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
Friday, April 14, 2017

Spring tax hikes talk is blooming on Beacon Hill


Jon Hurst, president of the Retailers Association of Massachusetts, is about to inject an X factor into the state’s fiscal and political debate.

Beacon Hill Democrats have been proceeding upon the assumption that they’ll have a popular measure — a tax hike on million-dollar earners — on the ballot in November 2018. That proposed constitutional amendment should bring progressives to the polls. And, depending on how tax-increase-averse Governor Charlie Baker plays it, may give the eventual Democratic gubernatorial nominee an issue to use against the GOP incumbent.

That plan faces an impending legal challenge, and needs a second legislative vote before it lands on the ballot. But if it clears those hurdles and passes, lawmakers will have another $1.9 billion or so flowing annually into state coffers.

Now come Hurst and his 4,000-member association with a tax scheme of their own: A possible 2018 ballot question to lower the state sales tax from 6.25 percent to 5 percent or less....

It’s all a debate the state needs to have. And one that should make campaign 2018 a lively and multi-faceted fiscal affair.

The Boston Globe
Friday, April 7, 2017
A duel between tax plans


The tax collectors for Massachusetts’ state coffers caught Amazon in their web in 2013. Now, they’re going after the other big e-commerce companies.

The state Department of Revenue just issued a directive telling out-of-state vendors to start collecting sales taxes on Massachusetts purchases on July 1. The requirement would kick in for many companies that sell more than $500,000 of goods annually here, effectively capturing out-of-state Internet retailers.

The Boston Globe
Tuesday, April 4, 2017
Mass. officials make move to capture online sales taxes


Where would we be without state Senate President Stan Rosenberg beating the drum for new taxes!

Yes, you can take the Democrat out of Amherst, but ... well, you know.

“It has been many years since we’ve been able to balance our budget without resorting to gimmicks and one-time revenue fixes — Band-aids that result in structurally imbalanced budgets the following years,” Rosenberg told the Greater Boston Chamber of Commerce on Wednesday [read his speech here]. “In effect, we’ve been propping up a sagging house without ever addressing the real problem — its shaky foundation.”

Rosenberg insisted that despite a stellar economic performance and an unemployment rate of 3.4 percent, the state’s solid economy simply isn’t translating into sufficient revenue — well, sufficient revenue to support all of the never-ending spending priorities that Rosenberg and his Democratic colleagues in the Senate can come up with, that is.

Of course, the Senate president is all gung-ho for the so-called “fair share” tax that would impose a 4 percent income surtax on those with incomes of $1 million or more — a constitutional amendment expected to make it to the 2018 ballot. (Its approval would pretty much demolish current constitutional prohibitions on a graduated income tax.)

But clearly that’s not enough for Rosenberg who this week also raised the horrifying specter of a sales tax on services. If that’s not a back-to-the-future moment, we don’t know what is.

But clearly that’s not enough for Rosenberg who this week also raised the horrifying specter of a sales tax on services. If that’s not a back-to-the-future moment, we don’t know what is.

He recalled that the Legislature did indeed pass such a tax in the waning days of the Dukakis administration only to repeal it before it ever went into effect after Gov. William Weld took office.

“So it’s very controversial, but our economy is even more reliant now than it was then on services and it is certainly worth looking at,” Rosenberg told the chamber.

A Boston Herald editorial
Sunday, April 9, 2017
Taxachusetts redux?


“After delivering 3.4 billion in tax reductions in the 80s and 90s – cuts we could afford at the time; cuts that helped us shed the title Taxachusetts forever – the bill is finally coming due. It has been many years since we’ve been able to balance our budget without resorting to gimmicks and one time revenue fixes – band-aids that result in structurally imbalanced budgets the following years.”

Senate President Stan Rosenberg

"Since the $12 billion FY1990 budget annual state spending has more than tripled to a proposed $40.5 billion. During that period the “temporary” income tax hike of 1989 still lingers, the sales tax was increased by 25%, the gas tax has been hiked, and other revenue-raising gimmicks have been relentlessly imposed.  In 1994 a graduated income tax scheme was comfortably defeated for the fifth time by voters; in 2000 the voters mandated a rollback of the “temporary” income tax hike; in 2014 the voters repealed the automatic gas tax increase.  On Beacon Hill More Is Never Enough (MINE) from taxpayers. The state has an insatiable spending problem, not a revenue problem."

Chip Ford
Executive Director
Citizens for Limited Taxation

Response for Beacon Hill Roll Call
Friday, April 7, 2017


Acknowledging just how controversial of a proposal it would be, Senate President Stanley Rosenberg on Wednesday said Massachusetts should discuss imposing a tax on services.

Speaking over the din of clinking coffee cups and silverware at a Greater Boston Chamber of Commerce breakfast in Boston's seaport, Rosenberg said the state's tax structure is not working -- pointing to tax revenues that have fallen short of projections in recent years as evidence that the state's tax code is not bringing in enough revenue to support state spending....

The state's last attempt at establishing a sales tax on services was the Legislature's short-lived 2013 law subjecting certain computer services to the sales tax. Lawmakers wound up repealing their so-called tech tax amid an outcry from businesses.

Though the Republican has taken a dim view of new taxes, Gov. Charlie Baker has refused to take a non-new-taxes pledge, saying in 2014 that he did not want to be boxed into a position should a proposal arise to simplify the tax code. And in House Speaker Robert DeLeo, a Democrat and author of the 2009 sales tax rate hike to 6.25 percent, Baker for at least the first half of his term has found an ally in resisting higher tax proposals....

Rosenberg, who noted in his speech Wednesday . . . "We should sit down and take a look at our property tax, our sales tax, our income tax and figure out what makes sense, our corporate tax," he told reporters after his remarks.

But to do so through the legislative process, the more conservative House would have to be the genesis of any such legislation because bills that raise revenue, so-called money bills, can only originate in the House.

State House News Service
Wednesday, April 5, 2017
Tax overhaul should include consideration of service tax, Rosenberg says


Stan Rosenberg visited the Greater Boston Chamber of Commerce with high hopes that he could change some minds.

It was a tough sell. Ever try to tell a six-year-old to eat her veggies? That’s what the mood in the room felt like, as the Senate president made an impassioned case for the “Fair Share Tax,” aka the “Millionaires Tax,” on Wednesday. The state, Rosenberg said, has implemented many tax cuts over the years, and now the bills are coming due as lawmakers wrestle with a perennially out-of-balance state budget. Rosenberg sees some salvation in this new tax. It’s a potential 2018 ballot question, a constitutional amendment, that would add 4 percentage points to the state’s income tax rate (currently 5.1 percent) for all personal earnings over $1 million, to raise funds for transportation and education.

