 |
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
Saturday, November 2, 2019
The hits
(on taxpayers) just keep on coming!
|
Legislative
leaders are having such difficulty spending hundreds of
millions in revenue they already have, it's only fair to
wonder what will happen when the focus turns to raising
revenue they don't.
Beacon Hill might
soon find out.
With less than
three weeks until the Legislature breaks for the year, House
Speaker Robert DeLeo and a small team of top deputies kicked
off their week by hunkering down in his office to hone in on
a plan to raise new money for investments in transportation.
Majority Leader
Ronald Mariano and Transportation Committee Co-Chair Rep.
William Straus said a pre-recess debate in the House is
still the goal, and it's a timeline they think they can
meet, though they'll be cutting it close....
Apart from raising
fees on ride-for-hire service, the business groups that
DeLeo challenged this spring to coalesce around a revenue
plan are predictably torn over the possibility of options
like raising the gas tax.
The gas tax, which
Straus has all but guaranteed to be part of the revenue
solution, is especially controversial in light of how gas
prices are likely to rise, even modestly, under the novel
cap-and-invest program Gov. Charlie Baker is negotiating
with other states to reduce vehicle emissions....
Mariano said the
House leaders have "started to put some numbers next to the
strategies," but the size of the revenue package they will
seek has not yet been determined.
The size of the
surplus from fiscal 2019, however, is better understood. And
yet the House and the Senate appear stalemated over not just
how to spend it, but on the basic procedures of how to get a
bill to Gov. Charlie Baker's desk.
Comptroller Andrew
Maylor wrote to legislators letting them know that for every
day that goes by starting on Friday, the state is losing out
on about $30,000 in interest it could be accruing from a
sizeable deposit planned for the "rainy day" account....
This week, even in
the face of Thursday's deadline, neither branch blinked,
jeopardizing interest the state could be earning in an
account designed to weather the next recession, which may be
sooner than anyone would like....
The start of
negotiations on a compromise education funding reform bill
went a bit smoother. The conference committee led by Rep.
Alice Peisch and Sen. Jason Lewis was named Monday and met
for the first time on Thursday - Halloween.
Peisch and Lewis
told the group and reporters there was nothing to be afraid
of.
"I'm very
confident that we will reconcile the very modest
differences, in my opinion, between the Senate and the House
bill and hopefully we will soon have legislation on Governor
Baker's desk," Lewis said during the initial public portion
of their now-private talks.
State House News Service
Friday, November 1, 2019
Weekly Roundup - A Taxing Process
Recap and analysis of the week in state government
The Legislature
has put only a few major laws on the books so far in 2019,
but six-member conference committees now have custody of
distracted driving, children's health and the landmark $1.5
billion education funding bills. Those bills could be sprung
at any time for floor votes or remain for an extended period
in the dark recesses of conference.
The bill designed
to get motorists to finally stop texting while driving has
been in conference since June. One bill that can't wait much
longer, legislation allocating the big fiscal 2019 surplus,
remains in limbo as November begins.
State finance
officials have said such closeout budget bills should be
handled by the end of August, following the June 30 end of
the fiscal year. But the Legislature generally takes August
off and since there are no ramifications for being late
other than some forgone interest earnings - currently
estimated at $500,000 plus $30,000 a day after Nov. 15 - and
some negative attention from credit rating agencies,
lawmakers in recent years have taken more and more time to
settle these supplemental spending bills....
Formal sessions,
which are held to consider bills that require debate or roll
calls, are scheduled to end this off-election year by the
third Wednesday in November, or Nov. 20.
Both branches
start the week with informal sessions on Monday. The Senate
plans a formal session Thursday to take up a bill improving
campaign finance reporting for legislative candidates. The
House will be looking to hold formal sessions next week,
with the schedule hinging on when or whether bills are ready
for votes.
State House News Service
Friday, November 1, 2019
Advances - Week of Nov. 3, 2019
The Massachusetts
Legislature was the last in the nation to enact an annual
budget this year and now their drawn-out deliberations over
last year's state budget are about to cost the taxpayers
real money.
Comptroller Andrew
Maylor faces a Thursday deadline to file the state's annual
Statutory Basis Financial Report closing the books on
spending and revenues for the fiscal year that ended June
30, almost four months ago. But here's the problem: the
Legislature still isn't done spending last year's revenues.
Beacon Hill talks
on a final fiscal 2019 supplemental budget only started to
heat up this month, and House and Senate Democrats are
currently looking at two different bills that spend most of
last year's budget surplus, while proposing rainy day
savings account deposits of between $350 million and $400
million....
Basing his
calculations on the financial report being issued on Nov.
15, Maylor projected forgone interest on expected
stabilization fund revenues of more than $500,000, an amount
he estimated will increase by more than $30,000 each day
beyond Nov. 15.
Calling it a
"measurable downstream impact" of not filing the financial
report on time, Maylor wrote, "I realize that this amount
may not seem important, but as a taxpayer and someone who
spent more than 25 years in local government, that sum is
meaningful."
