 |
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 — |
|
CLT UPDATE
Wednesday, June 19, 2019
Billions
more is 'Not enough yet'
|
House and Senate held a Constitutional
convention and approved 145-48, (House approved 112-43,
Senate approved 33-5), a proposed constitutional amendment
that would allow a graduated income tax in Massachusetts and
impose an additional 4 percent income tax, in addition to
the current flat 5.1 percent one, on taxpayers' earnings of
more than $1 million. Language in the amendment requires
that "subject to appropriation" the revenue will go to fund
quality public education, affordable public colleges and
universities, and for the repair and maintenance of roads,
bridges and public transportation....
"Another election must intervene before the
second and final vote occurs, in the 2021-22 legislative
session, before this constitutional amendment can appear on
the 2022 statewide ballot for voters to ultimately decide,"
said Chip Ford, executive director of Citizens for
Limited Taxation. "Though in Massachusetts it's highly
unlikely, there remains a distant possibility that a
turnover in the Legislature in the 2020 election can derail
this abomination. Unfortunately, Massachusetts being 'The
Bluest State,' pigs will likely need to fly first and Hell
freeze over."
Beacon Hill Roll Call
Saturday, June 15, 2019
Constitutional convention approves millionaires tax
[Excerpt]
By Bob Katzen
Massachusetts legislators approved the
“millionaire tax” without a single adjustment, voting down
amendments that would specify that the new money be spent on
what proponents of the measure have said it will be spent on
— education and transportation.
“This question is about a bait-and-switch.
It’s about raising money,” Minority Leader Rep. Bradley
Jones (R-North Reading) told the Herald, “and then we will
spend it however we damn well please.” ...
Rep. Marc Lombardo (R-Billerica) noted that
the voters have rejected a graduated income tax six times,
that the state took in $1.1 billion in extra revenue in 2018
and referenced a Herald report that found almost $3 billion
has gone uncollected.
“Massachusetts does not have a revenue
problem. Massachusetts has a spending and a priority
problem,” Lombardo said. “We need reform in our spending, in
our priorities and not a divisive class warfare tax
increase.”
The Boston Herald
Thursday, June 13, 2019
Massachusetts millionaire tax proposal moves forward
minus amendments to earmark funds
The Massachusetts Legislature on Wednesday
passed a constitutional amendment to raise taxes on income
over $1 million, the first step in a process that will take
until 2022.
It is, in effect, a do-over of the last
three-year battle over the “millionaire’s tax,” which ended
in 2018 when the proposed constitutional amendment was
struck down by the Supreme Judicial Court before it went on
the ballot.
“We’re like junkyard dogs. We don’t give up.
We are back,” said Lew Finfer, an organizer with Raise Up
Massachusetts, the coalition of labor, religious and
community groups pushing for the amendment.
The vote was 147-48. The vote was mostly
along party lines, with Democrats supporting the amendment
and Republicans opposing it.
The Springfield Republican
Thursday, June 13, 2019
Massachusetts Legislature — again — passes
constitutional amendment to create ‘millionaire’s tax’
State Rep. Marc T Lombardo, R-Billerica,
opposed a renewed effort to amend the state Constitution by
creating a graduated income tax.
According to a release from Lombardo’s
office, the so-called “Millionaires Tax” – which is being
billed by proponents as an opportunity to boost spending on
education and transportation – does not include sufficient
safeguards to ensure the money raised will actually result
in any significant funding increases in these two areas. He
also expressed concerns about creating a two-tiered tax
system....
To ensure that current state spending in
these areas is not diverted for other purposes, Lombardo
supported an amendment stipulating any revenues generated by
the surtax will be used “in addition to and not in lieu of
funds” that are already being appropriated for education and
transportation. That amendment failed on a vote of 40-156.
Lombardo also expressed concerns about the
Legislature’s ability to revisit the surtax if it does not
work out as planned. By placing language in the state
Constitution, any effort to repeal the surtax would have to
go through a time-consuming four-year process that would
prevent any repeal question from appearing on the state
ballot until November of 2026 at the earliest.
Lombardo also noted that the amendment calls
for the new revenues to be used “for quality public
education and affordable public colleges and universities,”
but does not define what actually constitutes a “quality”
education, or an “affordable” education. This ambiguity
could open the Commonwealth to costly litigation moving
forward.
According to Lombardo, the commonwealth
doesn’t have a revenue problem but rather a spending and
priority problem. Massachusetts collected $1.1 billion in
revenues surplus last year all while the state spends over
$2 billion annually for benefits for illegal immigrants.
MassHealth’s line item has more than doubled in the last 10
years, now consuming more than 40 percent of the state
budget.
“It’s time for reforms in state government,
not unfair and divisive class warfare tax increases” said
Lombardo.
The Billerica Minuteman
Friday, June 14, 2019
Billerica’s Rep. Lombardo opposes effort to institute
graduated income tax
It’s not about raising taxes, you must
understand. It’s about investments — investments in the
future.
That’s what the greed-crazed hacks at the
State House always say whenever they’re talking about
robbing you … I mean, investing in the future.
The kleptocrats on Beacon Hill were up to
their old tricks again last week, taking the initial steps
toward an 80% hike in the “millionaire tax.” But the next
day, they instantly gave away the game when we discovered
what the Democrats really care about “investing” your
hard-earned money in....
In the debate over the so-called millionaire
tax on Beacon Hill last week, the moonbats repeated over and
over again that the additional billions would only be spent
on “education” and infrastructure, which of course they
described as crumbling.
OK, said the outnumbered Republicans. Would
the leadership be willing to put that in writing — that none
of the extra money will be spent on, say, paying for the
lawyers of criminal state judges, or another three dozen or
so associate deputy vice chancellors at UMass?
Oh no, the handful of pro-taxpayer solons
were told, we can’t assure you of anything like that. But
what’s the problem, we’re just talking about … investments.
What the hacks want to do is tack on an
additional 4% tax on any income over $1 million, thus, the
“millionaire tax.” Of course it won’t work, it never has in
any of the other states that have tried it. So as revenue
falls, and taxpayers flee, everyone’s taxes will go up … and
up … and up....
The Boston Herald
Saturday, June 15, 2019
Hacks invested in protecting their own
By Howie Carr
While a conference committee weighs the
idea, more than 100 municipal chief executives wrote to the
House speaker and Senate president Wednesday asking that
part of any potential fiscal year 2019 budget surplus be
transferred to help the Community Preservation Act
program....
Though the House and Senate budget both
authorized an increase in CPA funding starting next year,
the conference committee is considering whether to include
in the final budget the Senate's authorization of a transfer
up to $20 million from any potential fiscal 2019 surplus to
help towns that have adopted the CPA before the new funding
is available in 2020....
The idea of the CPA was for the state to
match 100 percent of what each participating municipality
raised through its own property tax surcharge to preserve
open space, renovate historic buildings and parks and to
build new playgrounds and athletic fields. But as more
communities adopt the CPA, each town's share of the pie has
become smaller.
The Senate last month followed the House's
lead and voted to raise the fees that are used to fund the
Community Preservation Act in hopes of making what is
supposed to be a state-local partnership more equitable. The
Senate voted 38-2 to increase the recording fees that feed
the CPA Trust Fund from $20 to $50 for most documents and
from $10 to $25 for municipal lien certificates, a change
that the Community Preservation Coalition estimates will
provide the trust fund with an infusion of $36 million in
new money each year. The House did the same in its budget in
April.
State House News Service
Thursday, June 13, 2019
Muni leaders want piece of surplus
Governor Charlie Baker on Tuesday promoted
his plan to sharply increase taxes on real estate transfers
to generate $1 billion for cities and towns to confront
climate change, telling lawmakers the revenue would help
“make important investments in cost-effective and
data-driven solutions.”
The bill would raise the tax on real estate
transfers by 50 percent, with revenue going toward
infrastructure and climate resiliency programs.
“Our role is not only to protect our own
communities, but to develop solutions and policy approaches
that can be shared outside the borders of our Commonwealth,”
Baker said in testimony before the Legislature’s Joint
Committee on Revenue.
