Post Office Box 1147  ●  Marblehead, Massachusetts 01945  ●  (781) 639-9709
“Every Tax is a Pay Cut ... A Tax Cut is a Pay Raise”

45 years as “The Voice of Massachusetts Taxpayers”
and their Institutional Memory

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, May 8, 2019

Grad Tax advances; sales tax rollback fallout


With eight hearings on Tuesday's docket, Citizens for Limited Taxation on Monday tried to get the word out early about a topic that's largely fallen out of favor on Beacon Hill: tax cuts.

Saying state spending has soared to nearly $43 billion, an increase of $15 billion in ten years, CLT called for the state to roll back the sales tax rate to 5 percent -- the rate it was at before the Legislature raised it to 6.25 percent in 2009.

"Though rolling back the sales tax is a small recognition for the many sacrifices made by taxpayers to fund all of state government, it would demonstrate a degree of appreciation," CLT wrote in a memo to the Committee on Revenue, adding that it took 207 years for the state to enact its first budget with a bottom line of larger than $10 billion.

Gov. Charlie Baker supported a 5 percent sales tax rate during his first run for governor in 2010 and called for a sales tax cut at the Republican State Convention in 2018. However, the appetite for big tax cuts appears small on Beacon Hill this year, and lawmakers are instead mulling over possible tax increases to make larger investments in transportation and education.

The sales tax reduction bills are sponsored by Senate Minority Leader Bruce Tarr (S 1776) and Rep. Marc Lombardo (H 2545).

State House News Service
Monday, May 6, 2019
CLT: Cut sales tax to show taxpayers some appreciation
By Michael P. Norton


Massachusetts legislators should roll back the state’s sales tax to 5 percent, where it was for decades until the state Legislature increased it in 2009, an anti-tax group says.

The state’s sales tax is currently 6.25 percent, with a 0.75 percent local option that pushes it to 7 percent in some cities and towns.

In 2009, the year the sales tax increased, the state budget was $27.4 billion.

“Spending has increased by 55 percent since then,” Citizens for Limited Taxation said in a written statement, referring to the proposed $42.8 billion budget recently approved by the Massachusetts House of Representatives. “With that amount of revenue (taxpayers’ money) pouring in and being spent as quickly as it arrives, the state can certainly ‘afford’ to roll back the sales tax to 5 percent − and the Legislature certainly *does not* need to confiscate more of taxpayers’ hard-earned income − what remains of it.”

Adjusted for inflation, the 2009 state budget would be worth $32.9 billion in today’s dollars, meaning the House budget approved for next fiscal year would be a 30 percent increase over that figure....

But Citizens for Limited Taxation, which takes a skeptical approach toward taxes and government spending, says legislators are playing a dangerous game.

“Taxes simply cannot continue to be piled upon past tax increases over and over, new taxes devised and imposed in perpetuity, to spend ever more. There is a limit, if Massachusetts is to avoid further crushing productive taxpayers or chasing even more of them out of the commonwealth,” Citizens for Limited Taxation said in the written statement Monday, May 6....

“Though rolling back the sales tax is a small recognition for the many sacrifices made by taxpayers to fund all of state government, it would demonstrate a degree of appreciation,” Citizens for Limited Taxation said in the statement. “We hope that you too will appreciate this is well past due.”

Spokesmen for the House and Senate co-chairmen of the committee could not immediately be reached for comment Monday.

An official with the Massachusetts Budget and Policy Center, which is less skeptical of taxes than Citizens for Limited Taxation, said a sales tax decrease must be paired with a cut in spending or another tax increase.

The New Boston Post
Tuesday, May 7, 2019
Restore Massachusetts Sales Tax To 5 Percent,
Citizens for Limited Taxation Says


Massachusetts taxpayers showered state government with a nearly $1 billion windfall in April, altering state budget dynamics and making it possible for Beacon Hill to at least think about the possibility of a year-end surplus.

The $4.32 billion collected in April represented a $1.02 billion, or nearly 31 percent increase over April 2018 tax receipts and put state government on course to potentially far outpace the collection number that Gov. Charlie Baker and the Legislature used to build this year's $41.7 billion state budget.