State House News Service
Tuesday, October 29, 2019
Late Budget Means Half a Mil in Forgone Interest
A spending bill
allocating the big fiscal 2019 surplus and depositing
hundreds of millions of dollars into the state's rainy day
fund was still stuck in a twilight zone Thursday as
lawmakers recessed for the weekend and gave no indication
that the issue will be resolved imminently.
On Thursday
morning, the House and Senate both adjourned until Monday
without taking action on a more than $700 million budget
bill to close out the fiscal year that ended June 30,
authorize chunks of one-time spending, shore up state
reserves, and pay bills left over from fiscal 2019....
In each of the
last two years, Massachusetts was the last Legislature in
the country to pass its annual budget, and now the
Legislature has blown by the Oct. 31 deadline for the state
comptroller to file the state's annual Statutory Basis
Financial Report.
Lawmakers do not
appear fazed by the slow pace, although the extended talks
are cutting into the amount of time legislative leaders have
to focus on other issues and the Legislature has shown a
tendency in recent years to procrastinate, leaving scores of
important decisions to be made in a frenzy every other July.
The next
opportunity for the Legislature to enact the close-out
budget bill is Monday, Nov. 4. That means this year's
close-out bill will be finalized later than any year since
at least 1995.
State House News Service
Thursday, October 31, 2019
Branches Leave Budget Unfinished, Break for Weekend
A group of
legislators and policy advocates put together by Senate
leadership to explore ways to modernize the state's tax code
is looking into the possibility of taxing digital goods and
services like music downloads or Pandora.
The conversation
is still in its early stages, but the group also appears to
be leaning toward a set of recommendations that would be
close to revenue-neutral, eyeing ways to offset changes like
an expansion of the sales tax base with lower overall rates.
"I don't think we
at this table are going to come to some consensus to raise
taxes overall," said Sen. William Brownsberger, a Belmont
Democrat and member of the working group.
Brownsberger said
he thought the "safest space" for the group would be to
produce a package of recommendations that didn't
significantly alter how much the state takes in from taxes.
State House News Service
Tuesday, October 29, 2019
Senate Group's Tax Ideas May Be Revenue Neutral
Millennials beware
— a committee charged with revamping the state’s tax code is
eyeing music downloads and streaming services.
A tax on digital
goods — including music — is “worth looking into,” said
attorney David Sullivan, a member of the sales subcommittee
within the Senate Revenue Working Group.
“People don’t buy
CDs for their music these days, they download. CDs are
clearly taxable, downloads not so much. So what do you do
about that? It’s a difficult question,” Sullivan said during
the meeting.
He also pointed to
providers like Pandora or Spotify, which require
subscriptions, as another potential source of revenue.
The Boston Herald
Tuesday, October 29, 2019
Tax on music downloads eyed by Senate revenue working group
A spending bill
allocating the big fiscal 2019 surplus and depositing
hundreds of millions of dollars into the state's rainy day
fund was still stuck in a twilight zone Thursday as
lawmakers recessed for the weekend and gave no indication
that the issue will be resolved imminently.
On Thursday
morning, the House and Senate both adjourned until Monday
without taking action on a more than $700 million budget
bill to close out the fiscal year that ended June 30,
authorize chunks of one-time spending, shore up state
reserves, and pay bills left over from fiscal 2019....
In each of the
last two years, Massachusetts was the last Legislature in
the country to pass its annual budget, and now the
Legislature has blown by the Oct. 31 deadline for the state
comptroller to file the state's annual Statutory Basis
Financial Report.
Lawmakers do not
appear fazed by the slow pace, although the extended talks
are cutting into the amount of time legislative leaders have
to focus on other issues and the Legislature has shown a
tendency in recent years to procrastinate, leaving scores of
important decisions to be made in a frenzy every other July.
The next
opportunity for the Legislature to enact the close-out
budget bill is Monday, Nov. 4. That means this year's
close-out bill will be finalized later than any year since
at least 1995.
State House News Service
Thursday, October 31, 2019
Branches Leave Budget Unfinished, Break for Weekend
The exact effects
of a still-in-development regional partnership to cap
transportation emissions will depend on three states that
are participating in discussions but have not yet committed
to the pact, a Massachusetts official said Monday.
Three of the 13
jurisdictions involved in the effort are doing so as
"observers." Maine, New York and New Hampshire did not sign
the same December 2018 agreement to a cap-and-invest system
as others including Massachusetts and the District of
Columbia, according to Kate Hichter, assistant secretary for
policy and coordination in the Department of Transportation.
"It is the
collective hope that they will come in at the end, but there
is a robust internal negotiation, I would say, going on
around those things," Hichter told MassDOT and the MBTA's
boards during a joint meeting Monday.
State House News Service
Tuesday, October 29, 2019
New York Among Three States That Are Not All-in on TCI
Nearly every major
business organization in Massachusetts has united behind a
call for more government spending to expand public transit
and improve the roads, with the hope that a new infusion of
cash can help solve the congestion-related woes that vex
their workers.
The business
community’s call to action is due to be released Wednesday,
several weeks before the House of Representatives will
debate a major transportation bill that could lead to
billions of dollars in improvements.