The Republican governor filed the measure as
part of his state budget proposal in January and has said
the tax increase could raise about $137 million a year
toward a trust fund. The money would help cities and towns
fund projects like modernizing public buildings or improving
drainage....
The proposal would raise the transfer tax
from $2 per $500 of value to $3 per $500 of value, which
would tack on almost $1,200 in additional taxes to the sale
of a $500,000 home. Sellers would take on those costs.
“This increase provides a sustainable,
dedicated funding revenue stream that will be available to
invest directly in local and state climate change work, year
after year, without further appropriation,” Baker testified.
House Speaker Robert DeLeo, a Suffolk
Democrat, has also proposed a bill aimed at building
renewable-energy infrastructure and funding resiliency
programs to combat climate change. Representative Thomas
Golden filed the bill in the House.
Golden’s bill would draw the proposed $1
billion from state bonds and create a grant program in which
cities and towns could apply for funds to go toward
climate-conscious projects.
The bill also calls for allocating $295
million for energy infrastructure. The effort could include
funding electric vehicles for municipal fleets and systems
aimed at increasing the resiliency of the power grid.
Golden, a Lowell Democrat, said he was
confident both parties could collaborate and agree on a
single bill.
The Boston Globe
Tuesday, June 18, 2019
Baker touts climate resiliency bill in testimony before
lawmakers
The governor and the speaker of the House --
two of Beacon Hill's most powerful figures -- saw their
competing proposals to spend $1 billion or more over the
next decade fighting the effects of climate change go
head-to-head Tuesday for the attention of lawmakers.
Gov. Charlie Baker's bill would raise the
state's real estate transfer tax to generate as much as $137
million a year to help cities and towns prepare for and
adjust to climate change, while Speaker Robert DeLeo's bill
would borrow the money.
The contrasting approaches to the same
problem will create a choice for legislators over the coming
months, but on Tuesday it was welcome friction for
environmental advocates who relished the focus on climate
issues....
Baker's plan is to generate new revenue to
help cities and towns address their climate vulnerabilities
by raising the state's deeds excise from $2.28 to $3.42 for
every $500 of the price of a property sale. The money would
go into a Global Warming Solutions Trust Fund created last
year as part of a $2.4 billion bond bill, and augment the
work already being done through the Municipal Vulnerability
Preparedness program.
DeLeo's bill, filed by Telecommunications,
Utilities and Energy Committee House Chair Thomas Golden,
would create the GreenWorks infrastructure program and
allocate $1 billion over 10 years. Communities could apply
for grants through the Executive Office of Energy and
Environmental Affairs to fund installation of solar grids,
electric vehicle charging stations, resiliency
infrastructure and more....
Baker said he proposed to create an
"expendable trust" because it allows more flexibility than
borrowing would in how the money is used. For instance,
Baker said trust fund money from a real estate tax could be
combined with private money or federal money to pay for
multi-year projects or spent to protect private property,
such as privately-owned dams.
Borrowed money, Baker said, has "very
defined terms in state finance law with respect to what you
can use it for."...
A coalition of environmental and community
groups urged the Revenue Committee to consider doubling
Baker's real estate transfer tax and split the funding
between climate change preparedness and affordable housing.
"Our bold new Coalition reflects the broad
consensus throughout the Commonwealth that we need to take
immediate, comprehensive, and significant action to address
both our housing crisis and climate crisis," said Joe
Kriesberg, president of the Massachusetts Association of
Community Development Corporations....
Greg Vasil of the Greater Boston Real Estate
Board and Jonathan Schreiber of the Massachusetts
Association of Realtors testified together on DeLeo's plan,
which Schreiber said "provides the best avenue to fund and
operate climate resiliency programs in the commonwealth."
"Everyone will feel the negative effects of
climate change, therefore everyone should contribute to
remedying the problem," Schreiber said. "Contrary to Senate
Bill 10, paying for this ubiquitous problem should not rest
solely on the backs of home buyers and sellers."...
Rep. Mark Cusack, the co-chair of the
Revenue Committee, asked the governor if all of the funding
generated under Baker's bill would be used for competitive
grants. Theoharides told him that the bill was "agnostic" on
that issue, but the administration envisions a mix of grants
and loans. Baker also told Cusack that he would be open to
discussing whether the lawmakers wanted to create specific
buckets of funding for different types of projects to
preserve the Legislature's appropriating authority.
Baker told Co-Chair Sen. Adam Hinds he
didn't know how the $1 billion in estimated revenue over 10
years stacked up against the need in cities and towns, but
offered to come back before the committee in the fall to
provide an update as the administration gets deeper into the
resiliency planning process with cities and towns.
"I don't see us ever getting out of the
business of doing this," Baker said.
State House News Service
Wednesday, June 18, 2019
Climate bills hinge on $1 Bil in taxes, or borrowing
The state's "rainy day" fund has eclipsed
the $2.6 billion mark, according to the Baker
administration, growing by more than $1 billion in less than
five years fueled by growth in tax collections on capital
gains income.
Revenue Commissioner Christopher Harding
wrote a letter to state Comptroller Andrew Maylor on Tuesday
certifying that capital gains revenues for the fiscal year
through May totaled more than $1.8 billion, resulting in a
transfer of $636 million to the stabilization fund.
The transfer is made automatically, under
state law, based on capital gains revenues collected in
excess of $1.2 billion. About $64 million of the money being
transferred will be split and used to pay down the state's
pension and other post-retirement benefit obligations....
Through May, tax revenues for the fiscal
year were running $952 million ahead of estimates used to
the build the state budget, creating anticipation for an
end-of-year surplus that Gov. Charlie Baker and the
Legislature will have to decide how to spend....
The stabilization fund hit its previous high
with a $2.33 billion balance in fiscal 2007, when the state
budget was about $25.2 billion. The fiscal 2019 budget
signed by Gov. Baker last July authorized about $41.2
billion in spending.
Click above image/graph
to enlarge
End-of-fiscal-year balances of
the state's "rainy day" fund,
from fiscal 1986 to the projected close of fiscal 2019.
[Comptroller's Office; ANF]
State House News Service
Tuesday, June 18, 2019
Big deposit pushes rainy day fund past $2.6 Billion
Beacon Hill is approaching the six-month
mark in the Legislature's two-year session sitting on a
potentially fat budget surplus, still mired in uncertainty
over education and transportation challenges ...
To help address two of those problems (MBTA
unreliability and school funding) the House and Senate voted
147-48 in favor of increasing taxes on people earning over
$1 million....
The margin for the so-called "millionaires
tax" well exceeded the 101 votes needed to advance the
constitutional amendment to the next session in 2021-2022,
but for some that timeline just doesn't work.
After the Supreme Judicial Court last summer
invalidated a basically identical surtax proposal and
stopped it from going on the ballot, the four-year wait to
try again means four more years without additional
revenue....
House Speaker Robert DeLeo reiterated his
intention not to wait that long, writing on Facebook that
"in the coming months the House will debate a comprehensive
package of revenue enhancements that will allow us to more
immediately invest in infrastructure and other programs -
prior to voters making a decision on the Fair Share
amendment in 2022." ...
Corporate tax hikes? Gas tax increase?
Still, nobody has any idea what that revenue package will
look like.
State House News Service
Friday, June 14, 2019
Recap and analysis of the week in state government
Transportation officials took a key step
toward implementing promised improvements Monday by
approving a five-year, $18.3 billion capital investment
plan.
The plan, which covers fiscal years 2020
through 2024, outlines about $10.1 billion in Department of
Transportation projects and $8.3 billion in MBTA projects
for the next half decade.
State House News Service
Monday, June 17, 2019
Plan approved to spend $18B on transpo over next five years
The illegal migrant population grew more in
Massachusetts than any other state from 2007 to 2017 — a
60,000 spike that costs Massachusetts taxpayers and risks
public safety, legal immigration advocates say.
“This is very concerning,” said Jessica
Vaughan of the Center for Immigration Studies, after a Pew
Research Center report detailing the increase was released
Wednesday. “Besides the cost to taxpayers, there are public
safety implications when you fail to control illegal
immigration. And the continuing high levels of illegal
immigrants undermine the integrity of our legal immigration
system.”