With two months left in fiscal 2019, tax collections of $24.5 billion are up 8 percent, or $1.8 billion over the same ten-month period in fiscal 2018 and are running $961 million, or 4.1 percent ahead of the benchmarks that state budget writers have been using to make fiscal ends meet.

The news comes as Beacon Hill Democrats cast about for new tax and revenue sources to fuel their spending desires, especially in the areas of education and transportation.

State House News Service
Saturday, May 4, 2019
April tax receipts surge by more than $1 Billion


April tax revenues came in a whopping $1.02 billion over last year, putting the state on track to end the year with a surplus but prompting a note of caution from the governor, and fiscal watchdogs say the boon is a “one-time” result partly driven by federal tax reform.

“We got a very significant, what I would describe as sort of one-time benefit,” Gov. Charlie Baker told reporters yesterday. “I think we all agree that this will probably mean a more significant deposit to the stabilization fund, which I think we all think is a good thing.” ...

Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation President Eileen McAnneny cautioned that lawmakers shouldn’t “bank on” the surplus just yet.

“Robust revenue collection is a good news story,” McAnneny said. “But given how volatile tax collections have been in recent years, and the possibility that much of this revenue is nonrecurring in nature, now is the time to build our financial resiliency for the future.”

McAnneny said that lawmakers should strengthen the state’s finances and economy with the extra money by paying off current debt or making capital investments in key priorities instead of increasing annual spending on operations, which she said is “unsupported by sustainable tax revenues.”

The Boston Herald
Monday, May 6, 2019
Massachusetts stuffs the coffers with April revenue boost


With tax collections pouring in but Democrats still on the hunt for new revenue, the possibility of repealing tax breaks for specialized industries like aviation or the chance to apply new taxes to unhealthy, sugary drinks dangles like low-hanging fruit before many lawmakers.

But for every tax break or untaxed good that looks ripe for the taking, there is a constituency on the other end worried about the impact a change might have on jobs or the livelihoods of local business owners.

The Joint Committee on Revenue saw that tug-of-war play out Tuesday as members of the committee listened to testimony about legislation proposing to change the way the state applies its 6.25 percent sales tax.

It was the committee's first hearing on tax bills since House Chairman Mark Cusack told his colleagues at the opening of House budget deliberations in late April that his committee planned to get "rocking and rolling" soon, starting the process of holding hearings on tax bills in anticipation of a revenue debate later this year.

State House News Service
Tuesday, May 7, 2019
Tax bills stir soda, trucking, aviation industries


Senate leaders unveiled a $42.7 billion fiscal year 2020 budget proposal on Tuesday, virtually mirroring the total spending figure in the House's budget approved last week but embracing additional revenues the other chamber avoided.

The Senate Ways and Means Committee's proposal calls for a 3.1 percent increase in spending over last year's budget, including what lawmakers describe as a "historic" boost in public education funding, new initiatives to improve mental health and a University of Massachusetts tuition freeze. Those efforts are buoyed by new taxes on opioid manufacturers and vaping products, two ideas backed by Gov. Charlie Baker but eschewed in the House budget.

"Each line item, each number, is much more than just a number," said Senate President Karen Spilka in a briefing about the budget. "It is a statement of the Senate's priorities and our values and what we hold dear."

The Ways and Means Committee planned to formally advance the budget in an executive session Tuesday afternoon. Senators can file amendments until Friday, May 10 at 12 p.m., and the full chamber will launch its annual string of formal sessions to debate the budget starting Tuesday, May 21....

The Ways and Means Committee's budget does not include $35 million in not-yet-legal sports betting revenue that Baker projected, but — unlike the House, which adopted a set of rules banning any sports-gambling amendments during this year's budget process — Rodrigues said senators will be allowed to debate the topic.

The Senate budget does impose a 15 percent tax on opioid manufacturers for sales dispensed in Massachusetts and a 75 percent tax on wholesale prices of e-cigarettes and related products.

"We feel that these two revenue proposals are very much a component of the public purpose of what we are raising the revenues for, i.e. substance abuse treatment, i.e., public health," Rodrigues said. "We think there is adequate revenues in the state's coffers without raising new revenues to fully invest in our priorities."