While there was
wide support for some form of additional revenue, there was
less consensus about how best to raise the money, according
to a report issued by the business groups. Increasing the
state’s gas tax garnered support from only a slim majority
in the poll of business groups. While that majority did not
agree on a specific increase, the Greater Boston Chamber of
Commerce backs a 15-cent increase, phased in over three
years, and many others support a similar increase. At that
size, it would be the biggest hike in a generation....
Business support
could help give some political cover as lawmakers tackle the
tough topic of raising taxes and fees to deal with what many
executives consider to be a full-blown crisis.
While [Greater
Boston Chamber of Commerce chief executive James Rooney] did
not indicate how each business group voted, two major
organizations have already declined to support a state gas
tax increase.
For now, the
Massachusetts High Technology Council and Associated
Industries of Massachusetts are only willing to back a
climate-change fee on motor vehicle fuels that is being
championed by Governor Charlie Baker, and not a straight-up
gas tax increase as Rooney and other chamber members
propose. Though the fee would likely drive up the cost of
gasoline, Baker and other proponents have resisted calling
it a tax increase....
Representative
William Straus, the House cochairman of the transportation
committee, said House leaders met for 90 minutes on Monday
to work on the transportation bill. Those deliberations will
continue, to prepare a bill in time for a floor debate in
the third week of November. The Senate will then take up the
issue in 2020, with both sides needing to reach an agreement
by the end of next July.
The Boston Globe
Wednesday, October 30, 2019
Businesses plead for solution to alleviate traffic
congestion woes
Associated
Industries of Massachusetts rejected the gas tax and chose
to back the Baker administration by supporting its $18
billion bond bill, which includes a number of systemic
reforms to the state’s transportation bureaucracy, and a
multistate charge on fuel aimed at curbing vehicles’
greenhouse gas emissions, nicknamed “TCI.” But the money
from TCI is years away, and in the interim, AIM argues the
state doesn’t need other new revenues to improve
transportation. The Mass. High Technology Council took a
similar stance. Ditto the Massachusetts Competitive
Partnership.
Eight of the 28
participating groups didn’t end up responding to Rooney’s
poll. And the National Federation of Independent Business
chose not to even participate from the start. State director
Chris Carlozzi said his group was worried the end result of
all these meetings would be new fees or taxes. NFIB hates
that idea. Some of its roughly 5,500 small-business members
here struggle to get by.
The Boston Globe
Wednesday, October 30, 2019
Transportation debate highlights differences in state’s
business community
Massachusetts
retailers support an increase in the gas tax tied to a
multi-state effort to cut carbon emissions, but would not
back a further hike in the fuel levy beyond that.
As interest groups
and politicians ready themselves for a House debate on
proposed transportation taxes and revenues, Retailers
Association of Massachusetts President Jon Hurst said
Wednesday that his group supports Gov. Charlie Baker's
efforts to enlist Massachusetts in a new market-based
program to reduce transportation emissions as long as the
increase in the price of gas as a result the Transportation
Climate Initiative (TCI) is limited to between 5 and 15
cents a gallon.
"We oppose
additional gas taxes on top of TCI, because they are
avoidable by going over the border for car and trucker
drivers alike," according to Hurst. "Tax avoidance and the
regressive nature of excessive increases are real concerns."
...
Motorists pay 24
cents per gallon in state gas taxes, fractions of a penny
below the national average, according to the U.S. Energy
Information Administration.
For each gallon of
gas, drivers also pay a fee of roughly 2.5 cents to support
the Underground Storage Tank Petroleum Product Cleanup Fund.
When all state and federal assessments are calculated in,
about 45 cents of every gallon of gas pumped in
Massachusetts goes to taxes or fees.
State House News Service
Wednesday, October 30, 2019
Retailers Draw Line on Size of Gas Tax Increase
Just think about
it: congestion pricing, managed lanes, tolling on routes
other than just the Massachusetts Turnpike, money drawn from
drivers being invested back into public transit, and a
transportation system that could adapt to meet future needs.
That's what most
of a coalition of business groups supports asking the
Legislature to tell the smartest minds in the state: start
thinking seriously about the options for reducing congestion
on roads, improving accessibility and service on public
transportation, limiting greenhouse gas emissions and
raising the money to pay for it in a fair and
geographically-equitable way.
But in the
meantime, get to raising the revenue necessary to take care
of immediate needs -- like structurally deficient bridges
and poor roadway conditions -- by taxing customers a little
more for gasoline and increasing the fee built into ride
service fares, much of the Massachusetts Business Coalition
on Transportation agrees.
State House News Service
Wednesday, October 30, 2019
Biz Groups Support Gas Tax, TNC Fee Increases
Drivers could be
hit twice with price hikes at the gas pump as lawmakers
consider two measures that would drive up the cost of fuel,
which critics say puts the state’s financial burden on the
backs of working people....
Legislators have
been mulling over an adjustment to the gas tax for months as
a way to raise new revenue for transportation infrastructure
and public transit improvements, which was discussed during
a meeting between Speaker Robert DeLeo and House leadership
earlier this week.
Meanwhile, Gov.