Illegal immigrants annually cost
Massachusetts taxpayers an estimated $2 billion for welfare,
education and other costs, she said — a price that will only
rise as the illegal immigrant population goes up, she said.
“They’re a net fiscal drain because they
don’t pay enough in taxes to cover the cost of the social
services they use,” Vaughan said. “So the more illegal
immigrants, the higher costs to taxpayers. It’s just common
sense.” ...
The Bay State’s illegal immigrant population
increased to 275,000 in 2017, according to the Pew Research
Center’s report based on government data. The 60,000 growth
in Massachusetts since 2007 led the nation....
“Because there are already a lot of illegal
immigrants from Central America in Massachusetts, it has
become a magnet for people arriving here,” Vaughan said. “It
also doesn’t hurt that Massachusetts has sanctuary policies,
but that’s not the biggest reason they’re here because other
states also have sanctuary policies.”
The Boston Herald
Wednesday, June 12, 2019
Massachusetts illegal immigrant population spikes,
increase since ’07 leads nation
So Massachusetts is now the most desirable
resort destination in the Union for illegal freeloading
foreigners, at least according to one new survey.
The attraction of the Bay State for all
these Third World beggars can be summed up in two words:
Free stuff. ....
The Bruins may have lost, but when it comes to migrants
arriving to go on welfare, the Bay State can still claim
U.S. bragging rights.
We’re No. 1! We’re No. 1!
The Boston Herald
Friday, June 14, 2019
Massachusetts, the land of the free (stuff)
By Howie Carr
Lawmakers agreed Thursday to implement this
year's sales tax holiday on the weekend of Saturday, Aug. 17
and Sunday, Aug. 18....
It was the first time lawmakers established the annual
sales-tax holiday dates through a process established under
a 2018 law [the "grand bargain"] that calls for legislators
to choose by June 15 a weekend in August to designate as the
holiday. If legislators missed that deadline, the Department
of Revenue would have had until July 1 to announce dates for
the holiday.
State House News Service
Thursday, June 13, 2019
Legislature sets Aug. 17-18 sales tax holiday weekend
|
|
Chip Ford's CLT
Commentary
Is your head spinning yet?
"Unanticipated" billions are pouring into the state's
coffers; more billions upon billions are being
squandered in every direction. The Beacon Hill
response is "More revenue is needed, taxes must be
increased fast!"
Massachusetts state government has never
extracted more taxes and raked in more revenue than it
does today. The state's "rainy day fund" has never
been so flush and overflowing. Spending has never
been greater, as extravagant and unrestrained
― billion dollar spending
increases year after year for decades.
Yet all the Democrats, especially the
liberals (I'm repeating myself) and worse, the
progressives ― and an alleged
Republican governor ― can think about is how to
extract more, more, ever more from taxpayers.
Endlessly more is necessary to continue squandering more
on perpetually-expanding state government, funding
endless "unmet needs," self-serving wish lists, and
foolish pipe dreams.
The financial future
― the very survival
― of Massachusetts
taxpayers has never been more insanely threatened.
The plight of beleaguered taxpayers has never been so
irrelevant in the minds of decision-makers.
Absorb for a moment just some snippets
from the news gathered over just the past week:
According to [state Rep. Marc] Lombardo, the
commonwealth doesn’t have a revenue problem but
rather a spending and priority problem.
Massachusetts collected $1.1 billion in revenues
surplus last year all while the state spends
over $2 billion annually for benefits for
illegal immigrants. MassHealth’s line item has
more than doubled in the last 10 years, now
consuming more than 40 percent of the state
budget.
The
Senate last month followed the House's lead and
voted to raise the fees that are used to fund
the Community Preservation Act in hopes of
making what is supposed to be a state-local
partnership more equitable. The Senate voted
38-2 to increase the recording fees that feed
the CPA Trust Fund from $20 to $50 for most
documents and from $10 to $25 for municipal lien
certificates, a change that the Community
Preservation Coalition estimates will provide
the trust fund with an infusion of $36 million
in new money each year. The House did the same
in its budget in April.
The
Republican governor filed the measure as part of
his state budget proposal in January and has
said the tax increase could raise about $137
million a year toward a trust fund. The money
would help cities and towns fund projects like
modernizing public buildings or improving
drainage....
The
proposal would raise the transfer tax from $2
per $500 of value to $3 per $500 of value, which
would tack on almost $1,200 in additional taxes
to the sale of a $500,000 home. Sellers would
take on those costs.
A
coalition of environmental and community groups
urged the Revenue Committee to consider doubling
Baker's real estate transfer tax and split the
funding between climate change preparedness and
affordable housing.
The
state's "rainy day" fund has eclipsed the $2.6
billion mark, according to the Baker
administration, growing by more than $1 billion
in less than five years fueled by growth in tax
collections on capital gains income. . . .
Through May, tax revenues for the fiscal year
were running $952 million ahead of estimates
used to the build the state budget, creating
anticipation for an end-of-year surplus that
Gov. Charlie Baker and the Legislature will have
to decide how to spend....
The stabilization fund hit its previous high
with a $2.33 billion balance in fiscal 2007, when the state
budget was about $25.2 billion. The fiscal 2019 budget
signed by Gov. Baker last July authorized about $41.2
billion in spending.
After the Supreme Judicial Court last summer
invalidated a basically identical surtax
proposal and stopped it from going on the
ballot, the four-year wait to try again means
four more years without additional revenue....
House Speaker Robert DeLeo reiterated his
intention not to wait that long, writing on
Facebook that "in the coming months the House
will debate a comprehensive package of revenue
enhancements that will allow us to more
immediately invest in infrastructure and other
programs - prior to voters making a decision on
the Fair Share amendment in 2022."
The illegal
migrant population grew more in Massachusetts
than any other state from 2007 to 2017 — a
60,000 spike that costs Massachusetts taxpayers
and risks public safety, legal immigration
advocates say....
Illegal
immigrants annually cost Massachusetts taxpayers
an estimated $2 billion for welfare, education
and other costs, [Jessica Vaughan of the Center
for Immigration Studies] said — a price that
will only rise as the illegal immigrant
population goes up, she said.
“They’re a
net fiscal drain because they don’t pay enough
in taxes to cover the cost of the social
services they use,” Vaughan said. “So the more
illegal immigrants, the higher costs to
taxpayers. It’s just common sense.”
Any debate whatsoever over spending a
proposed additional billion taxpayer dollars on "climate
resiliency" is reduced to Gov. Baker's proposal to
raise taxes to fund his scheme, and House Speaker
DeLeo's preference to borrow (with interest) to
fund his scheme. This is what passes for debate
today on Beacon Hill. What now passes for
Massachusetts "leadership" has reached a frightening
place.
“Massachusetts does not have a revenue
problem. Massachusetts has a spending and a priority
problem” state Rep. Marc Lombardo (R-Billerica)
― one of the few rational good
guys left standing ― said, stating the obvious
which any sentient taxpayer has recognized for a long
time. “We need reform in our spending, in our priorities
and not a divisive class warfare tax increase,” he
concluded. To which I say Amen!
Instead, the vast Democrat majority,
liberals and progressives, and the alleged Republican
governor are crashing headlong through the fiscal
guardrails at breakneck speed and plunging the state off
the roadway and over a cliff.
With no checks or balances on Beacon
Hill this is the craziest I've ever seen things spin out
of control, coming at taxpayers relentlessly from every
direction.
$1.1 Billion in "unexpected" revenue
surplus was collected last fiscal year. Through
last month in this current fiscal year ending this month
the state has already raked in
$952 million ahead of expectations, almost another
addition billion dollars more than last year.
In most places that's recognized as over-taxation.
In Massachusetts it's called 'Not enough
yet.'
We've been saying for decades, for
The Takers "More Is Never Enough (MINE)
― and never will be until they've
taken it all.