The Boston chamber has not taken a position yet. So Rosenberg saw an opening.

Other business groups – such as the Mass. High Tech Council and Mass. Taxpayers Foundation – are already strategizing about a legal challenge.

The Boston Globe
Thursday, April 6, 2017
A case for the millionaires tax


President Donald J. Trump and Senate President Stanley C. Rosenberg may finally have a common interest: tax reform.

While that may be the point where their shared agendas start to diverge, the topic that Beacon Hill leaders largely like to avoid may soon become something they can't escape.

The federal debate over tax reform appears headed toward a package of tax cuts, while Massachusetts voters will almost certainly be asked to decide in 2018 whether households should pay a surtax on incomes over $1 million to generate additional revenue for state government.

Enter Rosenberg, who in a speech to the Greater Boston business leaders this week pleaded with the community not to embrace the Retailers Association of Massachusetts's pitch for a sales tax cut as he took a stab at explaining a conundrum that has vexed budget writers for years now....

Gov. Charlie Baker may not be chomping at the bit to entertain straight tax hikes, but the possibility of more comprehensive tax revamp is exactly the reason he refused to take a no-new-taxes pledge in 2014 when he was running for governor, and may be the opening Democrats need to start the debate, if not for now than perhaps the years to come.

State House News Service
Friday, April 7, 2017
Weekly Roundup
Two Things Are Certain


Democratic leaders of the Massachusetts House put forward a $40.3 billion spending plan for fiscal 2018 that Ways and Means Chairman Brian Dempsey said focused "first and foremost on the fundamentals" - health care, pensions and local aid....

As with all budgets, some interests were pleased with how they fared in the Ways and Means budget, while others were left wanting. The plan landed amidst another period of budget uncertainty with state tax collections trailing estimates this fiscal year by $220 million despite a relatively healthy economy....

MONEY, MONEY, MONEY BILL: While Speaker Robert DeLeo eschewed broad-based tax increases with his budget proposal, there are provisions in the bill that make it a "money bill," opening the door for the Senate to consider taxes next month when it takes a turn producing a budget. The House bill includes a $2,000 tax credit for businesses that hire veterans, as well as reforms to how sales taxes are collected and remitted to the state. "I think we'll see what they do," Dempsey said about the possibility of the Senate adding tax increases to the budget to generate new revenue. Senate President Stanley Rosenberg last week raised the idea of a sales tax on services, which was briefly contemplated and abandoned in the early 1990s. "Any new expansion to something that it is currently not taxed is always a challenge...," Dempsey said. "Personally, I would have some concerns."

State House News Service
Monday, April 10, 2017
Budget dynamics gain clarity with release of House's $40 billion plan


House leaders unveiled a $40.3 billion state budget Monday that significantly tempered two controversial plans by Governor Charlie Baker to tackle the cost of health care. Lawmakers slashed his proposed fee on businesses to fund state medical costs, and they rejected a plan to cap the prices charged by hospitals.

The budget proposal comes as state tax revenue has failed to meet projections. It effectively maintains spending levels in many areas, including the University of Massachusetts system, and cuts funding for lawyers for poor defendants....

The House plan also rejected the governor’s effort to impose a tax on people who use short-term rental services like Airbnb from landlords who have a high-volume rental business....

The most significant move by House leaders, though, was the dent they want to put in Baker’s attempt to address rising health costs....

The House budget does not include a controversial proposal by the governor to shrink the number of people eligible for a program that provides cash to the state’s neediest families. Baker spokesman Billy Pitman said the administration was concerned the House dropped that welfare “reform” measure....

The plan comes as the state grapples with flagging tax revenue.

Through March, tax revenues are up just 1.7 percent — about $220 million less than Beacon Hill expected to take in. That could mean more emergency budget-tightening measures from Baker in the coming weeks. And that could impinge on the new budget House leaders are proposing for fiscal year 2018, which begins July 1.

In his January spending plan, Baker proposed several ideas for bringing in additional tax revenue to the state, including more aggressive efforts at collection. The House budget proposal embraces some of those plans.

The Boston Globe
Tuesday, April 11, 2017
House unveils $40.3 billion state budget


The call came in to the Citizens for Limited Taxation (CLT) office in the summer of 1979. The woman on the phone was irate over the huge auto excise bill she had received after moving to Massachusetts. She explained that this tax didn’t exist where she had lived in the Midwest.

I explained that she had to pay this onerous tax within 30 days or face a fine. That was the bad news.

The good news was that CLT was preparing to collect signatures that fall for its Proposition 2½ ballot question, which included reducing the auto excise from $66 per $1,000 assessed value to $25 — a 62 percent reduction.

The main purpose of the ballot question, of course, was the reduction of property taxes. It stipulated that every Massachusetts community had to get its spending down to 2.5 percent of assessed valuation. Once that level was achieved, then it could increase its property tax levy by not more than 2.5 percent annually. If the taxpayers felt they needed more revenue, their selectmen or city council could schedule a Proposition 2½ override election....

This system exists to this day — 38 years after the ballot question passed by an almost 60-40 percent margin....

When speakers, including the late Barbara Anderson and I, fanned out to sell our ballot question to the voters, we discovered something startling: Of the several sections within the ballot question, the most popular was the decrease in the car tax.

Our private polling indicated support for it was about 80 percent “Yes” to 12 percent “No.” Armed with these results, we emphasized the auto excise part of the ballot question as much as the property tax limitation as the election approached....

For example, my 2013 Toyota Scion for which I paid more than $20,000 in 2014 had an auto excise bill that year of $362.50. (I avoided the $957 bill that would have been due under the old rate.) My latest bill for 2017 was for $60....

Many Bay State residents don’t mind being driven, but nobody likes to be taken for a ride.

The Providence Journal
Wednesday, April 12, 2017
How Massachusetts slashed its car tax
By Chip Faulkner


Chip Ford's CLT Commentary

"Where would we be without state Senate President Stan Rosenberg beating the drum for new taxes!" the Boston Herald editorial asked.  Without question this leftwing liberals' liberal extremist is a piece of work.  Besides spending our money faster than the state can extract it, taking more from taxpayers is his primary purpose for existence.