Charlie Baker is engaged in a multi-state Transportation
Climate Initiative, which would charge transportation fuel
companies for the carbon emissions associated with the gas
and diesel they sell. Half of that money would go towards
Baker’s $18 billion transportation bond bill, which includes
major investments in the MBTA....
“Lawmakers talk
about affordability and wanting to make sure residents can
afford to live in Massachusetts and yet here we are talking
about taxes that are going to be raised on every commuter,
worker, consumer, small business and working family,”
[Christopher Carlozzi, the State Director of the National
Federation of Independent Business] said. “This will just be
one more thing that makes Massachusetts unaffordable.”
The Boston Herald
Thursday, October 31, 2019
Gas taxes could leave drivers doubly down in the dumps
Members of a
powerful advocacy coalition are mounting an effort to
include business tax measures in a revenue package designed
to bankroll transportation investments, saying proposals
that add to the costs of gasoline and tolls are too
regressive and will only put a heavier burden on low-income
and middle class residents.
House leaders are
assembling a revenue plan for debate sometime in the next
three weeks, but have not unveiled any specific
revenue-raising proposals.
In a letter to
supporters Thursday, Raise Up Massachusetts officials argued
that any revenue package should include proposals to create
a tiered corporate minimum tax, address offshore tax
shelters used by businesses, and require businesses to
publicly disclose their tax burdens. The group, which
estimates its ideas would generate at least $250 million,
says businesses need to kick in contributions toward needed
investments.
Raise Up is the
group leading the push for a constitutional amendment to
impose a $2 billion surtax on wealthy households. In recent
years, the coalition has used the initiative petition
process to force new laws guaranteeing paid family and
medical leave benefits, earned sick time benefits, and
minimum wage increases....
Massachusetts
motorists, in addition to the possibility of a gas tax
increase, could also face higher gas prices in connection
with a compact Gov. Charlie Baker is pursuing with other
Northeast and mid-Atlantic states to reduce carbon emissions
through a cap-and-invest program to drive down emissions
from cars and trucks.
State House News Service
Thursday, October 31, 2019
Coalition Urges Members to Back Biz Tax Measures
Baker is eyeing
the multistate Transportation Climate Initiative, which
would charge energy companies for the carbon emissions
associated with the gas and diesel they sell. Half of that
revenue would go toward Baker’s $18 billion transportation
bond bill, which includes major investments in the MBTA.
Joining the TCI,
critics warn, will just hit consumers at the pump.
According to the
AAA Fuel Gauge Survey, the average price of regular gas in
Massachusetts is $2.56. But in California, where a similar
climate initiative was rolled out, gas prices have gone as
high as $4.90 cents a gallon.
“I don’t think
it’s ever a wise policy to raise sales taxes. It just kills
working people,” said state Rep. David DeCoste, a Norwell
Republican. “Can you imagine $4 a gallon? It would just
cream local retailers and crush the rest of us.”
DeCoste said he’s
hoping the governor backs away from the pact, which would
also rope in Maine, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York,
Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia, Connecticut,
Delaware and Maryland.
Holly Robichaud, a GOP strategist who helped lead the repeal
of a hike in the state’s gas tax in 2014, said it’s
“outrageous” that any talk of boosting what motorists pay at
the pump is coming up again.
“They should have
gotten the message five years ago. Any hike in the cost of
gas would be a killer for every small business and
commuter,” said Robichaud. “There’s no need for it. We don’t
have a money problem, we have a spending problem.”
The Boston Herald
Saturday, November 2, 2019
Green gas tax bid could push prices close to $5 a gallon
Do you want to pay
an additional $1.50 or more to fill up every time you stop
at a gas station?
You would if a
proposed gas tax being pushed by some Massachusetts
lawmakers comes to pass. They’re in fact considering two
measures that would drive up the cost of fuel. Gov. Charlie
Baker’s support for the so-called Transportation Climate
Initiative would lead to hikes, say analysts, and the House
is mulling a 15-cent gas tax per gallon increase phased in
over a three-year period....
A gas tax
theoretically pays for road maintenance, and our roads are
mostly awful, so an argument could be made that we need all
the infrastructure help we can get. But government in the
Bay State clearly has shown it is incapable of maintaining
roads; laying the blame for that at insufficient funding
seems bogus....
Massachusetts
already duns its people for plenty in taxes. When the state
figures out how to spend money more efficiently, it won’t
have to always turn to taxpayers to solve its problems.
Until then, we can’t support a gas tax hike.
A Boston Herald editorial
Saturday, November 2, 2019
Gas tax is a bad idea
|
|
Chip Ford's CLT
Commentary
As I furiously
followed and aggregated this week's news on a frenzy of
tax increase schemes I couldn't help but observe the
pattern: First, key up a crisis early (in this
case, crises when you conflate traffic gridlock
with "climate change"), then invite everyone with any
influence to get involved with their preferred
solutions. I couldn't help but recall the
legendary Sir Winston S. Churchill narrative:
Churchill:
"Madam, would you sleep with me for five million
pounds?"
Socialite: "My goodness, Mr. Churchill...