They are
moving
closer to their ultimate goal.
|
 |
 |
|
Chip Ford
Executive Director |
|
|
|
|
|
The Boston Herald
Thursday, June 13, 2019
Massachusetts millionaire tax proposal moves
forward minus amendments to earmark funds
Constitutional amendment approved by the House
and Senate
By Mary Markos
Massachusetts legislators approved the
“millionaire tax” without a single adjustment,
voting down amendments that would specify that
the new money be spent on what proponents of the
measure have said it will be spent on —
education and transportation.
“This question is about a bait-and-switch. It’s
about raising money,” Minority Leader Rep.
Bradley Jones (R-North Reading) told the Herald,
“and then we will spend it however we damn well
please.”
The Fair Share amendment, filed by Rep. James
O’Day (D-West Boylston), would add a 4% surtax
on household incomes over $1 million. It was
voted on favorably during a constitutional
convention Wednesday, moving the long process of
changing the state constitution another step
forward. At least half of the Legislature will
need to vote for it again in the 2021-2022
legislative session before the question can be
put to voters in 2022.
“I think the 4% is fair, I think a million
dollars is a lot of money,” O’Day told reporters
yesterday. “We have truly identified some
resources that will go to fill some tremendous
needs that the commonwealth has.”
Every single proposal filed to adjust the
amendment failed, including some intended to
ensure that the estimated $2 billion in annual
revenue the tax is expected to raise would be
spent on education and transportation, that the
money currently being spent in those areas isn’t
spent elsewhere, and to allow the Legislature to
reverse the measure without having to wait
years.
O’Day said that he was concerned the proposals
could throw the amendment “out of whack,” or
“out of balance.”
Some legislators warned of dire impacts the tax
would have on small- to mid-sized businesses,
the risk of high earners leaving Massachusetts,
and losing more revenue than they would gain as
a result. Sen. Bruce Tarr (R-Gloucester) pointed
to other states that have adopted similar
high-level taxes and lost significant amounts of
revenue, including New York’s $8.4 billion loss,
New Jersey’s $3.4 billion loss and Connecticut’s
$2.6 billion loss.
“Do we want to take a risk that we would see
what other states have seen — a tremendous
outflow of tax revenue,” Tarr posed.
Rep. Marc Lombardo (R-Billerica) noted that the
voters have rejected a graduated income tax six
times, that the state took in $1.1 billion in
extra revenue in 2018 and referenced a Herald
report that found almost $3 billion has gone
uncollected.
“Massachusetts does not have a revenue problem.
Massachusetts has a spending and a priority
problem,” Lombardo said. “We need reform in our
spending, in our priorities and not a divisive
class warfare tax increase.”
The Springfield Republican
Thursday, June 13, 2019
Massachusetts Legislature — again — passes
constitutional amendment to create
‘millionaire’s tax’
By Shira Schoenberg
The Massachusetts Legislature on Wednesday
passed a constitutional amendment to raise taxes
on income over $1 million, the first step in a
process that will take until 2022.
It is, in effect, a do-over of the last
three-year battle over the “millionaire’s tax,”
which ended in 2018 when the proposed
constitutional amendment was struck down by the
Supreme Judicial Court before it went on the
ballot.
“We’re like junkyard dogs. We don’t give up. We
are back,” said Lew Finfer, an organizer with
Raise Up Massachusetts, the coalition of labor,
religious and community groups pushing for the
amendment.
The vote was 147-48. The vote was mostly along
party lines, with Democrats supporting the
amendment and Republicans opposing it.
In the House, 10 Democrats broke with their
party and voted against the amendment, including
Western Massachusetts Reps. John Velis of
Westfield, Angelo Puppolo of Springfield, Thomas
Petrolati of Ludlow, Brian Ashe of Longmeadow,
and Michael Finn of West Springfield. In the
Senate, Republican Patrick O’Connor of Weymouth
broke with his party to vote for the amendment.
The constitutional amendment would raise the tax
rate by an additional 4 percentage points on
income above $1 million, from the flat 5% rate
to 9%, beginning in 2023. The $1 million income
level would be adjusted annually to reflect
inflation.
The Department of Revenue estimates that this
would raise an additional $1.9 billion a year
from 19,600 tax filers. The money would be
earmarked for education and transportation.
The amendment must pass with a majority vote of
the House and Senate at Constitutional
Conventions in two consecutive legislative
sessions. Wednesday was the first passage, and
lawmakers will consider it again in the
2021-2022 session. If it passes, it would go on
the ballot in November 2022.
In advance of the 2018 election, the
constitutional amendment was introduced through
a citizens’ petition. Advocates gathered 150,000
signatures and got support from two
Legislatures. But the SJC struck it down because
it contained two subjects that are not “related
or mutually dependent” - it would both set the
tax rate and earmark money for education and
transportation.
This time, the amendment was introduced by two
lawmakers - Sen. Jason Lewis, D-Winchester, and
Rep. James O’Day, D-Worcester. An amendment
introduced by lawmakers does not have the same
legal requirement that all parts of the question
be related.
O’Day said each day more revenue is not
forthcoming, “children’s educational needs are
left in the balance,” and transportation needs
are unmet. He noted Tuesday’s derailment of an
MBTA train that caused major transit delays.
“The Massachusetts economy is working great for
those in the upper 1%,” O’Day said. “The time is
now for all Massachusetts residents to reap the
benefits of what this great state can accomplish
with the revenue of the Fair Share Amendment.”
Lewis called the vote “another step forward in
supporting the critical needs of residents of
our commonwealth.” “We have tremendous unmet
needs in Massachusetts that are hurting our
families and our communities and our state’s
economic future,” Lewis said.
Business-backed groups oppose the increased tax.
Christopher Carlozzi, state director of NFIB in
Massachusetts, the National Federation of
Independent Business, said the higher tax rate
would hurt small businesses. Many small
businesses are set up in a way that the owner
pays business taxes through their personal tax
return, which would be subject to the higher
rate.
“A millionaire’s tax could also send wealthy
people fleeing the state and leave Massachusetts
with less revenue, which would place a financial
burden upon the remaining residents who would
see taxes go up, small business owners
included,” Carlozzi said.
Massachusetts Republican Party Chairman and
former State Rep. Jim Lyons criticized the
amendment as “a blatant cash grab masquerading
as class warfare.”
“Massachusetts doesn’t have a revenue problem,”
Lyons said. “It has a spending problem.”
During debate in the House chamber, Rep. Marc
Lombardo, R-Billerica, said after Connecticut
raised taxes, “an exodus of the most mobile
taxpayers has had a devastating effect on
revenue and job creation.”
Lombardo warned that increasing taxes in
Massachusetts would hurt small businesses and
vilify successful residents. He said wealthy
taxpayers are already paying taxes equivalent to
the average income in Massachusetts “These
taxpayers are paying their fair share, they’re
paying more dollars than any other taxpaying
class in the commonwealth,” Lombardo said.
Supporters of the amendment say wealthy
taxpayers will remain in the state because of
social ties, good schools and other reasons, and
improved education and transportation will
actually draw business owners.
Rep. Alice Peisch, D-Wellesley, introduced an
amendment that would have allowed for a
graduated income tax. But she withdrew the
amendment before debate started. Massachusetts
voters rejected a graduated income tax five
times previously, between 1962 and 1994.
On the floor, lawmakers defeated amendments that
would exempt certain types of business income;
ensure new money is not used to replace existing
funds; allow lawmakers to adjust the tax rate
without another constitutional amendment;
earmark money for the state’s rainy day fund and
for regional school transportation; and others.
Lewis said sponsors of the constitutional
amendment want to ensure that the amendment that
passes is the same language that gathered
150,000 signatures and received prior support
from the Legislature. “The reason this proposal
has gotten the support it has from the
Legislature is because it’s very clear, it’s
simple, everybody can understand exactly what is
going to happen,” Lewis said.
The Billerica Minuteman
Friday, June 14, 2019
Billerica’s Rep. Lombardo opposes effort to
institute graduated income tax
State Rep. Marc T Lombardo, R-Billerica, opposed
a renewed effort to amend the state Constitution
by creating a graduated income tax.
