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

Visit CLT on Facebook

CLT UPDATE
Wednesday, April 29, 2015

Threat of "Divide-and-Conquer" Grad Tax intensifies


Massachusetts’ flat state income tax is destined to become a major political issue this year as a prominent coalition of advocacy groups launches a ballot petition to raise taxes on the wealthiest Bay State households.

The tentative plan is to target the 1 percent of earners: incomes over $500,000.

Raise Up Massachusetts, a coalition of community groups, labor unions, and religious organizations, is working out the details of a ballot petition that it plans to submit by August to the Attorney General for approval. But the soonest the ballot question would go to the voters is 2018 because of the complications in establishing a graduated income tax, which involves amending the state constitution.

Raise Up was behind the paid sick time initiative, Question 4, that passed last fall. If Raise Up succeeds, it would spell the end of Massachusetts’ one-size-fits all income tax. The current state income tax rate is 5.15 percent regardless of income....

The politics of the campaign promise to be tricky. Massachusetts voters have historically hated the idea of a graduated state income taxes, last defeating a ballot question severely by a 2-to-1 margin in 1994. That’s because voters sensed a graduated tax ultimately would reach their wallets and pocketbooks. Massachusetts is among seven states with a flat rate.

But given the growing income gap, the theme of income equality rising as a top domestic issue, and a burgeoning millionaire class in Massachusetts, the politics of taxing the rich could play well here. The challenge is defining “the rich” in a politically foolproof way.

In light of the state budget shortfalls, last month I suggested in a Boston Globe op-ed that a surtax tax on millionaires – there are 13,700 of them in the Commonwealth – would likely pass muster with voters. My basic point was the Commonwealth needs to raise more revenue, and it shouldn’t pretend otherwise (and millionaires could afford it). But my modest proposal would only raise about $340 million. Raise Up Massachusetts has bigger ambitions, and it has the resources to push its agenda forward.

MassterList
Monday, April 27, 2015
Ballot petition in the works to target 1 percent with higher taxes
By George Donnelly


Constitutional amendments have not generated much interest from lawmakers since the historic debates over gay marriage, but lawmakers continue to file proposals.

Committees faced a Wednesday deadline to render judgments on amendments filed for consideration during a potential Constitutional Convention this year. Bills that do not receive a committee report will automatically be reported as ought-not-to-pass, Senate Clerk Bill Welch told the News Service.

The Judiciary Committee plans to conduct an email poll on its amendments before the deadline....

Once bills have been reported out members can place them on the calendar of the first constitutional convention a joint session of the House and Senate where Senate President Stanley Rosenberg will preside.

State House News Service
Advances: Week of April 26, 2015
Constitutional Amendment Deadline


The average single family tax bill in Massachusetts in fiscal year 2015 was $5,225, a 3.6 percent jump from the previous year, according to the state’s Department of Revenue. This growth follows a longer trend: property taxes have increased over each of the past 10 years....

A single family property tax bill is influenced by factors both in and out of the home. A renovation or expansion can increase a tax bill. And growth within the municipality — both residential and commercial — plays a role, too. Single family tax bills change relative to the rest of the municipality.

In some communities, growth in the annual tax bill can also be attributed to local ballot initiatives that give the municipality permission to hike property taxes to fund public schools, infrastructure improvements, or other municipal expenses. These voter-approved exclusions push communities’ year-to-year tax increase beyond the limits set by Proposition 2½.

The Boston Globe
Wednesday, March 25, 2015
Property tax bills on the rise throughout Mass.


Chip Ford's CLT Commentary

I warned last month that the Gimme Lobby is gearing up for the sixth attempt to impose a graduated income tax on the taxpayers of Massachusetts.  For the sixth time the tax-borrow-and-spend cabal is scheming to amend the state constitution to make hiking taxes easier, one tax bracket at a time.  If the constitution is ever so amended it will be forever, and defeating any tax increase on one targeted bracket at a time will be impossible forevermore. (CLT Update. Mar. 17 - "Here they come, again! Sixth assault for a Grad Tax is upon us")  I asked:

"What do the tax-borrow-and-spend "progressives" find unfair with the historic, constitutionally ensconced flat tax? How does everyone paying the same rate "favor the rich" — if everyone's paying the same tax rate, regardless of the amount of income? (5.15% of $50,000 = $2,575: 5.15% of $1,000,000 = $51,500) What could be more fair than that?"

This is not about "fairness" it's about easier access to more of every taxpayer's money on a whim.  Sure, today they'll claim they're only going after the "richest 1%" to pitch their scheme to voters, but that's not where the real money is.  There are 13,700 millionaires living among approximately 1.8 million tax filers of Massachusetts.  How long will hiking the income tax on "the richest 1 percent" alone satisfy their insatiable spending lust?  You can bet however they word their proposed constitutional amendment they will leave room to inevitably maneuver on to all taxpayers.  Why else would they bother especially if the wealthy begin to bail out of Massachusetts as they have in other high-tax states?