Well, I suppose... we would have to discuss terms,
of course... "
Churchill: "Would you sleep with me for five
pounds?"
Socialite: "Mr. Churchill, what kind of woman
do you think I am?!"
Churchill: "Madam, we've already established
that. Now we are haggling about the price”
They have
established the "crisis," and have arrived at their
solutions — higher taxes in one
form or another. Now they are haggling
about the price.
Notice that
nobody — not a single one
— made any mention
whatsoever of how vastly much more Massachusetts
squanders on its highways, roads, and bridges than all
but two other states. In the CLT Update of August
24 ("Mass.,
#46, spent 304% higher than national average on its
highways") I stated:
No
matter how you look at — or make excuses for — its
conclusions, the Reason Foundation report indicates
that the Massachusetts Department of Transportation
spent tremendously more per lane-mile of its
highway system ($216,066) than all other states but
Florida ($241,100) and New Jersey ($511,266). On
spending alone, Massachusetts ranked 48th-worst of
all 50 states.
Massachusetts total spending per lane-mile was 304%
greater than national average. . . .
Remember this when the Legislature returns next week
from its month-long vacation and pivots to demands
for more and higher taxes to fund "the state's
deteriorating infrastructure," as has been promised.
We surely will.
As we at CLT
have been saying for decades, and as Holly Robichaud, a
leader in the 2014 automatic gas tax hike repeal
campaign, also noted, "We don’t have a money problem, we
have a spending problem.”
How and why
can anyone with even a fragment of intelligence
think that giving state government even more will
make any difference whatsoever
— that it too won't
also be squandered?
When has more
taxpayers' money ever solved a problem in Massachusetts,
or been enough?
More
unexpected revenue has poured into the state's coffers
— last year's $2 billion revenue surplus
(over-taxation) — than legislators
have yet to agree on how to spend. Failing to put
anything away in the state's surplus revenue "rainy day
fund" since the end of last fiscal year on June 30 has
already cost taxpayers $500,000 and will cost an
additional $30,000 a day every day after November
15. The spending committee's leaders assure us
there's "nothing to be afraid of."
"I'm very
confident that we will reconcile the very modest
differences, in my opinion, between the Senate and the
House bill and hopefully we will soon have legislation
on Governor Baker's desk," Senate co-chairman Sen. Jason
Lewis assured us during opening comments before secret
negotiations begin.
Then "The Best
Legislature Money Can Buy" immediately recessed on
Thursday morning and left the State House for the
weekend.
In less than
three weeks the Legislature will recess for the
remainder of the year (while still collecting their
obscene salaries, of course), on November 20. As
always, critically important votes on massive policy
changes and tax hikes will come up in the last moments
of the eleventh hour in the middle of the night in the
closing day or two. This has become increasingly
more common, an apparent leadership strategy. Keep
the citizenry like potted mushrooms: In the dark
and well fertilized. And keep legislators equally
in the dark until they must vote on whatever is dropped
in front of them moments before.
There's enough
here for you to hopefully digest without me adding more.
As always, you can find the full news reports in detail
below.
|
 |
 |
|
Chip Ford
Executive Director |
|
|
|
|
|
State House News Service
Friday, November 1, 2019
Weekly Roundup - A Taxing Process
Recap and analysis of the week in state
government
By Matt Murphy
Legislative leaders are having such difficulty
spending hundreds of millions in revenue they
already have, it's only fair to wonder what will
happen when the focus turns to raising revenue
they don't.
Beacon Hill might soon find out.
With less than three weeks until the Legislature
breaks for the year, House Speaker Robert DeLeo
and a small team of top deputies kicked off
their week by hunkering down in his office to
hone in on a plan to raise new money for
investments in transportation.
Majority Leader Ronald Mariano and
Transportation Committee Co-Chair Rep. William
Straus said a pre-recess debate in the House is
still the goal, and it's a timeline they think
they can meet, though they'll be cutting it
close.
The huddle happened days before the business
community weighed in - though not exactly with a
single voice - on what it could tolerate in
terms of taxes to improve the transportation
options for its workers.
The good news for revenue-supporting legislators
is that employers are in broad agreement that
the transportation system needs an infusion of
cash. But that political cover may only go so
far.
Apart from raising fees on ride-for-hire
service, the business groups that DeLeo
challenged this spring to coalesce around a
revenue plan are predictably torn over the
possibility of options like raising the gas tax.
The gas tax, which Straus has all but guaranteed
to be part of the revenue solution, is
especially controversial in light of how gas
prices are likely to rise, even modestly, under
the novel cap-and-invest program Gov. Charlie
Baker is negotiating with other states to reduce
vehicle emissions.
Greater Boston Chamber of Commerce President Jim
Rooney led the coalition that took the
temperature of business groups, and said his
group backs a 15-cent increase in the 24-cent
gas tax. Others, including Associated Industries
of Massachusetts and the Retailers Association
of Massachusetts are opposed, arguing that the
Transportation Climate Initiative will raise
enough money on the back of drivers.
Mariano said the House leaders have "started to
put some numbers next to the strategies," but
the size of the revenue package they will seek
has not yet been determined.