According to a release from Lombardo’s office,
the so-called “Millionaires Tax” – which is
being billed by proponents as an opportunity to
boost spending on education and transportation –
does not include sufficient safeguards to ensure
the money raised will actually result in any
significant funding increases in these two
areas. He also expressed concerns about creating
a two-tiered tax system.
Meeting in a joint Constitutional Convention on
June 12, the House and Senate gave initial
approval to the “Millionaires Tax” on a vote of
147-48, with Lombardo voting against the
proposed amendment. A second vote of the
Legislature is required during the 2021-2022
legislative session before the measure can be
placed on the November 2022 ballot for voter
approval.
Massachusetts currently imposes a uniform tax
rate of 5.05 percent on personal income. Under
the proposed amendment, the state would assess
an additional surtax of 4 percent on income in
excess of $1 million, beginning Jan. 1, 2023,
with the revenues generated to be expended for
education and transportation, subject to
appropriation by the Legislature.
To ensure that current state spending in these
areas is not diverted for other purposes,
Lombardo supported an amendment stipulating any
revenues generated by the surtax will be used
“in addition to and not in lieu of funds” that
are already being appropriated for education and
transportation. That amendment failed on a vote
of 40-156.
Lombardo also expressed concerns about the
Legislature’s ability to revisit the surtax if
it does not work out as planned. By placing
language in the state Constitution, any effort
to repeal the surtax would have to go through a
time-consuming four-year process that would
prevent any repeal question from appearing on
the state ballot until November of 2026 at the
earliest.
Lombardo also noted that the amendment calls for
the new revenues to be used “for quality public
education and affordable public colleges and
universities,” but does not define what actually
constitutes a “quality” education, or an
“affordable” education. This ambiguity could
open the Commonwealth to costly litigation
moving forward.
According to Lombardo, the commonwealth doesn’t
have a revenue problem but rather a spending and
priority problem. Massachusetts collected $1.1
billion in revenues surplus last year all while
the state spends over $2 billion annually for
benefits for illegal immigrants. MassHealth’s
line item has more than doubled in the last 10
years, now consuming more than 40 percent of the
state budget.
“It’s time for reforms in state government, not
unfair and divisive class warfare tax increases”
said Lombardo.
The Boston Herald
Saturday, June 15, 2019
Hacks invested in protecting their own
By Howie Carr
It’s not about raising taxes, you must
understand. It’s about investments — investments
in the future.
That’s what the greed-crazed hacks at the State
House always say whenever they’re talking about
robbing you … I mean, investing in the future.
The kleptocrats on Beacon Hill were up to their
old tricks again last week, taking the initial
steps toward an 80% hike in the “millionaire
tax.” But the next day, they instantly gave away
the game when we discovered what the Democrats
really care about “investing” your hard-earned
money in.
Namely, the $127,000 in lawyers’ fees for
corrupt District Court judge Shelley Joseph,
indicted by the feds for allegedly letting a
Dominican illegal immigrant career criminal
abscond from her suburban courthouse before an
ICE agent could pick him up for deportation.
Imagine — $127,000 to provide free legal
services to a former member of the Democrat
State Committee from Brookline who is charged
with committing a criminal felony that could
land her in prison for 20 years.
How is paying off this hack’s legal tab an
“investment” in anyone’s future except hers …
and maybe all the other illegal immigrant
Dominican fentanyl dealers and their enabling
judges who realize they have carte blanche to
commit whatever crimes they so desire, and that
no one will ever pay the price, any price?
When the Democrat judge first stood outside the
courthouse on Northern Avenue after her
indictment, weeping buckets, her TV lawyer
Thomas Hoopes sanctimoniously told the press
that he would be representing Judge Joseph “pro
bono.”
Now it turns out that before she was indicted,
the taxpayers had already paid some lawyer
$127,000 in an attempt to help the scofflaw
judge ward off the long arm of the law. (Hoopes
did not return calls asking him if he was the
recipient of the $127 large.)
In the debate over the so-called millionaire tax
on Beacon Hill last week, the moonbats repeated
over and over again that the additional billions
would only be spent on “education” and
infrastructure, which of course they described
as crumbling.
OK, said the outnumbered Republicans. Would the
leadership be willing to put that in writing —
that none of the extra money will be spent on,
say, paying for the lawyers of criminal state
judges, or another three dozen or so associate
deputy vice chancellors at UMass?
Oh no, the handful of pro-taxpayer solons were
told, we can’t assure you of anything like that.
But what’s the problem, we’re just talking about
… investments.
What the hacks want to do is tack on an
additional 4% tax on any income over $1 million,
thus, the “millionaire tax.” Of course it won’t
work, it never has in any of the other states
that have tried it. So as revenue falls, and
taxpayers flee, everyone’s taxes will go up …
and up … and up.
Hey, somebody’s gonna have to pay when the next
Shelley Joseph gets it into her empty blond head
to go on another PC crime spree?
Carrying the ball for the Beacon Hill banditos
was Sen. Jason Lewis, who was born in South
Africa. Here is a selection from this woke pol’s
remarks on the “need” to beggar the native-born
population:
“We have needs, tremendous unmet needs … a $10
billion investment … important investments …
greater investments … fund such investment …
these investments … we desperately need to
invest … .”
At the beginning, this latest soak-the-rich
scheme would single out approximately 20,000
citizens. At the earliest, it would go into
effect in 2023, giving all the alleged
plutocrats plenty of time to flee, or to take
some other measures to get their reportable
income under $1 million.
Rep. Randy Hunt, a Republican from Sandwich,
pointed out how much this latest insanity would
cost — an average of $178,000 per victim.
Granted, disproportionate amounts would be
assessed from local billionaires like, say, Bob
Kraft, or Abigail Johnson of Fidelity.
“For $178,000,” Hunt said, “people will find a
way to avoid paying the tax, by paying family
members, by deferring taxable income, sheltering
income in irrevocable trusts or, as has been
mentioned, simply moving to New Hampshire.”
Or they could just decide to stop working — you
know, like all the Democrats in the Legislature,
not to mention 98% of their constituents.
Making people who work pay even more to support
those who don’t — many of whom are in the
country illegally, living on welfare — it’s the
“fairest way possible,” we were assured by the
senator from South Africa.
How many krugerrands can you buy with $178,000?
Do you suppose Judge Joseph knows?
State House News
Service
Thursday, June 13, 2019
Muni leaders want piece of surplus
By Colin A. Young
While a conference committee weighs the idea,
more than 100 municipal chief executives wrote
to the House speaker and Senate president
Wednesday asking that part of any potential
fiscal year 2019 budget surplus be transferred
to help the Community Preservation Act program.
Leaders from Boston, Quincy, Somerville,
Braintree, West Springfield, New Bedford, Salem,
Newton, Northampton and more said that the CPA
is "no longer the state-local partnership it was
designed to be" and highlighted the fact that
while the 175 cities and towns that have adopted
the CPA have collectively raised approximately
$160 million in local revenue each year, the
match from the statewide CPA Trust Fund has
dropped to $24 million.
Though the House and Senate budget both
authorized an increase in CPA funding starting
next year, the conference committee is
considering whether to include in the final
budget the Senate's authorization of a transfer
up to $20 million from any potential fiscal 2019
surplus to help towns that have adopted the CPA
before the new funding is available in 2020.
"Without this money, the statewide match will be
an estimated 11 percent," the 101 municipal
officials wrote in the letter coordinated by the
Community Preservation Coalition and the
Metropolitan Area Planning Council. "This
short-term solution for 2019, coupled with the
long-term fix for 2020 and beyond, will ensure a
viable, vibrant, and enduring CPA."
Through 11 months of fiscal 2019, state tax
collections were running $952 million above
year-to-date expectations, the Department of
Revenue reported earlier this month.
The idea of the CPA was for the state to match
100 percent of what each participating
municipality raised through its own property tax
surcharge to preserve open space, renovate
historic buildings and parks and to build new
playgrounds and athletic fields. But as more
communities adopt the CPA, each town's share of
the pie has become smaller.
