|
Help save yourself
— join CLT
today! |
CLT introduction and membership application |
What CLT saves you from the auto excise tax alone |
Make a contribution to support
CLT's work by clicking the button above
Ask your friends to join too |
Visit CLT on Facebook |
Barbara Anderson's Great Moments |
Follow CLT on Twitter |
CLT UPDATE
Wednesday, March 1, 2017
Tax hikes: "a death by a
thousand cuts"?
|
Although he hasn't studied it thoroughly
yet, Canton's state representative is not inclined to
support a new gun control proposal that would increase taxes
on gun sales, ban .50-caliber weapons, restrict personal
sales and enact additional regulations on firearms and
ammunition.
"At first blush of reading the bill I don't
have a favorable reaction," said state Rep. William Galvin,
D-Canton.
He said gun bills typically have provisions
to increase public safety, something he did not see in the
proposal, adding that this bill hurts legal gun owners and
gun clubs with the increase in taxes....
The bill, sponsored by Sen. Cynthia Creem,
D-Newton, is just starting to make its way through the
process on Beacon Hill....
"I've heard from gun owners that are against
the bill," [Representative Lou Kafka, D-Stoughton] said.
"They feel they are being picked on because they are gun
owners."
He said most, if not all, gun owners he
knows are conscientious about owning guns.
"I can understand their apprehension about
the bill as far as doubling their taxes," Kafka said....
Creem's legislation, SD.1884 [S.1298],
calls for the establishment of a grant program for municipal
violence prevention programs, funded by a new 4.75 percent
tax on gun and ammunition sales. Guns and ammunition already
are subject to the 6.25 percent state sales tax.
The Canton Journal
Thursday, February 23, 2017
Canton rep leans against gun control bill
Don’t breathe a sigh of relief that House
Speaker Robert DeLeo walked back his comments on raising
taxes!
He still has his heart set on taking more
money out of our wallets. Remember, DeLeo plotted for more
than two years to pass the legislative pay raise heist. He’s
not going to give up on tax increases. His quest started
last fall when he met with “economists” to discuss “tax
policy.” Don’t you wish Bacon Hill officials would meet with
experts on how to cut spending?!
DeLeo’s latest statement was actually that
there would be no “broad base tax” hikes. That’s Bacon Hill
speak for brace for increases....
This is shaping up to be a banner year for
Bacon Hill — one when they put more money in their wallets
by taking it out of ours.
The Boston Herald
Monday, February 27, 2017
New legislative season means hold onto your wallets
By Holly Robichaud
BOSTON — Massachusetts should set a
five-year deadline for 102 public pension systems to
transfer their assets to the Pension Reserves Investment
Management Board.
That's the conclusion of a policy brief
released by the Pioneer Institute, a conservative-leaning
think tank.
The Pension Reserves Investment Management
Board — also known at PRIM — already manages both the
Massachusetts State Employee Retirement System and the
Massachusetts Teachers Retirement System.
The Pioneer Institute says PRIM offers
better asset allocation and cash management, lower
investment fees and other costs, and more attractive
investment options because of its size and market power.
The institute estimates that local
retirement systems have forfeited about $2.9 billion over
the past 30 years by not investing with PRIM and that
ultimately local taxpayers are on the hook for the pension
benefits.
Associated Press
Sunday, February 26, 2017
Think tank recommends changes to local public pension funds
If you are a municipal employee who hopes
one day to retire with an adequate pension — or simply a
taxpayer who hates to see your money thrown down the tubes —
pay attention to a
new report from the Pioneer Institute, which examines
the problem of inadequately funded municipal pension systems
and offers a sensible solution.
Study author Iliya Atanasov concludes that
non-state public pension systems — there are 102 of them in
Massachusetts, including local, regional and agency pension
funds — passed up $2.9 billion in earnings (from 1986 to
2015) they could have realized had their assets been managed
by the state retirement board.
The study recommends that all of those
separate funds — many of which remain significantly
underfunded — transfer their assets to the state Pension
Reserves Investment Management board, which manages
retirement funds for state employees and teachers. Doing so
should improve returns, lower costs and save local taxpayers
money. And who could object to that?