The size of the surplus from fiscal 2019,
however, is better understood. And yet the House
and the Senate appear stalemated over not just
how to spend it, but on the basic procedures of
how to get a bill to Gov. Charlie Baker's desk.
Comptroller Andrew Maylor wrote to legislators
letting them know that for every day that goes
by starting on Friday, the state is losing out
on about $30,000 in interest it could be
accruing from a sizeable deposit planned for the
"rainy day" account.
But the bill is also packed with more than $700
million in total spending and a bunch of policy
proposals, including a controversial business
tax break, that need to be negotiated.
Because of the way the Senate processed the
House's version of the bill, one of the two
branches will need to re-vote it in order to
begin a formal conference committee negotiation.
This week, even in the face of Thursday's
deadline, neither branch blinked, jeopardizing
interest the state could be earning in an
account designed to weather the next recession,
which may be sooner than anyone would like.
The U.S. economy grew in the third quarter at a
modest 1.9 percent annual clip, while the
state's economy contracted by 0.2 percent. It's
a sign, economists said, of "capacity limits" in
the state's ability to provide enough workers to
continue economic and job growth, but not
necessarily of a recession.
The start of negotiations on a compromise
education funding reform bill went a bit
smoother. The conference committee led by Rep.
Alice Peisch and Sen. Jason Lewis was named
Monday and met for the first time on Thursday -
Halloween.
Peisch and Lewis told the group and reporters
there was nothing to be afraid of.
"I'm very confident that we will reconcile the
very modest differences, in my opinion, between
the Senate and the House bill and hopefully we
will soon have legislation on Governor Baker's
desk," Lewis said during the initial public
portion of their now-private talks....
DeLeo's plan to extend his reign coincided with
a controversy over how the speaker rules, with
former Rep. Jay Kaufman of Lexington telling
Commonwealth Magazine that the speaker
threatened to strip him of his chairmanship in
2013 if he voted against a transportation
revenue package that he knew was insufficient.
DeLeo responded by calling Kaufman a "liar," and
also questioned the outlet's decision to publish
the interview.
Faced with the same question as DeLeo, Senate
President Spilka gave a true politician's
answer: "When I have an announcement you'll all
know." ...
STORY OF THE WEEK: Speaker DeLeo asked for it,
and the business community answered. But was the
transportation revenue plan they produced as
helpful as the speaker thought it would be?
State House News Service
Friday, November 1, 2019
Advances - Week of Nov. 3, 2019
The Legislature has put only a few major laws on
the books so far in 2019, but six-member
conference committees now have custody of
distracted driving, children's health and the
landmark $1.5 billion education funding bills.
Those bills could be sprung at any time for
floor votes or remain for an extended period in
the dark recesses of conference.
The bill designed to get motorists to finally
stop texting while driving has been in
conference since June. One bill that can't wait
much longer, legislation allocating the big
fiscal 2019 surplus, remains in limbo as
November begins.
State finance officials have said such closeout
budget bills should be handled by the end of
August, following the June 30 end of the fiscal
year. But the Legislature generally takes August
off and since there are no ramifications for
being late other than some forgone interest
earnings - currently estimated at $500,000 plus
$30,000 a day after Nov. 15 - and some negative
attention from credit rating agencies, lawmakers
in recent years have taken more and more time to
settle these supplemental spending bills.
This year's hangup features disagreement over an
important business tax policy, and a
late-breaking kerfuffle over the process the
Senate used to take up the bill.
Formal sessions, which are held to consider
bills that require debate or roll calls, are
scheduled to end this off-election year by the
third Wednesday in November, or Nov. 20.
Both branches start the week with informal
sessions on Monday. The Senate plans a formal
session Thursday to take up a bill improving
campaign finance reporting for legislative
candidates. The House will be looking to hold
formal sessions next week, with the schedule
hinging on when or whether bills are ready for
votes. The week ahead also brings public
hearings on drugged driving bills and proposals
calling for early voting and ranked choice
voting.
State House News Service
Tuesday, October 29, 2019
Late Budget Means Half a Mil in Forgone Interest
By Michael P. Norton
The Massachusetts Legislature was the last in
the nation to enact an annual budget this year
and now their drawn-out deliberations over last
year's state budget are about to cost the
taxpayers real money.
Comptroller Andrew Maylor faces a Thursday
deadline to file the state's annual Statutory
Basis Financial Report closing the books on
spending and revenues for the fiscal year that
ended June 30, almost four months ago. But
here's the problem: the Legislature still isn't
done spending last year's revenues.
Beacon Hill talks on a final fiscal 2019
supplemental budget only started to heat up this
month, and House and Senate Democrats are
currently looking at two different bills that
spend most of last year's budget surplus, while
proposing rainy day savings account deposits of
between $350 million and $400 million.
In a letter delivered to top lawmakers and Gov.
Charlie Baker Tuesday, Maylor said that when the
budget bill is eventually signed by Gov. Charlie
Baker, it will take about 14 days to compile the
final financial report and have it reviewed by
the state's independent audit firm, currently
KPMG. That timeline puts Maylor's office well
beyond its statutory filing deadline.