Last week, in his speech to the Greater Boston Chamber of Commerce, not only did he promote his long-lusted for graduated income tax (aka, the "Millionaires Tax," aka, "The Fair Share Amendment"), but attempted to turn the Chamber against the retail business community's push to reduce the state sales tax.  He went on to describe his ultimate ambition; to rearrange the entire tax system to his liking!

"We should sit down and take a look at our property tax, our sales tax, our income tax and figure out what makes sense, our corporate tax," Senate President Stan Rosenberg pontificated to reporters after his speech.

Senate President Rosenberg most immediately is advocating for the repeal of the exemption from the sales tax on services (again).

"But to do so through the legislative process, the more conservative House would have to be the genesis of any such legislation because bills that raise revenue, so-called money bills, can only originate in the House," the State House News Service reported on April 5 ("Tax overhaul should include consideration of service tax, Rosenberg says").  This is an important point.

On Monday, the State House News Service reported:  "Democratic leaders of the Massachusetts House put forward a $40.3 billion spending plan for fiscal 2018 that Ways and Means Chairman Brian Dempsey said focused 'first and foremost on the fundamentals' - health care, pensions and local aid...."

We spent a couple days pouring over the "outside sections" of the proposed House budget, where the sneaky stuff is usually buried.  Except for the extension of charging a tax on those who pay for their own nursing home care, we found nothing more directly attacking taxpayers especially no removal of the sales tax exemption on services.

But that won't stop the tax-insatiable Sen. Rosenberg and the more liberal chamber from sticking it into the Senate's version of next fiscal year's budget and apparently the House made this possible.

The State House News Service reported on Monday ("Budget dynamics gain clarity with release of House's $40 billion plan"):

While Speaker Robert DeLeo eschewed broad-based tax increases with his budget proposal, there are provisions in the bill that make it a "money bill," opening the door for the Senate to consider taxes next month when it takes a turn producing a budget. The House bill includes a $2,000 tax credit for businesses that hire veterans, as well as reforms to how sales taxes are collected and remitted to the state. "I think we'll see what they do," Dempsey said about the possibility of the Senate adding tax increases to the budget to generate new revenue. Senate President Stanley Rosenberg last week raised the idea of a sales tax on services, which was briefly contemplated and abandoned in the early 1990s. "Any new expansion to something that it is currently not taxed is always a challenge..." [House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Brian] Dempsey said. "Personally, I would have some concerns."

We saw this battle between the House and Senate just two years ago over which chamber can initiate a tax and on similar grounds the Senate won the state Supreme Judicial Court's advisory opinion.

In the spring of 2015 the House and Senate fought aggressively over a similar dispute.  At question was whether the Senate's proposed tax changes in its version of the fiscal year 2016 budget was authorized under the constitution; whether what the House had proposed in its version of a $38.1 billion state budget made it a "money bill" subject to Senate changes in tax policy.

At that time, Senate President Stanley Rosenberg in the Senate's budget bill proposed increasing the Earned Income Tax Credit for low-income families by $140 million, funding it from a freeze on our "temporary" income tax (from working families) rollback, then at 5.15 percent.

Because of small tweaks to tax policy within the House budget, the state Supreme Judicial Court deemed the House bill to be a "money bill" subject to the Senate's proposed changes.  Fortunately for taxpayers, the final budget bill did not surrender to Senate President Rosenberg's insatiable appetite.

For more information see:
CLT Update, June 17, 2015, ("The Senate vs. Taxpayers")

"The legal battle between the Massachusetts House and Senate over the constitutional authority to raise taxes in this year's budget hinges on interpretations of a 137-year-old Supreme Judicial Court advisory opinion...."
CommonWealth Magazine, June 11, 2015, "What's a money bill?" by Bruce Mohl

The state's top court ruled in favor of the Senate on Monday, finding that proposed House policies had in fact made the fiscal 2016 budget bill a "money bill" and allowed the Senate to attach major tax reforms, including a suspension of the income tax rollback and an increase in tax credits for low-income families....

To pay for the $140 million tax plan, the Senate voted to halt the gradual rollback of the state's income tax to 5 percent. The income tax is currently 5.15 percent, but is expected to decrease to 5.1 percent in January if certain economic triggers are hit. It could fall further in 2017 and potentially hit the 5 percent mark in 2018....

The court, in its opinion signed by all seven justices, found that the House's decision in its version of the budget to delay the implementation of a business tax deduction, known as FAS 109, opened the door for the Senate to propose additional tax policy changes.

State House News Service, June 15, 2015, "Court's tax opinion adds clarity, complexity to budget talks"

The Boston Globe reported on Tuesday, April 11 ("House unveils $40.3 billion state budget"):  "Through March, tax revenues are up just 1.7 percent — about $220 million less than Beacon Hill expected to take in. That could mean more emergency budget-tightening measures from Baker in the coming weeks. And that could impinge on the new budget House leaders are proposing for fiscal year 2018, which begins July 1."

The important takeaway from this goes back to what I've noted often:  On Beacon Hill a budget crisis is declared when revenues don't meet or exceed "expectations" and revenues, for some reason, rarely do meet those "expectations."  Rather than threatening the need for more revenues why not simply just lower expectations realistically, so often proven to be inaccurate?

If you must make a monthly mortgage payment or lose your home, would you over-estimate your anticipated income and hope you have enough to pay that mortgage or would you realistically estimate your family budget, even project conservatively to allow for unexpected expenses that might arise (car repair, new refrigerator, higher taxes), to insure that you could pay it?


Rhode Island is considering legislation to phase-out its "car tax" similar to the "excise" on our vehicles here in Massachusetts.  CLT communications director Chip Faulkner was asked to write an op-ed column for the Providence Journal relating for its readers what happened here in Massachusetts when CLT reduced our annual municipal excise on vehicles by 62% under our Proposition 2½ in 1980.  It's an interesting perspective for Rhode Islanders — and is also an important reminder for Bay State motorists.

Chip Ford
Executive Director


 
The Boston Globe
Friday, April 7, 2017

A duel between tax plans
By Scot Lehigh

Jon Hurst, president of the Retailers Association of Massachusetts, is about to inject an X factor into the state’s fiscal and political debate.

Beacon Hill Democrats have been proceeding upon the assumption that they’ll have a popular measure — a tax hike on million-dollar earners — on the ballot in November 2018. That proposed constitutional amendment should bring progressives to the polls. And, depending on how tax-increase-averse Governor Charlie Baker plays it, may give the eventual Democratic gubernatorial nominee an issue to use against the GOP incumbent.