The Senate last month followed the House's lead
and voted to raise the fees that are used to
fund the Community Preservation Act in hopes of
making what is supposed to be a state-local
partnership more equitable. The Senate voted
38-2 to increase the recording fees that feed
the CPA Trust Fund from $20 to $50 for most
documents and from $10 to $25 for municipal lien
certificates, a change that the Community
Preservation Coalition estimates will provide
the trust fund with an infusion of $36 million
in new money each year. The House did the same
in its budget in April.
The Boston Globe
Tuesday, June 18, 2019
Baker touts climate resiliency bill in testimony
before lawmakers
By Aidan Ryan
Governor Charlie Baker on Tuesday promoted his
plan to sharply increase taxes on real estate
transfers to generate $1 billion for cities and
towns to confront climate change, telling
lawmakers the revenue would help “make important
investments in cost-effective and data-driven
solutions.”
The bill would raise the tax on real estate
transfers by 50 percent, with revenue going
toward infrastructure and climate resiliency
programs.
“Our role is not only to protect our own
communities, but to develop solutions and policy
approaches that can be shared outside the
borders of our Commonwealth,” Baker said in
testimony before the Legislature’s Joint
Committee on Revenue.
The Republican governor filed the measure as
part of his state budget proposal in January and
has said the tax increase could raise about $137
million a year toward a trust fund. The money
would help cities and towns fund projects like
modernizing public buildings or improving
drainage.
Baker does not often testify on legislation he
has filed. He testified last in May on a number
of bills related to housing and criminal
dangerousness.
Speaking in front of a packed hearing room,
Baker thanked the Legislature as well as cities
and towns across the state for their efforts to
address climate change.
Environmental Affairs Secretary Kathleen
Theoharides also testified Tuesday, saying
Baker’s administration expects the demand for
resources to mitigate climate change will
increase in the coming years.
“We’ve heard loud and clear that communities
want to be engaged in the work of designing the
climate-resilient communities of tomorrow, and
this partnership between state and local
government gives us a way to do just that,” she
testified.
The proposal would raise the transfer tax from
$2 per $500 of value to $3 per $500 of value,
which would tack on almost $1,200 in additional
taxes to the sale of a $500,000 home. Sellers
would take on those costs.
“This increase provides a sustainable, dedicated
funding revenue stream that will be available to
invest directly in local and state climate
change work, year after year, without further
appropriation,” Baker testified.
House Speaker Robert DeLeo, a Suffolk Democrat,
has also proposed a bill aimed at building
renewable-energy infrastructure and funding
resiliency programs to combat climate change.
Representative Thomas Golden filed the bill in
the House.
Golden’s bill would draw the proposed $1 billion
from state bonds and create a grant program in
which cities and towns could apply for funds to
go toward climate-conscious projects.
The bill also calls for allocating $295 million
for energy infrastructure. The effort could
include funding electric vehicles for municipal
fleets and systems aimed at increasing the
resiliency of the power grid.
Golden, a Lowell Democrat, said he was confident
both parties could collaborate and agree on a
single bill.
“Everybody — the governor, Speaker DeLeo — we
are pushing to make this a priority,” he said.
“The word of the day on Beacon Hill is always
collaboration.”
Catherine Williams, a spokeswoman for DeLeo,
wrote in an e-mail that the speaker’s office
began conversations with Representative Mark
Cusack — chairman of the Joint Committee on
Revenue — after Baker’s testimony. Williams said
it was the House’s understanding that the
committee had remaining questions on the
Legislature’s role in the bill.
“The House will continue to monitor the
governor’s bill as those details are made
available and as it goes through the Committee
process,” Williams wrote.
After the hearing, Baker defended his plan by
arguing money from an expendable trust can be
used alongside other sources of funding, but
declined to criticize Golden’s bill.
“First of all, good for him for stepping up and
proposing this significant program,” Baker said.
“In some respects, that’s important. It’s really
important.”
State House News
Service
Wednesday, June 18, 2019
Climate bills hinge on $1 Bil in taxes, or
borrowing
By Matt Murphy and Katie Lannan
The governor and the speaker of the House -- two
of Beacon Hill's most powerful figures -- saw
their competing proposals to spend $1 billion or
more over the next decade fighting the effects
of climate change go head-to-head Tuesday for
the attention of lawmakers.
Gov. Charlie Baker's bill would raise the
state's real estate transfer tax to generate as
much as $137 million a year to help cities and
towns prepare for and adjust to climate change,
while Speaker Robert DeLeo's bill would borrow
the money.
The contrasting approaches to the same problem
will create a choice for legislators over the
coming months, but on Tuesday it was welcome
friction for environmental advocates who
relished the focus on climate issues.
"Today, I think, is a momentous day for
addressing the climate crisis in Massachusetts,
where we've got two committee hearings -- I
won't call them competing, they're just
contemporaneous -- at this hour in this building
on far-reaching climate legislation for the
commonwealth of Massachusetts," Keith Bergman,
retired Littleton town administrator and former
president of the Metropolitan Area Planning
Council, said at the hearing on the House bill.
"Massachusetts is poised to become an example
for the rest of the nation by crafting a truly
bipartisan approach to combating the climate
crisis, and boy, do we ever need a bold,
bipartisan example of something here, and why
not the most important issue facing humankind?"
Bergman said.
The two bills had simultaneous hearings at the
State House on Tuesday before two different
committees. The Telecommunications, Utilities
and Energy Committee heard testimony on the
speaker's bill (H 3846), while Baker went before
the Revenue Committee with Energy and
Environmental Affairs Secretary Kathleen
Theoharides to testify for his plan (S 10).
"We are committed to substantially expanding our
investment in resilient infrastructure and other
adaptation strategies across the Commonwealth,"
Baker said.
Baker's plan is to generate new revenue to help
cities and towns address their climate
vulnerabilities by raising the state's deeds
excise from $2.28 to $3.42 for every $500 of the
price of a property sale. The money would go
into a Global Warming Solutions Trust Fund
created last year as part of a $2.4 billion bond
bill, and augment the work already being done
through the Municipal Vulnerability Preparedness
program.
DeLeo's bill, filed by Telecommunications,
Utilities and Energy Committee House Chair
Thomas Golden, would create the GreenWorks
infrastructure program and allocate $1 billion
over 10 years. Communities could apply for
grants through the Executive Office of Energy
and Environmental Affairs to fund installation
of solar grids, electric vehicle charging
stations, resiliency infrastructure and more.
Baker refused to get drawn into any competition
with the speaker, telling reporters he was happy
to see DeLeo put forward a climate plan and to
have both bills get hearings relatively early in
the two-year session.
"First of all, I would never say that anything I
propose is necessarily any better than anything
that's proposed by anyone else in this building
because in the end we are all working on best
estimates with respect to what we think the
right way to deal with something like this, and
what will ultimately prove that out will be time
and experience," Baker said.
"Good for him," the governor said of DeLeo.
David Queeley, the director of eco-innovation
for the Codman Square Neighborhood Development
Corporation, said the Baker and DeLeo bills
complement each other and could perhaps lead to
a "more comprehensive approach."
"We stand with other organizations that
recognize that we need to protect communities we
serve from climate change, sea level rise and
extreme heat, and we recognize that we must
especially protect the residents of low-income
communities from displacement and housing
instability while also providing them with
economic opportunity," he said.
Baker and Theoharides testified before the
Revenue Committee for close to 45 minutes, with
the governor detailing the steps his
administration has taken to address climate
change and the role the state could play as a
national leader in the conversation.
"As we continue to prioritize emission
reductions to address the causes of climate
change, we must also implement strategies to
prepare for a rapidly changing climate, and once
again our role is not only to protect our own
communities, but to develop solutions and policy
approaches that can be shared outside the
borders of our Commonwealth," Baker said.
Theoharides said the state has 370 miles of
seawall along the coast, 25,000 culverts and
small bridges that are aging, and 3,000 dams, of
which 300 are considered "high hazard" and will
require $15 million to $20 million in repairs
over the next four years. So far, 249 of the
state's 351 cities and towns have started the
vulnerability planning process through the MVP
program, and Baker said some are already
pursuing projects, like Pittsfield where the
city is replacing a "high-priority culvert" that
causes flooding.