With Sen. Stanley Rosenberg (D-Amherst) as the new Senate President presiding over the upcoming constitutional convention, it will bear watching.  Sen. Rosenberg has been a longtime advocate for a graduated income tax, and a bill for such a legislative amendment has been filed by state Sen James Eldridge (D-Acton). With Senate President Rosenberg wielding the convention gavel a Grad Tax may soon be before us.


According to the state Department of Revenue, property taxes on average statewide have increased 3.6 percent over the past year.  Granted that much of that increase is due to local voters electing to tax themselves and their neighbors more through municipal overrides and debt exclusions to exceed the limits of Proposition 2½.  Nonetheless, the cost of government at all levels — federal, state, and local — just keeps growing and growing year after year.

In the last CLT Update, Apr. 24 ("FY2016 "austere" House budget proposes 'only' $1B spending increase," I noted:

According to the US Inflation Calculator:

"The latest inflation rate for the United States is -0.1% through the 12 months ended March 2015 as published by the US government on April 17, 2015."

For whatever that's worth  anyone who shops, pays bills, recognizes that the official government Consumer Price Index is a hoax.

Then there's the drop of median household income, still below pre-recession level.  According to Sentier Research's "Household Income Trends" (issued last month):

Real median annual household income in January 2015 can be put into broader perspective by comparisons with previous levels of household income since the recession began and dating back to the start of the last decade. The January 2015 median income of $54,332 was 1.0 percent lower than the median of $54,873 in June 2009, the end of the recent recession and beginning of the “economic recovery.” (Since the recession ended consumer prices have increased by 9.3 percent, creating a sizable “headwind” for changes in median annual household income.) The January 2015 median was 2.8 percent lower than the median of $55,896 in December 2007, the beginning month of the recession that occurred more than seven years ago. And the January 2015 median was 3.9 percent lower than the median of $56,561 in January 2000, the beginning of this statistical series. These comparisons demonstrate that despite recent increases in real median annual household income, a significant amount of ground needs to be recovered to return to a median income level that existed before the occurrence of the recent recession and even at the turn of the last century.

Since "economic recovery" from the Great Recession allegedly began in 2009, median household income is down or stagnant even as consumer prices have risen by 9.3 percent.  We are making less and spending more just to get by day to day.  But recessions and hardships do not affect governments at any level.  Governments just demand more to spend more, simply impose higher taxes and take it.

The state is proposing to spend an additional billion dollars in FY2016 over current spending.  Local property taxes statewide on average are up 3.6 percent over the past year.  The tax-borrow-and-spend cabal wants a Graduated Income Tax to grab even more from taxpayers to spend on its own interests.

More Is Never Enough (MINE) and never will be until they have it all, or are stopped.  This cannot go on forever in fact, it can't go on for much longer. Our money is running out, as is time.

Chip Ford


 

MassterList
Monday, April 27, 2015

Ballot petition in the works to target 1 percent with higher taxes
By George Donnelly


Massachusetts’ flat state income tax is destined to become a major political issue this year as a prominent coalition of advocacy groups launches a ballot petition to raise taxes on the wealthiest Bay State households.

The tentative plan is to target the 1 percent of earners: incomes over $500,000.

Raise Up Massachusetts, a coalition of community groups, labor unions, and religious organizations, is working out the details of a ballot petition that it plans to submit by August to the Attorney General for approval. But the soonest the ballot question would go to the voters is 2018 because of the complications in establishing a graduated income tax, which involves amending the state constitution.

Raise Up was behind the paid sick time initiative, Question 4, that passed last fall. If Raise Up succeeds, it would spell the end of Massachusetts’ one-size-fits all income tax. The current state income tax rate is 5.15 percent regardless of income.

Raise Up conducted polling in January that showed strong support – upwards of 70 percent – for significant tax increases on incomes over $500,000. According to one person familiar with the polling data, an income of $500,000 and above resonated in polls as “wealthy” – and a level that should be taxed at a higher rate.

“Polling and focus groups have opened a new horizon about how strongly people feel about that $500,000 level,” said one of the organizers. Raise Up expects to be on the streets collecting signatures in the fall.

Raise Up is considering an aggressive target for revenue from a new tax rate for top earners – upwards of $2 billion a year, which the coalition believes would result from raising the rate to 9 percent on incomes over $500,000. Raise Up used the 9 percent rate in its polling – so that marginal rate, which would begin at the $500,000 level, tested well. But the group is still debating the income level and tax rate for the petition – nothing is settled yet, a source said.

Changing the Commonwealth’s flat income tax is a complicated matter because it’s written into the state constitution. A constitutional amendment requires a multistep process that involves the Legislature and more than one legislative session. In short, a fall 2015 signature drive would set in motion a process for a 2018 ballot question.

There are other complications – notably, drafting the petition so a move to a graduated income tax through a constitutional amendment stands the test of time. For example, a $500,000 income places the household not quite in the 1 percent of earners in Massachusetts (one percent of Bay Staters actually earn $532,000 or higher); rampant inflation, while not a factor in our current economy, could return; and in 10 years $500,000 could be worth $150,000 in today’s dollars, so the petitioners need to weigh an inflation rider.

