revenue for public transit
BOSTON — A coalition of groups is recommending a small payroll tax
be approved to help pay for chronically underfunded public transit
services in Massachusetts.
A report to be discussed with lawmakers at the Statehouse on Tuesday
also calls for a more equitable fare structure that would give
breaks to low-income riders. The report was prepared by Public
Transit-Public Good, a coalition that includes community
organizations and labor unions.
The groups suggest a 0.75 payroll tax on workers earning more than
$100,000, with the revenue dedicated to paying off debt from the Big
Dig and helping fund the MBTA and other regional transit systems.
The Legislature is expected to consider possible new sources of
revenue to finance the state’s transportation system when it begins
the next two-year in January.
State House News Service
Tuesday, November 27, 2012
State Capitol Briefs – Lunch Edition
Coalition calls for transportation payroll tax
By Matt Murphy
A payroll tax increase on upper-income earners in Massachusetts
would produce revenues to cover part of a yawning budget gap between
available funds and resources needed to maintain the state’s
infrastructure and avoid large fare hikes, according to unions and
advocates for the state’s seniors, students and disabled transit
riders.
In a report released Tuesday, the groups recommended a menu of
potential solutions to the transportation financing question facing
lawmakers and Gov. Deval Patrick when the Legislature starts a new
two-year session in January, including a new payroll tax on
employers that would be applied based on employees earning over
$100,000.
The payroll tax proposal is one of the first concrete ideas to be
presented in advance of the Patrick administration’s report on
transportation financing due to the Legislature in January, and even
organizers acknowledge it could be a tough sell on Beacon Hill.
Under the proposal, employers would pay to state government a
percentage of the salary of workers earning more than the threshold,
with the money dedicated to transportation financing. A tax of
three-quarters of 1 percent would generate more that $190 million
annually, enough to cover annual debt payments for the Big Dig and
send $60 million a year to regional transit authorities, according
to the report.
“We look forward to working together to enact a package of
legislative, budgetary, and policy changes to our transit system
that will fix it, fund it, and make it fair,” the report’s authors
wrote.
The income threshold, according to proponents, would shield
lower-income workers from additional income taxes while also
guaranteeing that the state’s largest employers shoulder most of the
burden, including major financial and professional service firms,
biotech, and pharmaceutical companies.
“The payroll tax on upper-income workers is designed to bring equity
to a system funded almost entirely by middle- and lower- income
riders,” said Richard Rogers, chair of Community Labor United and
executive secretary and treasurer of the Greater Boston Labor
Council.
Other regions with aging infrastructure and public transit systems
have turned to payroll taxes to support transportation, including
New York City where since 2009 the Metropolitan Transportation
Authority has collected a dedicated 0.34 percent payroll tax from
employers in the 12 surrounding counties. Oregon also taxes
employers in two major “transit districts” around the cities of
Portland and Eugene.
The Boston Herald
Wednesday, November 21, 2012
Give Dems an inch, they’ll take a mile ... tax
By Howie Carr
All you motorists out there, consider yourselves warned: Gov. Deval
Patrick wants to tax you back to the Stone Age.
You can withstand a pay cut, right? Especially when it’s for a good
cause — otherwise, how are the hacks at the State House going to be
able to continue paying their fellow coatholder Sheila Burgess
$87,000 a year for whatever new phony-baloney job they invent for
her now that she’s no longer going to be the “state highway safety
director.”
This latest Beacon Hill trial balloon on higher taxes was floated
the day before Sheila Burgess, of Randolph and the 34 moving
violations and assorted citations, became the 2012 poster girl for
the hackerama.
In the tax-hike story, the hacks claimed they need at least a
billion for the “infrastructure.” The reality is, the infrastructure
is Sheila Burgess and her fellow payroll patriots. They’re very
needy, and greedy.
Which is why the Democrats are whispering yet again about a proposed
tax on miles driven. But don’t worry — it’ll “only” cost you .85
cents per mile ... in the first year. In June, the last time they
floated this new tax — excuse me, “funding strategy” — the hacks
pooh-poohed its impact. Since the average motorist drives 14,800
miles a year, the Beacon Hill taxaholics argued, even after the tax
goes up to a penny a mile, it’ll “only” cost you an extra $148 a
year.