While the initial budget proposal only includes those specific taxes, Rodrigues said any other revenue amendments that senators want to pursue "will be open to discussion." ...

The Senate is likely to use a consolidation process similar to the House to bundle amendments on similar topics, but leaders do not plan to block anything from coming to the chamber floor, Rodrigues said.

"We're not going to rule anything out of order," he said. "The Senate will debate any and all amendments that members should happen to file, unless it's completely, totally out of order. But we're not going to use any sort of discretionary decisions to stifle debate."

State House News Service
Tuesday, May 7, 2019
Senate includes opiod, vaping taxes in $42.7 Bil budget


Chip Ford's CLT Commentary

CLT's news release on Monday ("Yes on S-1776 and H-2545 Roll Back the Sales Tax to 5%"), chock full of historical data on metastasizing state budget spending, got significant attention.  Beside the (above) news reports, I was called by Alan Zarek for an extensive interview on his Fall River WSAR AM-1480 program, "Newsroom" at noon.  Then Howie Carr quoted CLT's historic budget figures on his WRKO program while speaking with Rep. Marc Lombardo on his bill to roll back the sales tax to 5%.

Sadly, few if any expect to see the sales tax reduced this year, if ever.  Legislators are too consumed with ways to increase taxes and revenue so they can spend ever more.

This is despite the shocking revenue numbers released over the weekend from last month.  Total revenues for April came in at over a Billion dollars more than last April's take, just a year ago.  A Billion dollars more but More Is Never Enough (MINE) and in Massachusetts never will be.

Today the House and Senate very briefly met jointly in Constitutional Convention to consider the sixth attempt at a graduated income tax (seventh if you count last year's attempt, thrown out by the state Supreme Judicial Court).  I was watching the session just now but the vote happened so fast I must have blinked.  The State House News Service just reported:

"House and Senate Democrats resurrected a proposed income surtax on wealthy residents Wednesday, voting 156-37 to advance the proposed millionaire tax constitutional amendment (H 86).  Further consideration of the proposal is expected when the Constitutional Convention returns from recess on June 12."

They're looking to squeeze another Two Billion dollars from "millionaires" for now.  They'll come for everyone else soon after if they can shatter that constitutional barricade that requires all tax rates be equal among taxpayers.  The Takers have long lusted for that breach of John Adams' oldest still-functioning written constitution in effect in the world.

The state Senate released its budget yesterday, totaling $42.7 Billion same as the House, but with different spending priorities.  The Senate included taxes in its budget.  Does the Senate now presume the House budget to be a "money bill" open to Senate additions of more and new taxes when they start debating it on May 21?

We were afraid of this . . .

Chip Ford
Executive Director


 

The New Boston Post
Tuesday, May 7, 2019

Restore Massachusetts Sales Tax To 5 Percent, Citizens for Limited Taxation Says
By Matt McDonald


Massachusetts legislators should roll back the state’s sales tax to 5 percent, where it was for decades until the state Legislature increased it in 2009, an anti-tax group says.

The state’s sales tax is currently 6.25 percent, with a 0.75 percent local option that pushes it to 7 percent in some cities and towns.

In 2009, the year the sales tax increased, the state budget was $27.4 billion.

“Spending has increased by 55 percent since then,” Citizens for Limited Taxation said in a written statement, referring to the proposed $42.8 billion budget recently approved by the Massachusetts House of Representatives. “With that amount of revenue (taxpayers’ money) pouring in and being spent as quickly as it arrives, the state can certainly ‘afford’ to roll back the sales tax to 5 percent − and the Legislature certainly *does not* need to confiscate more of taxpayers’ hard-earned income − what remains of it.”

Adjusted for inflation, the 2009 state budget would be worth $32.9 billion in today’s dollars, meaning the House budget approved for next fiscal year would be a 30 percent increase over that figure.

Democrats in the state Legislature have recently been discussing ways to increase taxes, not ways to decrease them.

But Citizens for Limited Taxation, which takes a skeptical approach toward taxes and government spending, says legislators are playing a dangerous game.