Baker said he proposed to create an "expendable
trust" because it allows more flexibility than
borrowing would in how the money is used. For
instance, Baker said trust fund money from a
real estate tax could be combined with private
money or federal money to pay for multi-year
projects or spent to protect private property,
such as privately-owned dams.
Borrowed money, Baker said, has "very defined
terms in state finance law with respect to what
you can use it for."
A coalition of environmental and community
groups urged the Revenue Committee to consider
doubling Baker's real estate transfer tax and
split the funding between climate change
preparedness and affordable housing.
"Our bold new Coalition reflects the broad
consensus throughout the Commonwealth that we
need to take immediate, comprehensive, and
significant action to address both our housing
crisis and climate crisis," said Joe Kriesberg,
president of the Massachusetts Association of
Community Development Corporations.
At the Energy Committee hearing, real estate
groups and municipal officials from communities
including Boston and Lexington offered support
for the House bill.
Greg Vasil of the Greater Boston Real Estate
Board and Jonathan Schreiber of the
Massachusetts Association of Realtors testified
together on DeLeo's plan, which Schreiber said
"provides the best avenue to fund and operate
climate resiliency programs in the
commonwealth."
"Everyone will feel the negative effects of
climate change, therefore everyone should
contribute to remedying the problem," Schreiber
said. "Contrary to Senate Bill 10, paying for
this ubiquitous problem should not rest solely
on the backs of home buyers and sellers."
Dave Sweeney, chief of staff to Boston Mayor
Marty Walsh, said one challenge facing many
municipalities is how to make "equitable
decisions" on climate resiliency without
"driving up the cost of housing," and urged the
committee to report out the House bill
"favorably and expeditiously."
Representatives from environmental groups also
spoke in support of the House bill and made
suggestions they said would strengthen it. Casey
Bowers of the Environmental League of
Massachusetts said the Greenworks program should
take environmental justice into consideration
and Deanna Morgan of the Conservation Law
Foundation asked lawmakers to consider allowing
municipalities to apply for grants under the
umbrella of regional entities.
Rep. Mark Cusack, the co-chair of the Revenue
Committee, asked the governor if all of the
funding generated under Baker's bill would be
used for competitive grants. Theoharides told
him that the bill was "agnostic" on that issue,
but the administration envisions a mix of grants
and loans. Baker also told Cusack that he would
be open to discussing whether the lawmakers
wanted to create specific buckets of funding for
different types of projects to preserve the
Legislature's appropriating authority.
Baker told Co-Chair Sen. Adam Hinds he didn't
know how the $1 billion in estimated revenue
over 10 years stacked up against the need in
cities and towns, but offered to come back
before the committee in the fall to provide an
update as the administration gets deeper into
the resiliency planning process with cities and
towns.
"I don't see us ever getting out of the business
of doing this," Baker said.
State House News
Service
Tuesday, June 18, 2019
Big deposit pushes rainy day fund past $2.6
Billion
By Matt Murphy
The state's "rainy day" fund has eclipsed the
$2.6 billion mark, according to the Baker
administration, growing by more than $1 billion
in less than five years fueled by growth in tax
collections on capital gains income.
Revenue Commissioner Christopher Harding wrote a
letter to state Comptroller Andrew Maylor on
Tuesday certifying that capital gains revenues
for the fiscal year through May totaled more
than $1.8 billion, resulting in a transfer of
$636 million to the stabilization fund.
The transfer is made automatically, under state
law, based on capital gains revenues collected
in excess of $1.2 billion. About $64 million of
the money being transferred will be split and
used to pay down the state's pension and other
post-retirement benefit obligations.
"This is very good news for Massachusetts
taxpayers," Administration and Finance Secretary
Mike Heffernan said in a statement, explaining
that it would give "further protection against
any future downturn in the economy."
The capital gains revenues reported by Harding
to the comptroller's office does not account for
any additional tax money from investment income
that might be collected in June, which could
result in a further deposit into reserves.
Through May, tax revenues for the fiscal year
were running $952 million ahead of estimates
used to the build the state budget, creating
anticipation for an end-of-year surplus that
Gov. Charlie Baker and the Legislature will have
to decide how to spend.
The automatic deposit into reserves reduces that
potential revenue surplus for the moment to $316
million.
The balance in the "rainy day" fund, which has
grown amidst the state's economic expansion, is
now up 135 percent since Baker took office in
January 2015, according to the administration.
The governor and Legislature have historically
used the fund to preserve state services during
time of economic slowdowns, and in fiscal 2015
and fiscal 2016 the automatic deposit of excess
capital gains revenues was suspended.
There were no excess capital gains revenues in
2017, and in fiscal 2018 a $514 million deposit
was made of capital gains taxes in excess of
$1.17 billion.
The stabilization fund hit its previous high
with a $2.33 billion balance in fiscal 2007,
when the state budget was about $25.2 billion.
The fiscal 2019 budget signed by Gov. Baker last
July authorized about $41.2 billion in spending.
Click above
image/graph to enlarge
End-of-fiscal-year
balances of the state's "rainy day" fund,
from fiscal 1986 to the projected close of
fiscal 2019. [Comptroller's Office; ANF]
State House News
Service
Friday, June 14, 2019
Weekly Roundup - Experiencing Delays
Recap and analysis of the week in state
government
By Matt Murphy
Beacon Hill is approaching the six-month mark in
the Legislature's two-year session sitting on a
potentially fat budget surplus, still mired in
uncertainty over education and transportation
challenges ...
To help address two of those problems (MBTA
unreliability and school funding) the House and
Senate voted 147-48 in favor of increasing taxes
on people earning over $1 million.
By slapping a 4 percent surtax on annual
household income over $1 million, supporters are
hoping to raise billions in new tax revenue for
education and transportation, and dismissed
arguments of opponents that it would drive
employers, small business owners and the wealthy
out of state.
Only 11 of the 161 elected Democrats in the
Legislature voted against the measure, with a
concentration of those no votes hailing from the
suburbs of Springfield.
The margin for the so-called "millionaires tax"
well exceeded the 101 votes needed to advance
the constitutional amendment to the next session
in 2021-2022, but for some that timeline just
doesn't work.
After the Supreme Judicial Court last summer
invalidated a basically identical surtax
proposal and stopped it from going on the
ballot, the four-year wait to try again means
four more years without additional revenue....
House Speaker Robert DeLeo reiterated his
intention not to wait that long, writing on
Facebook that "in the coming months the House
will debate a comprehensive package of revenue
enhancements that will allow us to more
immediately invest in infrastructure and other
programs - prior to voters making a decision on
the Fair Share amendment in 2022."
"This two-step approach is designed to ensure
that time sensitive investments can be made
immediately: a need that has been highlighted by
recent and unacceptable failures of our
transportation system," DeLeo said.
Corporate tax hikes? Gas tax increase? Still,
nobody has any idea what that revenue package
will look like.
What tax accountants did learn this week is when
the sales tax will be suspended this summer.
The annual sales tax holiday was set by the
Legislature for Aug. 17-18, a scheduling
decision made just under the wire of the June 15
deadline established by last year's "grand
bargain" law.
State House News
Service
Monday, June 17, 2019
Plan approved to spend $18B on transpo over next
five years
By Chris Lisinski
Transportation officials took a key step toward
implementing promised improvements Monday by
approving a five-year, $18.3 billion capital
investment plan.
The plan, which covers fiscal years 2020 through
2024, outlines about $10.1 billion in Department
of Transportation projects and $8.3 billion in
MBTA projects for the next half decade.
About 45 percent of that spending will focus on
reliability and resiliency efforts, while close
to 30 percent will go toward modernizing
outdated parts of the system.
Funding will also go toward long-discussed
modernization projects, such as the Green Line
Transformation, which will add new trains and
upgraded stations along the line, and the first
phase in the South Coast Rail expansion.