That plan faces an impending legal challenge, and needs a second legislative vote before it lands on the ballot. But if it clears those hurdles and passes, lawmakers will have another $1.9 billion or so flowing annually into state coffers.

Now come Hurst and his 4,000-member association with a tax scheme of their own: A possible 2018 ballot question to lower the state sales tax from 6.25 percent to 5 percent or less. The 25 percent hike in the sales tax, which took effect in 2009, has been a lasting burr under the retail saddle, as is the tax-free treatment of online purchases from out-of-state companies. Given the federal political and legal hurdles to broader taxation of Internet sales, the latter situation isn’t likely to change anytime soon. Meanwhile, Beacon Hill policy makers haven’t been particularly attentive to the retailers’ other state concerns. Last year, they failed to authorize a sales-tax holiday.

All of that has prompted Hurst’s group to rethink their approach.

“For two decades, we have been trying to get the Internet guys to collect the sales tax,” Hurst says. “But there are two ways to skin this cat. The other way is to lower the tax rate for our local retail businesses.” Given the relatively regressive nature of the sales tax, what would be good for merchants would also be good for low-income residents, Hurst says.

Hurst’s group hasn’t yet made up its collective mind to go forward with a ballot question; if they win favorable consideration on Beacon Hill, they probably wouldn’t. Nor have they decided upon their proposed sales tax rate, though Hurst says it would likely be in the 4.5 to 5 percent range. But imagine if the two tax measures are both on the 2018 ballot. The millionaire’s tax would raise about $1.9 billion. A sales tax reduction to 5 percent would cost the state $1.2 billion, while a 4.5 percent rate would mean a $1.7 billion revenue loss, according to the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation.

So Campaign 2018 would present voters and political candidates with four menu choices. Let’s call them:

The revenue-hungry liberal: Yes on the millionaire’s tax, no on the sales tax cut. State revenue gain: $1.9 billion.

The pro-small-business moderate: Yes on the millionaire’s tax, yes on the sales tax cut. Net revenue gain: $200 million to $700 million.

The status quo: No on both; no revenue change.

The full fiscal conservative: No on the millionaire’s tax, yes on the sales tax cut. Net revenue loss: $1.2 billion to $1.7 billion.

Then there’s the question of how candidates would spend whatever new tax revenue they favor (or, for full fiscal conservatives, of what they’d cut). The proposed constitutional amendment mentions education and transportation. And would they simply add it all to the budget base, or tuck some away in the state’s rainy day reserves?

There’s certainly a good case to be made for more education spending. But if there is a substantial infusion of new money, some should come in the shape of competitive grants to encourage things like extended learning time and a commitment to best practices. And to fund programs like digital literacy and computer science education.

It’s all a debate the state needs to have. And one that should make campaign 2018 a lively and multi-faceted fiscal affair.
 

The Boston Globe
Tuesday, April 4, 2017

Mass. officials make move to capture online sales taxes
By Jon Chesto


The tax collectors for Massachusetts’ state coffers caught Amazon in their web in 2013. Now, they’re going after the other big e-commerce companies.

The state Department of Revenue just issued a directive telling out-of-state vendors to start collecting sales taxes on Massachusetts purchases on July 1. The requirement would kick in for many companies that sell more than $500,000 of goods annually here, effectively capturing out-of-state Internet retailers.

The agency is prioritizing major online retailers that are not already collecting sales taxes in the state. Governor Charlie Baker’s administration hopes to use the new directive to raise $30 million for the next fiscal year. It’s worth noting that online merchants with fewer than 100 transactions a year in the state would be exempt.

Brick-and-mortar retailers have long complained that Internet merchants had an unfair advantage: A 1992 US Supreme Court decision — Quill Corp. vs. North Dakota, aka “Quill” — meant that retailers need a physical presence in a state to be forced to collect sales taxes there.

Here in Massachusetts, the revenue department had leverage to force Amazon to pay up in 2013 after it opened a substantial office in Cambridge and acquired a local robotics firm, Kiva Systems.

Now, the agency is saying there are reasons why Quill applies to other Internet retailers. One of its arguments: these sellers often put software such as apps on customers’ computers and phones, software that should be considered tangible personal property.

This interpretation could take many people by surprise. Sullivan & Worcester partner Richard Jones said some attorneys at his Boston firm were a bit shocked to get the news. Jones expects this approach could be challenged in court.

Bill Rennie, vice president at the Retailers Association of Massachusetts, said his group welcomes the help, even though the administration’s approach could face a legal fight.

“We’ve been waiting decades for a level playing field,” Rennie said. “We need some type of sales tax parity here. ... Times have changed. Online retail is everywhere. You’ve got really, really big Internet companies selling into Massachusetts the same products that our members sell.”

With the inaction in Congress on this issue, a number of states are trying to take on Quill in various ways. Now, Massachusetts is joining the fray.


The Boston Herald
Sunday, April 9, 2017

A Boston Herald editorial
Taxachusetts redux?


Where would we be without state Senate President Stan Rosenberg beating the drum for new taxes!

Yes, you can take the Democrat out of Amherst, but ... well, you know.

“It has been many years since we’ve been able to balance our budget without resorting to gimmicks and one-time revenue fixes — Band-aids that result in structurally imbalanced budgets the following years,” Rosenberg told the Greater Boston Chamber of Commerce on Wednesday [read his speech here]. “In effect, we’ve been propping up a sagging house without ever addressing the real problem — its shaky foundation.”

Rosenberg insisted that despite a stellar economic performance and an unemployment rate of 3.4 percent, the state’s solid economy simply isn’t translating into sufficient revenue — well, sufficient revenue to support all of the never-ending spending priorities that Rosenberg and his Democratic colleagues in the Senate can come up with, that is.

Of course, the Senate president is all gung-ho for the so-called “fair share” tax that would impose a 4 percent income surtax on those with incomes of $1 million or more — a constitutional amendment expected to make it to the 2018 ballot. (Its approval would pretty much demolish current constitutional prohibitions on a graduated income tax.)

But clearly that’s not enough for Rosenberg who this week also raised the horrifying specter of a sales tax on services. If that’s not a back-to-the-future moment, we don’t know what is.

He recalled that the Legislature did indeed pass such a tax in the waning days of the Dukakis administration only to repeal it before it ever went into effect after Gov. William Weld took office.

“So it’s very controversial, but our economy is even more reliant now than it was then on services and it is certainly worth looking at,” Rosenberg told the chamber.