A cautionary tale is the Alternative Minimum Tax, originally a reaction in 1969 to a tiny fraction of high earners who avoided taxes through deductions. Now it affects millions of taxpayers, although it finally was indexed to inflation in 2012.

The politics of the campaign promise to be tricky. Massachusetts voters have historically hated the idea of a graduated state income taxes, last defeating a ballot question severely by a 2-to-1 margin in 1994. That’s because voters sensed a graduated tax ultimately would reach their wallets and pocketbooks. Massachusetts is among seven states with a flat rate.

But given the growing income gap, the theme of income equality rising as a top domestic issue, and a burgeoning millionaire class in Massachusetts, the politics of taxing the rich could play well here. The challenge is defining “the rich” in a politically foolproof way.

In light of the state budget shortfalls, last month I suggested in a Boston Globe op-ed that a surtax tax on millionaires – there are 13,700 of them in the Commonwealth – would likely pass muster with voters. My basic point was the Commonwealth needs to raise more revenue, and it shouldn’t pretend otherwise (and millionaires could afford it). But my modest proposal would only raise about $340 million. Raise Up Massachusetts has bigger ambitions, and it has the resources to push its agenda forward.


State House News Service
Advances: Week of April 26, 2015

Constitutional Amendment Deadline


Constitutional amendments have not generated much interest from lawmakers since the historic debates over gay marriage, but lawmakers continue to file proposals.

Committees faced a Wednesday deadline to render judgments on amendments filed for consideration during a potential Constitutional Convention this year. Bills that do not receive a committee report will automatically be reported as ought-not-to-pass, Senate Clerk Bill Welch told the News Service.

The Judiciary Committee plans to conduct an email poll on its amendments before the deadline.

Once bills have been reported out members can place them on the calendar of the first constitutional convention a joint session of the House and Senate where Senate President Stanley Rosenberg will preside.

In order for amendments to be taken up for debate at the convention, they must be placed on the calendar before May 13. The two branches are required to select a time and date of the first constitutional convention for no later than May 13.

Initiative petitions to the constitution could come up later in the two-year session, and the convention generally recesses and then returns at various points during the two years.

Last session, no amendments were passed.

On their way toward changing the state's founding document drafted by John Adams, amendments must first be ordered to a third reading by a majority of the members present. If they make it out of the House and Senate Bills on Third Reading committees acting jointly, the amendments must receive approval by a majority of members elected to then be taken up by the next general court, in 2017-2018.

There are 40 senators and 160 members of the House. If it then clears the next General Court, the amendment would go to voters.


The Boston Globe
Wednesday, March 25, 2015

Property tax bills on the rise throughout Mass.
Average single family tax bill in the state grew 3.6 percent from the last fiscal year
By Catherine Cloutier


Prospective home buyers may have another financial hurdle to consider this spring: Family property tax bills are on the upswing throughout the Commonwealth.

The average single family tax bill in Massachusetts in fiscal year 2015 was $5,225, a 3.6 percent jump from the previous year, according to the state’s Department of Revenue. This growth follows a longer trend: property taxes have increased over each of the past 10 years.

While the cost of property taxes varies by community across Massachusetts, growth in the average bill has been widespread. Between fiscal years 2014 and 2015, the average family property tax bill increased in 304 of the 326 cities and towns for which data were available.

Among the towns and cities that saw growth were many of the more highly taxed ones. In Wayland, the average family tax bill grew by almost 10 percent, increasing it by $1,075. Wellesley’s average bill was up $857. Lexington’s increased by $710.

When looking back to fiscal year 2011, these increases change from hundreds to thousands. The annual family tax bill has grown more than $1,000 in 50 towns and cities in the last five fiscal years.

Only five communities saw declines — all under $200 — during that time period.

The Department of Revenue does not release average single family tax bill information for every city or town in Massachusetts, including Boston, many of its close suburbs, and Cape Cod vacation destinations. Some of these communities have exemptions, meaning they set their tax rates differently; others had yet to set their fiscal year 2015 rates when the data were published.

In Boston, the average single family tax bill in fiscal year was $3,520, a $103 uptick from the previous year, the city reported. Still, the city’s average bill makes up only about two-thirds of the statewide average.

A single family property tax bill is influenced by factors both in and out of the home. A renovation or expansion can increase a tax bill. And growth within the municipality — both residential and commercial — plays a role, too. Single family tax bills change relative to the rest of the municipality.

In some communities, growth in the annual tax bill can also be attributed to local ballot initiatives that give the municipality permission to hike property taxes to fund public schools, infrastructure improvements, or other municipal expenses. These voter-approved exclusions push communities’ year-to-year tax increase beyond the limits set by Proposition 2½.

In the wake of the recession, these increases are likely to continue, said Geoff Beckwith, director of the Massachusetts Municipal Association.

“Cities and towns rely more on property taxes to fund municipal services than they have at any point since 1982,” Beckwith said.

The reliance on property taxes is, in part, due to decreased local aid from the state due to budget constraints and the costs of distributing services outpacing municipal income, said Beckwith.

 

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

BACK TO CLT HOMEPAGE