“Many of these local boards have fallen on
hard times through a combination of poor management
practices, insufficient contributions and unsustainable
benefits,” Atanasov writes....
Such a move would mean better returns for
pension plan participants and substantial savings for
taxpayers. The Legislature should seriously consider it.
A Boston Herald editorial
Monday, February 27, 2017
Sense on pensions
|
|
Chip Ford's CLT
Commentary
In last Friday's CLT Update (Feb. 24, 2017, "Proven
again: Too much spending, not lack of revenue problem")
in my commentary I wrote:
We're not alone in our rational suspicion that
taxpayers are not safe and secure from potential tax
hikes in the days ahead — that tax increases are not
truly "off the table" but instead are simply not
being discussed out in the open. With this
Legislature, what's new? Look at how quickly House
Speaker DeLeo backtracked on his first
slip-of-the-tongue statement that tax increases were
in play this year. Don't doubt that a tax hike could
flash through the never-satisfied Legislature as
quickly as their recent obscene pay grab. The recent
Salem News editorial put a shot over the
Legislature's bow of any even thinking about
hiking taxes. They're thinking about it alright, and
whether they can get away with pulling it off, as
they hope to with their obscene pay grab.
Over the weekend, while doing my daily chore of
monitoring news reports, I came across a bill to impose
a 4.75 percent tax on firearms and ammunition sales (on top
of the 6.25 percent sales tax already imposed). My
immediate thought was a
pattern might be developing —
I'm always looking for the starting points of those patterns.
On Monday I read Holly Robichaud's column in the Boston
Herald and knew that we were onto something significant.
She went on to list a number of other stealthy tax
increase proposals drifting through the forming miasma:
State Sen. Michael Barrett has filed legislation to
tax your food by ending the sales tax exemption for
soft drinks. State Rep. Cory Atkins wants taxes on
both candy and soda.
State Sen. Jason Lewis is pushing legislation that
would allow communities to increase the local meals
tax, as well as a new surcharge on your car’s carbon
footprint, and a pilot program for a mileage tax.
While state Sen. Sonia Chang-Diaz wants to “sunset
tax expenditures.”
Bacon Hill considers not collecting taxes on
something as an expenditure on behalf of the state.
Chang-Diaz’s bill would end investment tax credits
for companies doing research and development in the
Bay State. It’s a jobs killer, like the tech tax
that had to be repealed three years ago.
State Sen. Michael Rodrigues has filed “an act
enhancing the creative economy through the tax
code.” If passed, it would create a property tax
break for people who “practice the arts” including:
painting, sculpture, drawing, etching, calligraphy,
mixed media, book writing, musical composition and
fine crafting. I guess taxes are bad economic policy
for artists but good on research companies?
State Sen. Anne Gobi has filed legislation to create
a local gas tax in the town of Charlton. She should
rename the bill “buy your gas anywhere but
Charlton.” The bill has received local approval,
which Bacon Hill will use as justification for
passing it. Warning: this is a roundabout way of
opening the door for new local option gas taxes.
Rather than swiftly beheading taxpayers with one fell
swing, it appears that the Beacon Hill schemers are plotting
a taxpayers' death by a thousand cuts.
On February 16 the Boston Herald reported ("DeLeo
walks back talk of new taxes"):
Speaker of the House Robert A. DeLeo yesterday said
he would not push any “broad-based” tax hikes, just
days after his refusal to rule them out drew heavy
flak in the wake of the controversial
multimillion-dollar pay raise package lawmakers
awarded themselves.
“Those aren’t going to be part of the House budget,”
DeLeo told reporters yesterday, clarifying that any
“broad-based” proposals to raise the sales tax or
income tax “will not be included.”
It's looking like another case of it all depending on
what the definition of "is" is —
in this case "broad-based."
Meanwhile the
ticking time bomb of unfunded pension promises made to
government employees counts down. Pioneer Institute
continues to offer potential solutions to reduce the
liabilities that will ultimately fall on taxpayers, while
there may still be time to avoid the impending catastrophe.