Because why wouldn’t you kill the goose that is providing the state with so many golden eggs in terms of jobs and the income taxes that go with them?

Even the 2013 sales tax on computer services caused such a hue and cry in the state that the Legislature repealed that too.

The only good news here — and the best check on Rosenberg’s tax-it-till-they-scream attitude — is that tax bills must originate in the House. And that’s where the thus-far rather sensible Speaker Robert DeLeo has held the line on broad-based taxes. We remain optimistic he will continue to do so.


State House News Service
Wednesday, April 5, 2017

Tax overhaul should include consideration of service tax, Rosenberg says
By Colin A. Young


Acknowledging just how controversial of a proposal it would be, Senate President Stanley Rosenberg on Wednesday said Massachusetts should discuss imposing a tax on services.

Speaking over the din of clinking coffee cups and silverware at a Greater Boston Chamber of Commerce breakfast in Boston's seaport, Rosenberg said the state's tax structure is not working -- pointing to tax revenues that have fallen short of projections in recent years as evidence that the state's tax code is not bringing in enough revenue to support state spending.

"It has been many years since we've been able to balance our budget without resorting to gimmicks and one-time revenue fixes -- Band-aids that result in structurally imbalanced budgets the following years," he said. "In effect, we've been propping up a sagging house without ever addressing the real problem -- its shaky foundation."

Among the reasons the state's solid economic performance -- boasting a 3.4 percent unemployment rate and the highest business confidence level in almost 13 years -- is not translating into sufficient revenue, Rosenberg said, is that Massachusetts has "a sales tax that applies to goods, not services, in an economy that's largely driven by services."

Asked after his speech if he was proposing that Massachusetts begin taxing services, Rosenberg said, "We should certainly have a discussion about it."

"As you may remember, we had a service tax in Massachusetts and it didn't last long," he said, alluding to a state sales tax on business and professional services that was passed in late 1990 in the waning days of the Dukakis administration but repealed by the incoming Weld administration before it ever took effect. "So it's very controversial, but our economy is even more reliant now than it was then on services and it is certainly worth looking at."

The state's last attempt at establishing a sales tax on services was the Legislature's short-lived 2013 law subjecting certain computer services to the sales tax. Lawmakers wound up repealing their so-called tech tax amid an outcry from businesses.

Though the Republican has taken a dim view of new taxes, Gov. Charlie Baker has refused to take a non-new-taxes pledge, saying in 2014 that he did not want to be boxed into a position should a proposal arise to simplify the tax code. And in House Speaker Robert DeLeo, a Democrat and author of the 2009 sales tax rate hike to 6.25 percent, Baker for at least the first half of his term has found an ally in resisting higher tax proposals.

Rosenberg, who noted in his speech Wednesday that he was one of six lawmakers to sign a conference committee report authorizing the largest tax cut in state history, said the state was "short on cash" and should look at altering the rest of its "regressive tax structure."

"We should sit down and take a look at our property tax, our sales tax, our income tax and figure out what makes sense, our corporate tax," he told reporters after his remarks.

But to do so through the legislative process, the more conservative House would have to be the genesis of any such legislation because bills that raise revenue, so-called money bills, can only originate in the House.

"But anybody can make a proposal," noted Rosenberg, who mentioned in his speech that Baker had proposed a tax on short-term rentals and a new assessment on certain employers to help the state meet its health care cost obligations.

He said he is not aware of any current proposals to establish a sales tax on services and said he would "assume" that any action towards a service tax would begin after the 2018 election, when a proposed 4 percent surtax on income above $1 million is expected to go to voters.

While he had the attention of the region's business leaders, Rosenberg on Wednesday used that opportunity to implore the business community not to pursue a cut in the state sales tax on the 2018 ballot, arguing that it would further compromise the state's fiscal health.

Rosenberg again pushed for the proposed 4 percent income surtax but warned a sales tax cut would negate the revenue from the extra tax on higher earners.

"If the fair share tax passed and the sales tax [cut] passed, we'd lose about the same amount of revenue we'd gain and all the revenue we'd gain will be earmarked for education and transportation," he said. "And we'd lose all that other money that's being used to fund other projects in the budget at this point, which as I described, is out of structural balance."

Frustrated by the rising share of tax-free sales transacted online, retailers last month said they are considering the launch of a ballot campaign in 2018 to lower the sales tax from its current 6.25 percent. The Legislature raised the former 5 percent rate almost eight years ago as part of a plan to generate $1 billion in new revenue to support the state budget.

In his prepared remarks, Rosenberg called the proposed sales tax cut "a very bad idea" although he did not use those words in his speech. Speaker DeLeo has said he cannot see himself supporting a sales tax cut as it would put Massachusetts "in a more precarious financial situation."


The Boston Globe
Thursday, April 6, 2017

A case for the millionaires tax
By Jon Chesto


Stan Rosenberg visited the Greater Boston Chamber of Commerce with high hopes that he could change some minds.

It was a tough sell. Ever try to tell a six-year-old to eat her veggies? That’s what the mood in the room felt like, as the Senate president made an impassioned case for the “Fair Share Tax,” aka the “Millionaires Tax,” on Wednesday. The state, Rosenberg said, has implemented many tax cuts over the years, and now the bills are coming due as lawmakers wrestle with a perennially out-of-balance state budget. Rosenberg sees some salvation in this new tax. It’s a potential 2018 ballot question, a constitutional amendment, that would add 4 percentage points to the state’s income tax rate (currently 5.1 percent) for all personal earnings over $1 million, to raise funds for transportation and education.

The Boston chamber has not taken a position yet. So Rosenberg saw an opening.

Other business groups – such as the Mass. High Tech Council and Mass. Taxpayers Foundation – are already strategizing about a legal challenge.

The chamber might not be far behind. CEO Jim Rooney expects to discuss the issue with his board’s executive committee this month. Although the chamber is still studying the issue, Rooney says it’s likely his group will join the opposition.

The tax could chase big earners away or deter companies from moving or expanding here, the critics say, and the funds could get vacuumed into the general fund at some point down the line. But Rosenberg’s fundamental problem remains unsolved. Those bills he mentioned are coming due.


State House News Service
Friday, April 7, 2017

Weekly Roundup
Two Things Are Certain
By Matt Murphy


President Donald J. Trump and Senate President Stanley C. Rosenberg may finally have a common interest: tax reform.