“Taxes simply cannot continue to be piled upon past tax increases over and over, new taxes devised and imposed in perpetuity, to spend ever more. There is a limit, if Massachusetts is to avoid further crushing productive taxpayers or chasing even more of them out of the commonwealth,” Citizens for Limited Taxation said in the written statement Monday, May 6.

The statement is billed as a memo to the Massachusetts Legislature’s Joint Committee on Revenue, which consists of state representatives and state senators.

“Though rolling back the sales tax is a small recognition for the many sacrifices made by taxpayers to fund all of state government, it would demonstrate a degree of appreciation,” Citizens for Limited Taxation said in the statement. “We hope that you too will appreciate this is well past due.”

Spokesmen for the House and Senate co-chairmen of the committee could not immediately be reached for comment Monday.

An official with the Massachusetts Budget and Policy Center, which is less skeptical of taxes than Citizens for Limited Taxation, said a sales tax decrease must be paired with a cut in spending or another tax increase.

“Because Massachusetts needs to balance its budget, any responsible proposals to reduce revenue should also specify which public spending would have to be reduced or what new taxes would take the place of the lost revenue,” said Phineas Baxandall, senior policy analyst at the Massachusetts Budget and Policy Center, in a written statement through a spokesman.

Bills have been filed in the House and Senate to reduce the sales tax to 5 percent.

One is House Bill 2545, sponsored by state Representative Marc Lombardo (R-Billerica), which would reduce the sales tax to 5 percent immediately. It has a total of two sponsors among the 200 state legislators. The other one is state Representative Shaunna O’Connell (R-Taunton).

Another is Senate Bill 1776, sponsored by state Senator Bruce Tarr (R-Gloucester), which would decrease the sales tax to 5.8 percent on August 1, 2019, then to 5.4 percent on August 1, 2020, then to 5 percent on August 1, 2021. It has a total of three sponsors among the 200 state legislators. The other two are state Senator Donald E. Humason Jr. (R-Westfield) and State Representative David DeCoste (R-Norwell).


State House News Service
Saturday, May 4, 2019

April tax receipts surge by more than $1 Billion
By Michael P. Norton


Massachusetts taxpayers showered state government with a nearly $1 billion windfall in April, altering state budget dynamics and making it possible for Beacon Hill to at least think about the possibility of a year-end surplus.

The $4.32 billion collected in April represented a $1.02 billion, or nearly 31 percent increase over April 2018 tax receipts and put state government on course to potentially far outpace the collection number that Gov. Charlie Baker and the Legislature used to build this year's $41.7 billion state budget.

With two months left in fiscal 2019, tax collections of $24.5 billion are up 8 percent, or $1.8 billion over the same ten-month period in fiscal 2018 and are running $961 million, or 4.1 percent ahead of the benchmarks that state budget writers have been using to make fiscal ends meet.

The news comes as Beacon Hill Democrats cast about for new tax and revenue sources to fuel their spending desires, especially in the areas of education and transportation. State officials are embarking on a multi-year plan to ramp up K-12 education spending, an effort Baker says does not require new taxes, and Democrats are restarting their push for a 4 percent income surtax on households with annual incomes above $1 million.

The revenues for April, the biggest month of the year for collections, were announced early Friday evening, hours after the federal government announced that U.S. employers added 263,000 new jobs in April, beating the average monthly gain of 213,000 over the past 12 months.

Analyzing the collections, state revenue officials said individual income tax withholding and sales taxes, which account for about 70 percent of annual tax revenues, poured in at levels close to monthly benchmarks, with almost all of the big gains coming in three "historically volatile categories."

Revenue from non-withheld income, which officials say reflects taxes due for 2018 but received in fiscal 2019, are running $336 million above benchmark. Corporate taxes are eclipsing benchmarks by $473 million, which the revenue department attributes in part to federal tax changes and repatriation. Estate tax payments are running 38 percent above benchmarks, or $142 million year to date.

"The strong results in April offset the shortfall in estimated payments that we experienced in December and January, because we believe many taxpayers opted to make their payments with returns and extensions during the April filing season," Revenue Commissioner Christopher Harding said in a statement, cautioning that the patterns "cannot be relied upon to repeat" and observing that categories of revenues that rose sharply can also fall.