If nothing is done soon, eventually taxpayers will be
reduced to paupers in order to keep the fattened "public
servants" living in the style to which they've become
accustomed, with their taxpayer-funded comfortable pensions,
lifetime healthcare coverage, and other public employee
benefits.
There's only one promise politicians can be trusted to
keep: The one they've made to themselves and
their public sector brethren. No matter what happens
to the rest of us, they will not be hurt, or
inconvenienced. That is not permitted at any cost.
|
 |
 |
|
Chip Ford
Executive Director |
|
|
|
|
The Canton Journal
Thursday, February 23, 2017
Canton rep leans against gun control bill
By Paula Vogler
Although he hasn't studied it thoroughly yet,
Canton's state representative is not inclined to
support a new gun control proposal that would
increase taxes on gun sales, ban .50-caliber
weapons, restrict personal sales and enact
additional regulations on firearms and
ammunition.
"At first blush of reading the bill I don't have
a favorable reaction," said state Rep. William
Galvin, D-Canton.
He said gun bills typically have provisions to
increase public safety, something he did not see
in the proposal, adding that this bill hurts
legal gun owners and gun clubs with the increase
in taxes.
Galvin said legislators continually review laws,
trying to enhance public safety yet trying to
respect the rights of citizens.
"We probably have one of the most comprehensive
gun laws in the nation," Galvin said, "but you
can bring guns in from anywhere and that's a
problem. Something needs to be done federally to
bring all these laws in line with each other."
The bill, sponsored by Sen. Cynthia Creem,
D-Newton, is just starting to make its way
through the process on Beacon Hill.
It's one of more than 5,700 bills that have been
filed this year so many legislators have not
read it through entirely.
Representative Lou Kafka, D-Stoughton, who also
had not read it through, said the bill could
change dramatically by the time it reaches him.
"I've heard from gun owners that are against the
bill," Kafka said. "They feel they are being
picked on because they are gun owners."
He said most, if not all, gun owners he knows
are conscientious about owning guns.
"I can understand their apprehension about the
bill as far as doubling their taxes," Kafka
said.
While he does not own a gun, Kafka said he is
not against individuals owning them.
"People that own guns, do the right thing,
follow the rules, they're not the problem," he
said. "This is something we will follow because
we've heard from a number of constituents."
Creem said gun violence issues always have been
important to her, which is why she has filed gun
legislation every session.
"I want to make it harder and harder to get guns
in and get guns into the hands of people who
shouldn't have them," Creem said.
Creem's legislation, SD.1884
[S.1298],
calls for the establishment of a grant program
for municipal violence prevention programs,
funded by a new 4.75 percent tax on gun and
ammunition sales. Guns and ammunition already
are subject to the 6.25 percent state sales tax.
The bill also calls for the adoption of
personalized technology to prevent unauthorized
users from firing a gun, and a ban on gun sales
that aren't performed through a licensed
firearms dealer. That restriction on private
sales, Creem said, would ensure that all gun
buyers are subject to the national background
check system.
"Some of these are just common-sense thoughts,"
she said. "This is not telling people they
cannot have a gun. I have great concerns over
private gun sales, where we don't utilize the
national instant background check system."
Jim Wallace, executive director of the
Massachusetts Gun Owners Action League, or GOAL,
characterized the bill as unnecessary and
misguided, failing to address the real problem.
"Has there ever been a crime committed with a
.50-caliber firearm in Massachusetts? What's the
problem we're trying to solve?" he said. "Is it
political, perceived or real? It seems it's
always been political."
A .50-caliber gun is considered among the
most-powerful weapons legally available to
civilians in the United States and is commonly
used by the military.
"I can't see a credible reason why a civilian
needs that kind of firearm," Creem said.
The weapons are banned in Washington, D.C., and
California while Connecticut and Maryland ban
some versions of .50-caliber rifles.
Wallace said the guns are popular with some long
distance sports shooters.
"If it's the government talking to the citizens,
then the government has to come up
with substantial reasons to ban anything," he
argued. "It's on them to prove without a shadow
of a doubt that these things should not be in
the hands of civilians. It's incumbent on the
government to prove its case."
The Boston Herald
Monday, February 27, 2017
New legislative season means hold onto your
wallets
By Holly Robichaud
Don’t breathe a sigh of relief that House
Speaker Robert DeLeo walked back his comments on
raising taxes!