While that may be the point where their shared agendas start to diverge, the topic that Beacon Hill leaders largely like to avoid may soon become something they can't escape.

The federal debate over tax reform appears headed toward a package of tax cuts, while Massachusetts voters will almost certainly be asked to decide in 2018 whether households should pay a surtax on incomes over $1 million to generate additional revenue for state government.

Enter Rosenberg, who in a speech to the Greater Boston business leaders this week pleaded with the community not to embrace the Retailers Association of Massachusetts's pitch for a sales tax cut as he took a stab at explaining a conundrum that has vexed budget writers for years now.

The strength of the state economy, including low unemployment, has done little to stablize state finances or generate the tax revenue growth necessary for Democratic leaders to comfortably invest in education, rail expansions and other projects on their wish lists. March brought another round of collections that missed benchmarks, and the state now trails revenue projections for the year by $220 million with just three months left in the fiscal year.

Rosenberg suggested a tax system reliant on income gains and taxes on the sales of goods has failed to capture the nature of the new service-based economy.

"The bill is finally coming due," he warned, calling the state's tax structure "regressive."

The Amherst Democrat suggested it was "certainly worth looking at" a revival of the sales tax on business and professional services passed under Gov. Michael Dukakis and repealed by Gov. William Weld.

But even if that's just one suggestion, Rosenberg raised an interesting questions and one that might not soon go away. True tax reform has not been attempted since Gov. Deval Patrick, late in his second term, put a package on the table that would have raised the income tax, lowered the sales tax and eliminated a variety of exemptions, but it barely got a look by skeptical legislators.

House Speaker Robert DeLeo recognized the need for revenue in 2013, but opted for increases in gas and cigarette taxes that haven't produced the revenue jolt that DeLeo's 2009 sales tax hike did.

Gov. Charlie Baker may not be chomping at the bit to entertain straight tax hikes, but the possibility of more comprehensive tax revamp is exactly the reason he refused to take a no-new-taxes pledge in 2014 when he was running for governor, and may be the opening Democrats need to start the debate, if not for now than perhaps the years to come.

STORY OF THE WEEK: Senate President Stan Rosenberg can't initiate taxes, but he can start the discussion.


State House News Service
Monday, April 10, 2017

Budget dynamics gain clarity with release of House's $40 billion plan
By Matt Murphy


Democratic leaders of the Massachusetts House put forward a $40.3 billion spending plan for fiscal 2018 that Ways and Means Chairman Brian Dempsey said focused "first and foremost on the fundamentals" - health care, pensions and local aid.

Increases of $322 million in MassHealth, $198 million for pensions and $164 million for local aid consumed $684 million of just more than $1 billion in projected revenue growth, leaving just one-third of new revenue to spread around to other programs and services.

The House also signed off on Gov. Charlie Baker's controversial employer assessment plan to generate new revenue to cover a shift of workers off employer-sponsored health coverage to MassHealth, but left the details for the administration to work out.

As with all budgets, some interests were pleased with how they fared in the Ways and Means budget, while others were left wanting. The plan landed amidst another period of budget uncertainty with state tax collections trailing estimates this fiscal year by $220 million despite a relatively healthy economy.

Here are some highlights, lowlights and takeaways from those who wrote the budget bill and could be impacted by it:

- THE GOVERNOR'S REACTION: Via Press Secretary Billy Pitman, "The Baker-Polito Administration proposed a balanced budget that protects taxpayers and increases public education investments to historic levels, and while the administration is concerned the House chose to drop a bipartisan proposal to reform welfare, the governor looks forward to working with the legislature to produce a final balanced budget." Pitman was referring to Baker's proposal that would have included supplemental security income (SSI) in the calculation of transitional assistance benefits. SSI is a federal program that provides stipends to low-income people who are either aged 65 or older, blind, or disabled. Baker hoped to save $12.6 million in transitional assistance by making the change.

- WILL IT STAY BALANCED? For the past two years, Gov. Charlie Baker has had to resort to mid-year budget cuts to keep spending in balance with revenues. Currently, revenue projections are trailing estimates by $220 million, making it a possibility that the governor could resort to another round of cuts. And yet with revenues growing by just 1.7 percent over the first nine months of fiscal 2017, House leaders are proposing to increase spending by 3.8 percent. "It's not an exact science," Dempsey noted, indicating that the Legislature and administration picked a revenue projection somewhere in the middle of the range presented by economic expects in December. "When we make these projections we've been correct more than we haven't and we took the mid-point range hoping again that in the current fiscal year we will begin hopefully to see some progress in April and May." Massachusetts Budget and Policy Center President Noah Berger said the House budget is not overly optimistic, but he did not rule out mid-year problems under the plan as proposed. "I think the budget itself and 3.8 percent growth has a reasonably good chance of being sustainable, but the fact that there are some underfunded accounts within that is a little bit troubling," Berger said. Dempsey acknowledged that the House put less funding than Baker into some accounts, such as sheriffs and indigent counsel services, that historically require passage of midyear spending bills to meet demand.

--- TRUST BAKER ON HEALTH CARE: It's somewhat unusual for the Democratic Legislature to defer decisions on major policy specifics to the administration, let alone a Republican administration. But that's what House leadership has done. The House plan leaves Baker free to pursue a new, controverial assessment on employers that don't provide health coverage to a significant number of their workers, which has been identified as a driver in higher Medicaid enrollment expenses. It does not specify the size of the assessment or who it should apply to, but directs the administration to hold public hearings and consider several factors that have been flagged by the business community as troubling with the governor's existing proposal. Dempsey said Baker's "expertise" in the health care arena and the ongoing dialogue with the business community give House leaders reason to believe a consensus can be reached. "I think we're cautiously optimistic that a constructive dialogue will continue between the administration and the business community that will yield a better outcome, whether it's simply considering those factors that we outlined in our document today or whether it be a more viable alternative that's more brady accepted by the business community," Dempsey said.

--- "PROGRESS" ON LOCAL AID: City and town leaders were less than enthusiastic about the levels of local aid proposed in Gov Baker's January budget bill, but Massachusetts Municipal Association Executive Director Geoff Beckwith said he was pleased with what he saw in the House Ways and Means redraft. The budget advanced Monday matched Baker's $40 million increase in unrestricted local aid, and put an additional $15 million into Chapter 70 for local schools, totaling a $106 million increase in fiscal 2018. Beckwith said that the Chapter 70 funding, along with investments in special education and regional school transportation, bring the House education increase to $20 million above Baker's budget. "We know that if this was a budget year with a growing pie that there would be a more accelerated effort to fund education. The fundamental education funding debate has not been resolved, clearly, but the intent of the House is to do as best as they can...," Beckwith said. "Today it's important to recognize that progress was made."