Only three months ago, as collections fell well shy of December and January benchmarks, receipts were running 2.4 percent lower than projections and were up only 1.3 percent over actual collections for the first seven months of fiscal 2018. Collections in January fell 6 percent compared to January 2018.

While a small percentage of overall collections, receipts associated with motor vehicle sales in April were up nearly 30 percent over April 2018.


The Boston Herald
Monday, May 6, 2019

Massachusetts stuffs the coffers with April revenue boost
By Mary Markos


April tax revenues came in a whopping $1.02 billion over last year, putting the state on track to end the year with a surplus but prompting a note of caution from the governor, and fiscal watchdogs say the boon is a “one-time” result partly driven by federal tax reform.

“We got a very significant, what I would describe as sort of one-time benefit,” Gov. Charlie Baker told reporters yesterday. “I think we all agree that this will probably mean a more significant deposit to the stabilization fund, which I think we all think is a good thing.”

Revenue collections for April totaled $4.323 billion, a level $942 million over the revised monthly benchmark, and $1.019 billion more than the actual collections in April 2018, according to the Department of Revenue. The money puts the state on track to surpass the collection number that Baker and the Legislature used to build this year’s $41.7 billion state budget.

Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation President Eileen McAnneny cautioned that lawmakers shouldn’t “bank on” the surplus just yet.

“Robust revenue collection is a good news story,” McAnneny said. “But given how volatile tax collections have been in recent years, and the possibility that much of this revenue is nonrecurring in nature, now is the time to build our financial resiliency for the future.”

McAnneny said that lawmakers should strengthen the state’s finances and economy with the extra money by paying off current debt or making capital investments in key priorities instead of increasing annual spending on operations, which she said is “unsupported by sustainable tax revenues.”

Corporate and business tax revenue is also up more than $91 million from April 2018. Some portion of this surplus is likely from corporate dividend repatriation, a component of federal tax reform that is one-time in nature, according to the MTF and the DOR.

Baker said the state’s revenue situation is “consistent with what other states are telling us under federal tax reform.” But he noted that the two core elements that drive 70% of the tax revenue — individual income tax withholding and sales tax — is about 1% over benchmark.

“I would rather have the true-up be to the commonwealth’s benefit as opposed to have the true-up be in the other direction because I’ve seen that,” Baker said. “When it’s on the other side, it creates terrible dislocation for everybody toward the end of the year.”


State House News Service
Tuesday, May 7, 2019

Tax bills stir soda, trucking, aviation industries
By Matt Murphy


With tax collections pouring in but Democrats still on the hunt for new revenue, the possibility of repealing tax breaks for specialized industries like aviation or the chance to apply new taxes to unhealthy, sugary drinks dangles like low-hanging fruit before many lawmakers.

But for every tax break or untaxed good that looks ripe for the taking, there is a constituency on the other end worried about the impact a change might have on jobs or the livelihoods of local business owners.

The Joint Committee on Revenue saw that tug-of-war play out Tuesday as members of the committee listened to testimony about legislation proposing to change the way the state applies its 6.25 percent sales tax.

It was the committee's first hearing on tax bills since House Chairman Mark Cusack told his colleagues at the opening of House budget deliberations in late April that his committee planned to get "rocking and rolling" soon, starting the process of holding hearings on tax bills in anticipation of a revenue debate later this year.

"Every year our state loses millions of dollars in revenue to special tax breaks, and while some of these are useful to achieving our economic or policy goals, there is no rationale for reducing or exempting taxes on specific luxury goods," said Rep. Tami Gouveia, an Acton Democrat.

Gouveia has filed legislation to repeal the sales tax exemption for aircraft, which she said could net the state an additional $20 million a year. And Sen. Adam Hinds, the co-chair of the Revenue Committee who is also leading a Senate examination of the tax code, said the exemption is often held up to him as an example of the "incoherence" of the state's tax policies.

But Sean Collins, regional manager of the Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association, said the aviation industry is intertwined into everything from medical transports to wildlife management, and the tax exemption helps support thousands of jobs, mainly in aircraft maintenance.

If the tax exemption was repealed, "we would see a gradual loss of jobs," Collins warned, telling the panel that pilots can fly to any number of states within 30 minutes where they won't have to pay a tax on parts or labor.