He still has his heart set on taking more money
out of our wallets. Remember, DeLeo plotted for
more than two years to pass the legislative pay
raise heist. He’s not going to give up on tax
increases. His quest started last fall when he
met with “economists” to discuss “tax policy.”
Don’t you wish Bacon Hill officials would meet
with experts on how to cut spending?!
DeLeo’s latest statement was actually that there
would be no “broad base tax” hikes. That’s Bacon
Hill speak for brace for increases.
Unfortunately, Gov. Charlie Baker has put three
tax increases on the table — including requiring
small businesses to pay $2,000 per employee per
year for health insurance, new taxes on renting
your home, and requiring more online businesses
to collect sales taxes.
But that’s just the tip of the iceberg.
State Sen. Michael Barrett has filed legislation
to tax your food by ending the sales tax
exemption for soft drinks. State Rep. Cory
Atkins wants taxes on both candy and soda.
State Sen. Jason Lewis is pushing legislation
that would allow communities to increase the
local meals tax, as well as a new surcharge on
your car’s carbon footprint, and a pilot program
for a mileage tax. While state Sen. Sonia
Chang-Diaz wants to “sunset tax expenditures.”
Bacon Hill considers not collecting taxes on
something as an expenditure on behalf of the
state. Chang-Diaz’s bill would end investment
tax credits for companies doing research and
development in the Bay State. It’s a jobs
killer, like the tech tax that had to be
repealed three years ago.
State Sen. Michael Rodrigues has filed “an act
enhancing the creative economy through the tax
code.” If passed, it would create a property tax
break for people who “practice the arts”
including: painting, sculpture, drawing,
etching, calligraphy, mixed media, book writing,
musical composition and fine crafting. I guess
taxes are bad economic policy for artists but
good on research companies?
State Sen. Anne Gobi has filed legislation to
create a local gas tax in the town of Charlton.
She should rename the bill “buy your gas
anywhere but Charlton.” The bill has received
local approval, which Bacon Hill will use as
justification for passing it. Warning: this is a
roundabout way of opening the door for new local
option gas taxes.
This is shaping up to be a banner year for Bacon
Hill — one when they put more money in their
wallets by taking it out of ours.
The Boston Herald
Monday, February 27, 2017
A Boston Herald editorial
Sense on pensions
If you are a municipal employee who hopes one
day to retire with an adequate pension — or
simply a taxpayer who hates to see your money
thrown down the tubes — pay attention to a
new report from the Pioneer Institute, which
examines the problem of inadequately funded
municipal pension systems and offers a sensible
solution.
Study author Iliya Atanasov concludes that
non-state public pension systems — there are 102
of them in Massachusetts, including local,
regional and agency pension funds — passed up
$2.9 billion in earnings (from 1986 to 2015)
they could have realized had their assets been
managed by the state retirement board.
The study recommends that all of those separate
funds — many of which remain significantly
underfunded — transfer their assets to the state
Pension Reserves Investment Management board,
which manages retirement funds for state
employees and teachers. Doing so should improve
returns, lower costs and save local taxpayers
money. And who could object to that?
“Many of these local boards have fallen on hard
times through a combination of poor management
practices, insufficient contributions and
unsustainable benefits,” Atanasov writes.
In 2007 Beacon Hill passed a law requiring
pension systems that are less than 65 percent
funded to transfer their assets to PRIM. But the
Pioneer report suggests that doesn’t go far
enough, offering too many loopholes and allowing
systems that still manage their funds
independently “to deliver mediocre results and
become a drain on local budgets.”
Because, after all, the bigger the gap between
assets and required payouts — the bigger
contribution taxpayers have to make.
Pioneer’s proposal is to give the local funds
five years to transfer their assets to PRIM. At
a minimum, the report suggests requiring systems
that are less than 90 percent funded to make the
move — and giving cities and towns that
participate in regional systems the power to
order the transfer of their assets to the state
fund.
Such a move would mean better returns for
pension plan participants and substantial
savings for taxpayers. The Legislature should
seriously consider it. |
| |
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
|