--- AIRBNB TAX NOT READY: The governor proposed a tax on short-term room rentals through websites like Airbnb as part of his budget, but the topic was not touched by House leaders in their proposal. Baker counted on $12 million for fiscal 2018 from the expanded room taxes, but Dempsey said his committee preferred to let bills dealing with the issue wind their way through the process. "I think we wanted to stay away from any potential revenue there," Dempsey said, adding, "First and foremost, it's important for us to get the policy right." Rep. Aaron Michlewitz, who chairs the Financial Services Committee, has filed legislation that would not only implement a tax structure for short-term room rentals, but address insurance requirements and safety precautions.

--- MARIJUANA IMPLEMENTATION: The House Ways and Means budget set aside $4 million for the implementation of the new medical marijuana law, large parts of which have been delayed by six months so that lawmakers can consider ways to change or strengthen the law. Treasurer Deborah Goldberg, whose authority to regulate the new industry may be stripped away and given to another entity, requested $10 million in startup costs. "We usually give everybody about 40 percent of what they ask for," Dempsey joked, before calling the proposed House appropriation a "good starting point" until officials get a better sense of staffing and other needs.

--- MONEY, MONEY, MONEY BILL: While Speaker Robert DeLeo eschewed broad-based tax increases with his budget proposal, there are provisions in the bill that make it a "money bill," opening the door for the Senate to consider taxes next month when it takes a turn producing a budget. The House bill includes a $2,000 tax credit for businesses that hire veterans, as well as reforms to how sales taxes are collected and remitted to the state. "I think we'll see what they do," Dempsey said about the possibility of the Senate adding tax increases to the budget to generate new revenue. Senate President Stanley Rosenberg last week raised the idea of a sales tax on services, which was briefly contemplated and abandoned in the early 1990s. "Any new expansion to something that it is currently not taxed is always a challenge...," Dempsey said. "Personally, I would have some concerns."

--- IMPACT ON COLLEGE TUITION: Public higher education campuses would see minimal increases under the House budget plan. The Ways and Means budget would send an additional $5.1 million to the University of Massachusetts, $2.5 million to state universities, and $2.7 million to community colleges. "We continue to do our very best," Dempsey said, noting that support for UMass increased by $95 million since 2012 as part of an agreement to reach a fifty-fifty funding split between the state and the university. "We're hopeful that all of the campuses will continue to work together to find efficiencies." The Havershill Democrat said he didn't know what impact the House budget plan would have on tuition and fees on public college campuses next year, but said Northern Essex Community College recently had success eliminating programs that had low student enrollment. "That's the kind of work that needs to be done," he said.

--- GOOD AND BAD FOR ENVIRONMENT: Not unlike Gov. Baker's budget proposal, the House spending plan made no progress toward pushing environmental spending closer to the 1 percent of overall spending long sought by activists. Environmental League of Massachusetts Vice President Erica Mattison said the "one bright spot" in the budget was for a "very small program that does very important work" known as the Division of Ecological Restoration. That division within the Department of Fish and Game works on wetland protection and dam removal. "On the other hand, it's disappointing to see the lack of investment continuing with major line items, like the overarching line item for the Department of Environmental Protection and the Department of Conservation and Recreation," Mattison said. Overall, Mattison said the Ways and Means budget would allocate $215 million for environmental programs and agencies, down from $219 million in the fiscal 2017 budget.


The Boston Globe
Tuesday, April 11, 2017

House unveils $40.3 billion state budget
By Priyanka Dayal McCluskey, Joshua Miller and Laura Krantz


House leaders unveiled a $40.3 billion state budget Monday that significantly tempered two controversial plans by Governor Charlie Baker to tackle the cost of health care. Lawmakers slashed his proposed fee on businesses to fund state medical costs, and they rejected a plan to cap the prices charged by hospitals.

The budget proposal comes as state tax revenue has failed to meet projections. It effectively maintains spending levels in many areas, including the University of Massachusetts system, and cuts funding for lawyers for poor defendants.

Like the plan Baker released in January, the House budget calls for a new fee on employers to help pay for the state Medicaid program, which provides health coverage to 1.9 million residents. But House leaders did not detail how their version of the fee would work, saying the Department of Revenue — overseen by Baker — should determine exactly which companies would have to pay and how much.

The House plan would raise an estimated $180 million from employers in the fiscal year that begins July 1, far less than the $300 million proposed by the governor.

Business groups had slammed Baker’s original plan as an unfair and expensive new tax and lobbied hard against it. On Monday, they said they were open to the House proposal for a smaller fee, one that would be implemented after months of public debate.

“It’s clearly a step in the right direction,’’ said James E. Rooney, chief executive of the Greater Boston Chamber of Commerce. “It gives us all more time to craft a solution that is actually more targeted at the problem.”

The House plan also rejected the governor’s effort to impose a tax on people who use short-term rental services like Airbnb from landlords who have a high-volume rental business.

Representative Brian S. Dempsey, the House budget chief, said legislators are examining the issue and hope to address whether short-term rentals should be taxed and regulated like hotels in a more comprehensive bill after hearing further from the public.

The most significant move by House leaders, though, was the dent they want to put in Baker’s attempt to address rising health costs.

Baker’s proposal charged companies $2,000 per worker if they failed to meet a slate of requirements for providing health coverage. He argued the fee would help stem the number of people who are leaving employer-sponsored health insurance because their employer isn’t providing adequate and affordable coverage. The administration says these people are shifting to subsidized coverage under the state Medicaid program, called MassHealth, driving up costs to the state budget.

As MassHealth enrollment has grown, spending on the program has doubled over the past decade and now represents 40 percent of the state budget. About half the costs are paid by the federal government.

In their spending blueprint, House leaders also axed a plan by the governor to rein in health care spending by capping the prices charged by expensive hospitals. Speaker Robert A. DeLeo cast hospitals as crucial to the state’s economy and said they should not be subjected to new cost-control measures at a time when Congress continues to consider repealing and replacing the Affordable Care Act.

Baker had proposed that the most expensive hospitals get no rate increase in insurance payments. Mid-priced health care providers would get a 1 percent increase, and the lowest-priced providers would not see their payments capped. He included a separate measure to limit rates for hospitals that do business with the state Group Insurance Commission, an agency that administers health benefits to public employees and their families.