Facing the opposite problem, advocates for the trucking industry showed up to testify in support of bills (H 2517/S 1759) filed by Senate Ways and Means Chairman Michael Rodrigues and House Minority Leader Brad Jones that would stop taxing "rolling stock," or the trucks used to transport goods across state lines.

Steve Normandin, president of the Truckers Association of Massachusetts, said 93 percent of all goods spend time on a truck, and that number is only getting higher with the rise of online retail. The exemption for rolling stock, however, was repealed in 1996, and the Department of Revenue currently collects between $9 million and $13 million a year, though Normandin admitted the tax is "not collected consistently or widely."

Ed Rodricks, also with the Truckers Association, said by restoring the exemption the Legislature would put Massachusetts on more competitive footing and in line with 37 others states. The money saved, he said, would allow trucking companies to invest in newer vehicles that are more fuel efficient and expel fewer carbon emissions.

The opportunity to reduce carbon emissions wasn't the only public health benefit being touted as a possibility through changes to the tax code.

Health advocates, including representatives from the Joslin Diabetes Center and the American Heart Association, were back at the State House making their case for taxing sodas and other sugary drinks.

The latest proposal, filed by Rep. Kay Khan, would apply a three-tiered tax structure to sugary drinks, with beverages with the most sugar, such as Coca-Cola, facing a 24-cent per can tax.

"If you could do one thing to dramatically improve the health of the people of Massachusetts, it would be to enact a sugary drink tax," said David Martin, CEO of the Massachusetts Health Council.

Several doctors linked high-sugar sodas and other drinks to increases in childhood obesity and diabetes, and Allyson Perron, of the American Heart Association, said the money raised through the tax could be put into programs that would make water and other healthy alternatives more accessible at schools.

The idea of a tax on soda, which former Gov. Deval Patrick pushed unsuccessfully almost every year he was in office, was once again opposed by convenience store operators and beverage manufacturers.

Jon Shaer, the executive director of the New England Convenience Store and Energy Marketers Association, said a provision in the bill that would put the onus for collecting the tax on retailers if distributors fail to pay would be unfair because there is no way for a store owner to verify if the tax had been paid.

Bree Dietly, a partner at Northbridge Group and representative of the American Beverage Association, also said it would push sales over the border and lead to a $700 million loss in retail sales around the state.

Citing the example of Philadelphia and that city's soda tax, Dietly said, "People just moved somewhere else to do their shopping. That doesn't convey any health benefits."

Rep. Randy Hunt, a Sandwich Republican and accountant, peppered proponents with similar questions about how the tax would be enforced, and suggested the proposal needed more work.

Hunt also asked Shaer whether the tax would lead store owners to stock their shelves with more healthy alternatives.

"Possibly," Shaer said. "At the end of the day, retailers are going to sell what sells."


State House News Service
Tuesday, May 7, 2019

Senate includes opiod, vaping taxes in $42.7 Bil budget
By Chris Lisinski


Senate leaders unveiled a $42.7 billion fiscal year 2020 budget proposal on Tuesday, virtually mirroring the total spending figure in the House's budget approved last week but embracing additional revenues the other chamber avoided.

The Senate Ways and Means Committee's proposal calls for a 3.1 percent increase in spending over last year's budget, including what lawmakers describe as a "historic" boost in public education funding, new initiatives to improve mental health and a University of Massachusetts tuition freeze. Those efforts are buoyed by new taxes on opioid manufacturers and vaping products, two ideas backed by Gov. Charlie Baker but eschewed in the House budget.

"Each line item, each number, is much more than just a number," said Senate President Karen Spilka in a briefing about the budget. "It is a statement of the Senate's priorities and our values and what we hold dear."

The Ways and Means Committee planned to formally advance the budget in an executive session Tuesday afternoon. Senators can file amendments until Friday, May 10 at 12 p.m., and the full chamber will launch its annual string of formal sessions to debate the budget starting Tuesday, May 21.

Matching projections in the House budget, Senate leaders anticipate about $133 million in revenue from marijuana sales and $294 million in revenue from casino and slots gaming. Overall, though, the Ways and Means Committee, under the leadership of new Chairman Michael Rodrigues, was more willing to pursue new forms of revenue than its colleagues in the House were.