"Please note that this is a target to help you
understand when the SBFR might be issued but is
not a guarantee," Maylor wrote.
As part of his work, Maylor is required to
certify and report the state's consolidated net
surplus at the same time as he issues the
financial report, and the surplus certification
determines if the budget is balanced and if
there's any amount to be transferred to the
rainy day account.
Basing his calculations on the financial report
being issued on Nov. 15, Maylor projected
forgone interest on expected stabilization fund
revenues of more than $500,000, an amount he
estimated will increase by more than $30,000
each day beyond Nov. 15.
Calling it a "measurable downstream impact" of
not filing the financial report on time, Maylor
wrote, "I realize that this amount may not seem
important, but as a taxpayer and someone who
spent more than 25 years in local government,
that sum is meaningful."
The spending bills are on the minds of
legislators, and the many stakeholders
throughout Massachusetts who stand to benefit
from newly authorized spending. The House
closeout budget totaled about $723 million in
spending; the Senate bill authorized $780
million in spending.
"On Beacon Hill, a supplemental budget should be
coming out, we think this week," Education
Commissioner Jeff Riley told the Board of
Education Tuesday.
Riley added, "We think legally they have to
figure this out by Oct. 31, but that may be
pushed. Legally is perhaps too strong a word.
Maybe they're shooting for Oct. 31,
traditionally."
Last year, Treasurer Deb Goldberg and former
Comptroller Thomas Shack knocked the practice of
passing final supplemental budgets so long after
fiscal years had ended, with Goldberg comparing
the practice to "kids getting away with stuff
for too long."
To follow industry best practices, Shack said, a
final supplemental budget should be approved by
Aug. 31 each year.
"This is the fourth fiscal year that I've
operated as the commonwealth's comptroller and
this is the fourth year under my comptrollership
that we will not meet the statutory deadline,"
Shack said last October."I would reiterate that
such late activity is really perilous. It's a
well-known risk within the audit world that if
you do not meet your own statutory obligations
you may well subject yourself to really, really
significant scrutiny."
Senate President Pro Tempore William Browsberger
said lawmakers are aware of Thursday's deadline
and said there's a possibility that the budget
bills could be reconciled without the need for a
six-member conference committee.
— Katie Lannan
contributed reporting
State House News Service
Thursday, October 31, 2019
Branches Leave Budget Unfinished, Break for
Weekend
By Colin A. Young
A spending bill allocating the big fiscal 2019
surplus and depositing hundreds of millions of
dollars into the state's rainy day fund was
still stuck in a twilight zone Thursday as
lawmakers recessed for the weekend and gave no
indication that the issue will be resolved
imminently.
On Thursday morning, the House and Senate both
adjourned until Monday without taking action on
a more than $700 million budget bill to close
out the fiscal year that ended June 30,
authorize chunks of one-time spending, shore up
state reserves, and pay bills left over from
fiscal 2019. Both sides said talks over the
budget bill, which is stalled as the branches
gripe over procedural issues, would continue
through the weekend but the important bill has
not been sent to a conference committee and it's
not clear who is negotiating.
"We're working closely with the House both on
the substantive differences to get to agreement
on those and also obviously just to work out the
process to get a final bill on the governor's
desk," Sen. Jason Lewis said after presiding
over the Senate's session Thursday. "Certainly
the Senate, and I believe the House, are
committed to doing that as soon as possible."
Rep. Paul Donato, a member of Speaker Robert
DeLeo's leadership team who presided over
Thursday's session, said the two sides are "just
waiting to see if we can come to a compromise.
That's where we are at this point."
Sen. Michael Rodrigues, the chairman of the
Senate Ways and Means Committee, said he is
"constantly communicating with the House chair."
"We're waiting for them to deal with it. But the
urgency is there," Rodrigues said after the
session. He later added, "Right now, we sent to
the House our version of the supp budget. So
we're waiting for them to figure out what they
want to do with it."
Both branches passed bills this month (H 4132/S
2386) to wrap up fiscal year 2019 budget
management. The Senate acted second, meaning the
next step appears to be the House's. But the
procedure the Senate used to advance the bill
that had come over from the House put the two
branches at loggerheads and has delayed an
already late-arriving bill.
Lewis said the House and Senate are not only
talking about resolving the procedural issues at
play, but also the differences in how the two
branches sought to spend down the surplus. That
raises the question of whether the branches will
seek to resolve their policy differences through
a six-member conference committee, as is
customary when they pass differing legislation.
"Hopefully," Rodrigues said when asked if the
budget bill will go to a conference committee.
Sen. Vinny deMacedo, the ranking Republican on
the Senate Ways and Means Committee, said he
expects he will be named as a conferee once the
two sides iron out their differences on the
process.
Donato said he was "not sure" whether the bills
will be bound for conference committee talks,
which would likely delay the final enactment of
the supplemental budget bill even longer.
"I know that they have their thing, they've
added some, you know, almost like a new bill,"
he said of the Senate. "We have ours. So I'm not
sure how we're going to straighten it out."