Chickenfeed, unless of course you were to ask an illegal alien to
pay $148 to go to UMass Amherst for a year. Then it would be a hate
crime, nativism, xenophobia, etc. etc.
Then there’s the state’s 21-cents-a-gallon gas tax. An increase in
the gas tax was voted down in 2009, but now the hacks plan to
“revisit” it.
That’s a great word, revisit. The hacks never lose anything
permanently, they just “revisit” it later. But once they get what
they want — such as, say, gay marriage — then the other side can
never revisit the issue. Because once the moonbats win, it becomes
“settled law” and/or a “constitutional right.”
By the way, the hacks never raise taxes either. They “adjust” them —
upward. Maybe this time they can promise us that it will be a
“temporary” increase in the gas tax, or the tolls. In hackspeak, the
definition of “temporary” is “permanent.”
But the money is needed. You can’t expect Sheila Burgess to actually
work for a living, now can you? This is a woman so ethical she once
gave $500 to the disgraced ex-House speaker Felon Finneran, who
after being convicted of obstructing justice went on to host what
was perhaps the worst talk show in radio history.
Despite her commitment to so-called public service, Sheila Burgess
hadn’t paid her automobile excise tax until a newspaper began nosing
around earlier this month. Same thing with Granny Warren, the fake
Indian. She was in arrears to the City of Cambridge until I called
her campaign on it. And we all remember Liveshot Kerry trying to
beat the state and the Town of Nantucket for more than $500,000 on
the $7 million yacht his second wife’s first husband’s trust fund
bought for him.
What is it with these liberals and taxes — I mean enhanced revenues?
They seem to think taxes are mandatory for us, but optional for
them.
There used to be a TV show called “You Asked for It.” On Nov. 6, we
asked for it, and now we’re going to get it, in spades.
The Boston Herald
Monday, November 26, 2012
Dems think state loses if you save $$
By Holly Robichaud
The never-ending saga of Taxachusetts is coming to our wallets soon.
Whether or not there is a need for more revenue, the fundamental
problem is that Democrats have a delusional view about our money.
They believe what we don’t pay in taxes is an expenditure on behalf
of the state.
Hence, it is costing Bacon Hill tax dollars because we keep more of
our savings and paychecks.
While normal people think a tax expenditure is paying for the
plowing of roads or police protection, for Democrats it is the
noncollection of our money.
The Massachusetts Department of Revenue estimates $27 billion in
uncollected taxes or loopholes. That’s the amount the state
presently amasses in tax revenue annually, which means a doubling in
taxes.
As you may have guessed, their idea of plugging loopholes means new
taxes for us. The biggest loophole is the tax exemption on food and
clothing, which, if plugged, would generate $17 billion.
Bacon Hill would never tax food and clothing, right? Unfortunately,
there is every reason to believe that it could happen.
Gov. Deval Patrick has floated the idea of a sugar tax, and his
administration has been working to increase fees on vending machines
by 567 percent.
Once Bacon Hill gets the sugar tax, it is only a matter of time
before there is the salt tax. Why exempt potato chips? And then it
will move on down the line to all foods.
Bacon Hill feels no sympathy for the taxpayers.
Before the holiday, the governor “revisited” his idea on a mileage
tax, as if we don’t already pay enough to drive with gas at $4 per
gallon.
Think about this on Cyber Monday. Last week, State Treasurer Steve
Grossman sent a letter to Washington, D.C., to encourage allowing
states to implement an Internet sales tax.
According to State House News Service, Grossman wrote that our local
stores are at a competitive disadvantage. “... it is a matter of
fairness and equity to Main Street businesses. Local retailers and
other merchants should not have to compete with online sales giants
that do not have to collect state and local sales taxes.”
While he writes good spin, this is not a simple fairness issue. It
is about taking more of your money.
If the treasurer were truly interested in leveling the playing
field, then he would suggest lowering the sales tax across the board
to offset the new revenue collected online.