The Ways and Means Committee's budget does not include $35 million in not-yet-legal sports betting revenue that Baker projected, but — unlike the House, which adopted a set of rules banning any sports-gambling amendments during this year's budget process — Rodrigues said senators will be allowed to debate the topic.

The Senate budget does impose a 15 percent tax on opioid manufacturers for sales dispensed in Massachusetts and a 75 percent tax on wholesale prices of e-cigarettes and related products.

"We feel that these two revenue proposals are very much a component of the public purpose of what we are raising the revenues for, i.e. substance abuse treatment, i.e., public health," Rodrigues said. "We think there is adequate revenues in the state's coffers without raising new revenues to fully invest in our priorities."

While the initial budget proposal only includes those specific taxes, Rodrigues said any other revenue amendments that senators want to pursue "will be open to discussion."

One key area of spending in the proposal is on elementary and secondary education. Senate leaders proposed $5.176 billion in Chapter 70 education aid to municipalities, a $268 million increase over the current budget and more than $50 million higher than what the House approved last month. The budget also calls for a $25 million increase in special education funding and a $10 million increase in charter school reimbursements.

Although the budget does not completely overhaul the outdated foundation budget formula used to determine how much each city and town receives in education funding, Rodrigues said the additional money will work as a "down payment" toward implementation of reforms recommended by a state commission. The Joint Committee on Education is currently weighing several different bills aimed at revamping the system.

"This deposit, this down payment will work along with what they're looking at," Rodrigues said.

On Wednesday, the mayors and school officials from Brockton, New Bedford and Worcester plan to hold a briefing in Boston on the "severe education challenges facing Massachusetts' Gateway Cities, the need for legislative action, and an update on the possibility of a lawsuit." The municipal officials will be joined by attorneys who are working with those cities and other education experts to provide a report on school conditions, potential legislative action and to answer questions about a possible lawsuit.

The Ways and Means Committee's budget includes language mandating that University of Massachusetts in-state tuition and fees remain flat next year. However, the proposal matches the House and Baker budgets in funding the system at $558 million, effectively ignoring testimony from UMass President Marty Meehan last week that said a tuition freeze would require another $10 million.

Following an announcement Spilka made last month, the budget proposal targets mental health as an important focus, allocating almost $900 million at various services. About $3 million in new funding would go to diversion efforts to move people with substance-abuse disorders and critical mental health needs from the criminal justice system into treatment programs, while another $3.5 million would be allocated to help open five recovery centers.

Senate leaders also called for a new $10 million mental health trust fund, which would both launch a public awareness campaign aimed at reducing stigma and create a program to forgive student-loan debt for behavioral health care workers.

An outside section to the budget proposal imposes a one-year time limit on so-called "clawbacks," limiting the ability of insurance companies to retroactively deny mental health claims.

The Senate's budget proposal hews more closely to Baker's approach on prescription drug pricing than to the House's. Like those, the Senate leadership version allows MassHealth to negotiate costs directly with pharmaceutical manufacturers, but companies could have input on what details they are asked to provide and the Health Policy Commission would be required to accept it.

If state officials feel a manufacturer is withholding information, a case could still be referred to the attorney general's office, but the Senate version implements an appeals process with an administrative law judge before that stage. The HPC would be allowed to make public its proposal for the price of a drug it is negotiating, and the state auditor would be directed to investigate how to increase transparency related to pharmacy benefit managers.

The budget also invests $15 million in nursing home stabilization in the wake of several closures and calls for creation of a task force to study the issue and complete a report by Nov. 30 on how to protect seniors from industry upheaval.

The Senate is likely to use a consolidation process similar to the House to bundle amendments on similar topics, but leaders do not plan to block anything from coming to the chamber floor, Rodrigues said.

"We're not going to rule anything out of order," he said. "The Senate will debate any and all amendments that members should happen to file, unless it's completely, totally out of order. But we're not going to use any sort of discretionary decisions to stifle debate."

 

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    (781) 639-9709

BACK TO CLT HOMEPAGE