House leaders did away with all of that.

Hospitals have been lobbying against rate caps, warning that such measures could force them to lay off staff.

“When you’re talking about a cap, you’re talking about a limitation as a result of that cap on nursing staff, you’re talking about limitation as to some of the people who do home-keeping type of services,” said DeLeo, a Winthrop Democrat.

Hospitals welcomed DeLeo’s comments. The Massachusetts Health and Hospital Association “greatly appreciates that the House listened to the concerns of hospitals and approached this budget proposal with caution about its impact on the Massachusetts health care community,” Lynn Nicholas, president of the association, said in a statement.

The House budget also differs slightly from the governor’s plan in several areas related to human services. It proposes $15 million to increase the pay of child-care workers, an issue the speaker has made a priority. That is more than double the amount proposed in the governor’s budget.

The House budget does not include a controversial proposal by the governor to shrink the number of people eligible for a program that provides cash to the state’s neediest families. Baker spokesman Billy Pitman said the administration was concerned the House dropped that welfare “reform” measure.

The state’s 11 district attorneys would see a bump in their budget if the House proposal becomes law. But money for lawyers for poor defendants would be sliced from the more than $230 million expected to be spent this fiscal year to $174 million. (Funding for those lawyers is often supplemented mid-year, so a cut of that size, even if it were to become law, would be unlikely to last.)

In line with the governor’s budget, the House budget proposes a $10.3 million increase for public higher education. But that’s a modest increase of about 1 percent.

The plan comes as the state grapples with flagging tax revenue.

Through March, tax revenues are up just 1.7 percent — about $220 million less than Beacon Hill expected to take in. That could mean more emergency budget-tightening measures from Baker in the coming weeks. And that could impinge on the new budget House leaders are proposing for fiscal year 2018, which begins July 1.

In his January spending plan, Baker proposed several ideas for bringing in additional tax revenue to the state, including more aggressive efforts at collection. The House budget proposal embraces some of those plans.

The House is poised to pass a budget this month. The Senate will then pass its own plan. Differences will be ironed out in a conference committee before a final vote. Baker will likely veto some parts of the budget and sign the rest into law.


The Providence Journal
Wednesday, April 12, 2017

How Massachusetts slashed its car tax
By Chip Faulkner


The call from an irate woman came into the Citizens for Limited Taxation (CLT) office in the summer of 1979. Upon answering the phone, I listened to someone furious over the auto excise bill she had received after moving from the Midwest to Massachusetts. She explained that this tax didn’t exist where she had previously resided.

I explained that Massachusetts has this onerous tax and she had to pay it within 30 days or face a fine. That was the bad news.

The good news was that CLT was preparing to collect signatures that fall for its Proposition 2½ ballot question, which included reducing the auto excise from $66 per $1,000 assessed value to $25 — a 62% reduction.

The main purpose of the ballot question, of course, was the reduction of property taxes. Our ballot question stipulated the every Massachusetts community had to get down to 2½ percent of assessed valuation. Once that level was achieved, then every city and town could increase its property tax levy by not more than 2.5 percent annually. If the taxpayers in any community felt they needed more revenue than the allowable 2.5 percent, their selectmen or city council could schedule a Prop. 2½ override election for any desired increase.

This system exists to this day — 38 years after the ballot question passed by an almost 60-40 % margin.

The irony is that the question may never have even appeared on the ballot if not for that irate caller from the Midwest. She organized a group in the Springfield area which collected a multitude of signatures towards the roughly 100,000 needed to qualify for the 1980 ballot. We achieved the required amount by less than a thousand. It was this woman’s irritation over the auto excise that gave voters the chance to vote for property tax reduction/limitation.

When the late Barbara Anderson, a few other speakers and I fanned out over the state during the fall campaign of 1980 to sell our Proposition 2½ ballot question to the voters, we discovered something startling: Of the several sections within the ballot question, the most popular was the decrease in the auto excise.

Our private polling indicated support for that reduction was close to 80% “Yes” to 12% “No” (with 8% undecided). Armed with these results, we publicized the auto excise part of the ballot question as much as the section dealing with property tax limitation.

The auto excise bill for car-owners is based on the manufacturers’ list price for vehicles in their year of manufacture. It’s not based on market value as commonly believed. The percentage drops in four steps, from a high of 90% down to 10% by the fifth year of ownership.

For example, my 2013 Toyota Scion for which I paid over $20,000 in 2014 had an auto excise bill that year of $362.50. (Thanks to CLT I avoided a bill of $957 that would have been due under the old rate.) My latest bill for 2017 was for $60.

Compared to what Bay State taxpayers shell out for other taxes like income, sales, or property taxes, why the hatred for this particular tax? Much of the reason, I suspect, is because drivers already spend a lot of money to keep a car on the road and the auto excise is just piling on.

First, the 6.25% state sales tax paid when we buy a car is over a thousand dollars if you’re purchasing a vehicle that costs a little over $20,000. On this same car your city or town then socks you with an excise bill for several hundred dollars.

Then there are those nitpicking charges for registering your vehicle and the annual auto inspection fee of $35.

Once finally on the road, a fill-up at the gas pump includes a Massachusetts tax of 26.54 cents per gallon. (Still not as bad as Rhode Islanders who pay 33 cents per gallon — 12th-highest in the nation according to the non-partisan Tax Foundation) Lest I forget, bridge, tunnel, and turnpike tolls are always out there — awaiting your arrival.

The Massachusetts Legislature passed a 3 cents-per-gallon gas tax hike in 2013, but more ominously also tied future increases automatically to inflation. Opponents let the 3 cents increase stand, but headed for the 2014 ballot advocating the elimination of the automatic increases — increases on which the legislature would never have to take another roll call vote.

Finally, as we always suspected and was revealed during the campaign to repeal, Massachusetts had the third-highest highway administrative costs in the nation — $74,000 per highway mile —as well as spending $675,000 per mile on road maintenance — also third-highest in the nation.

The vote to repeal passed with a 53-47% vote, despite its ballot campaign being outspent by the special interests by 30-to-1! Among those advocating for this gas tax increase was — believe it or not — AAA! This allegedly non-partisan national organization shamed itself by its very partisan position on this ballot question.

Victory over the automatic gas tax increase showed that many Bay State car-owners didn’t mind being driven, but nobody likes being taken for a ride.

Chip Faulkner is communications director of Citizens for Limited Taxation.

 

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