In Massachusetts you’ll never pay enough taxes, because the
Democrats believe it is their money first and you are lucky that
they let you keep any.
The Eagle-Tribune
Sunday, November 25, 2012
Rep. Lyons seeks to kill state aid for illegal immigrants
By Paul Tennant
ANDOVER — State Rep. James Lyons has renewed his fight to prevent
state benefits from being paid to illegal immigrants.
Gov. Deval Patrick issued an executive order last week that permits
undocumented aliens to pay the same tuition rate at state colleges
and universities as legal Massachusetts residents if they have
obtained work permits.
Lyons, R-Andover, said he and other Republican legislators have
filed a bill that would restrict all state benefits to United States
citizens and legal immigrants. Last year, Lyons demanded that the
Patrick administration report how much was spent during the fiscal
year on health services for illegal immigrants.
In October 2011, the administration gave a figure of $270 million,
Lyons said.
“My role is to protect the hard-earned tax dollars of working
people,” Lyons said. The governor has been talking about increasing
taxes, according to Lyons.
“We need other solutions besides taxes and providing services to
illegal immigrants,” he said. His proposal has support from
Republican colleagues but so far, no Democratic legislators have
approached him about backing the measure, he said.
Yet he’s received more than 100 emails from people who object to
illegal immigrants receiving state benefits, he said. The response,
he said, has been “really incredible.”
Lyons, re-elected to his second term as representative from the 17th
Essex District on Nov. 6, said “it’s insanity” that Patrick wants to
give illegal aliens benefits while presiding over reductions in aid
to cities and towns.
President Barack Obama issued an executive order that allows illegal
immigrants who came to the United States before reaching age 16 and
who don’t have criminal records to obtain work permits. They must
also pay a $465 fee.
Both Obama and Patrick have pointed out that those who came here
illegally at a young age were most likely brought by their parents,
so their presence in America is “not their fault.”
State Rep.-elect Diana DiZoglio, D-Methuen, whose 14th Essex
District abuts Lyons’ territory, did not commit herself to a
position when asked what she thinks of Lyons’ bill. She hasn’t had a
chance to study the legislation, she said.
The Patriot Ledger
Tuesday, November 20, 2010
Mass. legislator wants to tax money left in campaign war chests
By Adam Vaccaro
Political campaigns are often referred to by politicians as long,
grueling and taxing. But when election seasons come to an end,
campaign finance accounts sit still until the next election cycle –
untaxed.
But now, state Rep. Dan Winslow, R-Norfolk, is hoping to change
that. He has drafted a plan that would tax what’s left in elected
state and municipal officials’ war chests at 25 percent following
each election cycle.
He plans to introduce the legislation in January.
Winslow, who won his House seat in 2010 on the promise of tax cuts,
said the Legislature is likely to focus on raising revenues in its
next session.
Winslow said politicians should be willing to help raise revenues
themselves before suggesting gas- and sales-tax hikes, which he
thinks may be on the table next year.
The tax would be imposed at the end of a given candidate’s election
cycle – in odd-numbered years for most municipal candidates and
even-numbered years for state officials.
Winslow offered a rough estimate that such a tax could raise $5
million every two years, with an additional spike every four years
from races for governor. That amount is hardly enough to make a
significant dent in the state’s budget.
But, Winslow said, such a tax would help establish the Legislature’s
legitimacy should lawmakers seek to raise taxes elsewhere. It would
show that legislators were imposing the same standards on their own
funds as on taxpayers’ funds, he said.
Winslow added that the tax would help shrink incumbents’ war chests,
possibly encouraging people intimidated by those funds to run for
elected office.
Winslow said he would expect resistance from his colleagues on
Beacon Hill.
At a recent forum, Massachusetts Democratic Party Chairman John
Walsh of Abington said he would support the idea with some
provisions, Winslow said. Walsh and the party did not provide
comments upon request.
|
| |
NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this
material is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior
interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes
only. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml
Citizens for Limited Taxation ▪
PO Box 1147 ▪ Marblehead, MA 01945
▪ 508-915-3665
|