Following a public comment period that saw more
than four times as many responses as the FY19-23
capital investment plan, the MassDOT and MBTA
oversight boards voted during a joint meeting
Monday to approve the latest five-year rolling
plan.
Gov. Charlie Baker and other officials have
often pointed to funding planned in the CIP when
asked about conditions at the MBTA. The more
than $8 billion planned over the next five
years, they say, is a record investment for the
authority.
The Boston Herald
Wednesday, June 12, 2019
Massachusetts illegal immigrant population
spikes, increase since ’07 leads nation
By Rick Sobey
The illegal migrant population grew more in
Massachusetts than any other state from 2007 to
2017 — a 60,000 spike that costs Massachusetts
taxpayers and risks public safety, legal
immigration advocates say.
“This is very concerning,” said Jessica Vaughan
of the Center for Immigration Studies, after a
Pew Research Center report detailing the
increase was released Wednesday. “Besides the
cost to taxpayers, there are public safety
implications when you fail to control illegal
immigration. And the continuing high levels of
illegal immigrants undermine the integrity of
our legal immigration system.”
Illegal immigrants annually cost Massachusetts
taxpayers an estimated $2 billion for welfare,
education and other costs, she said — a price
that will only rise as the illegal immigrant
population goes up, she said.
“They’re a net fiscal drain because they don’t
pay enough in taxes to cover the cost of the
social services they use,” Vaughan said. “So the
more illegal immigrants, the higher costs to
taxpayers. It’s just common sense.”
But an advocate for illegal immigrants argued
that Massachusetts is a welcoming state that has
not been negatively impacted by the increase.
Illegal immigrants are making “very, very
substantial contributions to our society and to
our economy,” said Marion Davis, director of
communications for Massachusetts Immigrant and
Refugee Advocacy Coalition. “The increase has
not made a dent in public safety or anything
like that. And they all contribute a lot more to
taxes than any value they get out of it.”
The Bay State’s illegal immigrant population
increased to 275,000 in 2017, according to the
Pew Research Center’s report based on government
data. The 60,000 growth in Massachusetts since
2007 led the nation.
The other states with rising illegal immigrant
populations were Maryland, up 45,000; Louisiana,
up 15,000; and North and South Dakota, each up
5,000.
States that saw declines included five of the
six states with the largest illegal immigrant
populations: California, down 775,000; New York,
down 375,000; Florida, down 210,000; Illinois,
down 120,000; and New Jersey, down 110,000. A
sharp decrease in Mexican migration was the
major factor driving down the overall population
of illegal immigrants in the U.S.
That Massachusetts led the nation is
“fascinating,” Vaughan said.
“I never would have predicted that,” she said.
“Texas or Florida I would have thought, but I
guess Massachusetts makes sense because there is
now less illegal migration from Mexico and
Massachusetts has never had as much illegal
migration from Mexico to begin with.”
The illegal immigrant population in
Massachusetts mostly includes people from
Central America, Brazil, the Dominican Republic,
Haiti and China.
“Because there are already a lot of illegal
immigrants from Central America in
Massachusetts, it has become a magnet for people
arriving here,” Vaughan said. “It also doesn’t
hurt that Massachusetts has sanctuary policies,
but that’s not the biggest reason they’re here
because other states also have sanctuary
policies.”
The Boston Herald
Friday, June 14, 2019
Massachusetts, the land of the free (stuff)
By Howie Carr
So Massachusetts is now the most desirable
resort destination in the Union for illegal
freeloading foreigners, at least according to
one new survey.
The attraction of the Bay State for all these
Third World beggars can be summed up in two
words: Free stuff.
They say charity begins at home. Not if you’re
from the Dominican Republic, or any of these
other “tropical climes,” as John Silber used to
say, and which President Trump has more recently
described with an eight-letter word that begins
with “s” and ends with “e.”
For those looking for a permanent vacation
compliments of Tio Sam, charity begins in
Massachusetts, specifically in our “gateway
cities,” as the Democrats call the welfare
magnets like Lawrence, Lynn, Chelsea, Brockton
et al.
Here are two examples from earlier this week.
The first comes courtesy of the New Hampshire
State Police. In Salem, N.H., they stopped a
woman with a Massachusetts driver’s license
identifying her as “Chelimar Gonzalez.”
Turns out her real name was Lilian Fana
Martinez. She’s Dominican and had stolen the
identity of a U.S. citizen from Puerto Rico. At
age 28, she’d been in the states illegally for
more than 10 years.
Lately, she’s been living in Methuen, which is
becoming a suburb of Lawrence. In April, a
variety of law enforcement agencies — ICE,
Homeland Security, the New Hampshire State
Police and Methuen cops — grabbed the illegal
immigrant criminal at her home.
In the home, the New Hampshire State Police said
they found a cache of “healthcare benefits
cards, ATM cards and credit cards in the name of
the stolen identity that Martinez had been
using.”
Health care benefit cards — that means
MassHealth, Medicaid. We taxpayers see the EBT
cards being used by these layabouts at the
supermarket all the time, but their free health
care is a much greater drain on the public
purse. More than five years ago, then-Gov. Deval
Patrick’s administration admitted that the state
was paying at least $1.8 billion in welfare to
illegal immigrants.
On Wednesday, in the legislative debate over the
“millionaire tax,” Rep. Marc Lombardo mentioned
the billions we spend to support these foreign
loafers — it’s got to be way over $2 billion by
now, especially with the Pew Research Center now
estimating that they’re pouring into the state
in record numbers, at least 60,000 in the last
decade.
Back to the New Hampshire State Police arrest
report on the Dominican:
“Martinez was taken into federal custody on
multiple charges including but not limited to
health-care fraud and identity theft. She was
recently extradited back to New Hampshire to
face both misdemeanor and felony-level charges
in two different locations.”
But Martinez is a piker compared to another
Dominican illegal immigrant who was convicted of
welfare fraud and identity theft in federal
court in Boston Wednesday.
The U.S. attorney’s office is calling him “John
Doe,” because they still can’t figure out his
real identity. In their press release, they
describe him as a “Roxbury man.”
According to the feds, for more than 40 years,
“John Doe” has being living under the stolen
identities and/or Social Security numbers of at
least two different American citizens, which
enabled him to, among other things, “apply for
unemployment benefits and obtain public housing
benefits for himself and his family.”
So John Doe was grabbing at least two forms of
welfare he wasn’t entitled to, under two
different Americans’ stolen identities. No
wonder he ended up in Massachusetts. I wonder if
he was living in Boston public housing — do you
suppose he ever met his fellow BHA-squatting
illegal, Barack Obama’s late aunt, Zeituni
Onyango?
Before her death, Auntie Zeituni haughtily said
on TV that God had no problem with her living on
welfare in a foreign country — the United
States. I don’t know about God, but her nephew
certainly didn’t care.
The Bruins may have lost, but when it comes to
migrants arriving to go on welfare, the Bay
State can still claim U.S. bragging rights.
We’re No. 1! We’re No. 1!
State House News Service
Thursday, June 13, 2019
Legislature sets Aug. 17-18 sales tax holiday
weekend
By Chris Lisinski
Lawmakers agreed Thursday to implement this
year's sales tax holiday on the weekend of
Saturday, Aug. 17 and Sunday, Aug. 18.
The House and Senate adopted resolutions calling
for suspension of the state's 6.25 percent sales
tax. The House resolution initially recommended
Aug. 10 and 11 as the dates, but members agreed
to an amendment filed by Rep. Ann-Margaret
Ferrante — who also filed the initial House
resolution — to push the dates back a week.
Rep. Paul Donato, who presided over the House
session, told the News Service that Aug. 17-18
"would be a better time for businesses" to
benefit from the holiday.
It was the first time lawmakers established the
annual sales-tax holiday dates through a process
established under a 2018 law [the "grand
bargain"] that calls for legislators to choose
by June 15 a weekend in August to designate as
the holiday. If legislators missed that
deadline, the Department of Revenue would have
had until July 1 to announce dates for the
holiday.
Senate Minority Leader Bruce Tarr said the tax
holiday would benefit retailers and consumers.
|
| |
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
|