In each of the last two years, Massachusetts was
the last Legislature in the country to pass its
annual budget, and now the Legislature has blown
by the Oct. 31 deadline for the state
comptroller to file the state's annual Statutory
Basis Financial Report.
Lawmakers do not appear fazed by the slow pace,
although the extended talks are cutting into the
amount of time legislative leaders have to focus
on other issues and the Legislature has shown a
tendency in recent years to procrastinate,
leaving scores of important decisions to be made
in a frenzy every other July.
The next opportunity for the Legislature to
enact the close-out budget bill is Monday, Nov.
4. That means this year's close-out bill will be
finalized later than any year since at least
1995.
"I just think that budgets are, by design,
complicated," Lewis said when asked why the
House and Senate have recently struggled at
times to deal with fiscal matters in a timely
way. "There's usually a lot of issues at play,
there's obviously a lot of important funding
decisions that are made, there's also often
policy issues that are being worked out and it
takes time and work to resolve those."
Comptroller Andrew Maylor told lawmakers Tuesday
that his office projects that the state will
miss out on $500,000 in interest on expected
stabilization fund deposits if he is not able to
file the SBFR -- which he said would take his
office 14 days to prepare -- by Nov. 15. For
each day after Nov. 15 that the filing is
delayed, he said, the state will effectively
forfeit an additional $30,000.
"As the chair of Ways and Means, I'm always
concerned about foregone revenue," Rodrigues
said Thursday when asked about the consequences
of the delayed supplemental budget.
Donato said: "I know the comptroller says
today's the deadline but we've missed the
deadline before, I think, in the past. We'll see
if we can get something done over the weekend."
— Katie Lannan and
Chris Lisinski contributed to this report.
State House News Service
Tuesday, October 29, 2019
Senate Group's Tax Ideas May Be Revenue Neutral
By Matt Murphy
A group of legislators and policy advocates put
together by Senate leadership to explore ways to
modernize the state's tax code is looking into
the possibility of taxing digital goods and
services like music downloads or Pandora.
The conversation is still in its early stages,
but the group also appears to be leaning toward
a set of recommendations that would be close to
revenue-neutral, eyeing ways to offset changes
like an expansion of the sales tax base with
lower overall rates.
"I don't think we at this table are going to
come to some consensus to raise taxes overall,"
said Sen. William Brownsberger, a Belmont
Democrat and member of the working group.
Brownsberger said he thought the "safest space"
for the group would be to produce a package of
recommendations that didn't significantly alter
how much the state takes in from taxes.
"That's a nice place to be for this group," he
said.
The Senate Revenue Working Group, which is being
led by Sen. Adam Hinds of Pittsfield, met in
public Tuesday where the chairs of its four
subcommittees presented to the larger group on
the topics and questions they were working
through. The group's goal is to produce a
package of recommendations before the end of the
legislative session in the summer of 2020 to
modernize the state's tax code.
Hinds said it's not necessarily the goal of the
group to produce a set of recommendations that
are revenue-neutral, but acknowledged that
"fairness" has been the focus of the group,
which is also "aware that this is happening
within the context of a Fair Share amendment."
That amendment is a proposed ballot question
that has been advanced by the Legislature and
would go before voters in 2022 to raise close to
$2 billion a year by imposing a 4 percent surtax
on income over $1 million.
"I think it's still an open conversation," Hinds
said. "The emphasis has always been, and we have
a mission statement that talks about
modernizing, simplifying, make more fair, and in
that process we believe we will collect more
revenue. How much, I think, is the question."
The taxation of services has been a
controversial policy issue in Massachusetts for
decades. Gov Michael Dukakis tried to do it in
the early 1990s, only to see his successor Gov.
William Weld successfully repeal it.
More recently, the Legislature tried to tax
software services as part of the last big
revenue package to address transportation needs,
but wound up rolling that back as well in the
face of opposition from a major employment
sector.
Former Revenue Commissioner Amy Pitter and David
Sullivan, a one-time top lawyer to Gov. Deval
Patrick and Senate President Stanley Rosenberg,
are leading a subcommittee looking at the sales
tax.
"Not only do we have a narrow sales tax base but
it's getting narrower because of the way the
economy is changing," Sullivan said, referencing
technology like song downloads that aren't taxed
like a CD.
Sullivan acknowledged that there are challenges
inherent in trying to tax services and also make
sure the tax code doesn't disproportionately
impact lower-income families.
Northeastern University Professor Peter Enrich
suggested that a broadening of the sales tax
base could be coupled with a lowering of the
overall rate.
Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation President
Eileen McAnneny said her group, which is looking
at the income tax, had spent considerable time
discussing the possibility of increasing the
$4,400 personal income tax exemption as a way to
create a more progressive income tax.
Brownsberger, however, urged the group not to
spend any more time on it, suggesting it would
be politically untenable because it would
require a significant income tax rate hike to
keep it revenue neutral.
"I think it's a good tax policy, but I don't
think it's a marketable tax policy, so I'm not
advocating for it," Brownsberger said.
The idea of increasing the personal tax
exemption recalls former Gov. Patrick's proposal
to double the tax credit as part of his failed
package to raise $2 billion by increasing the
income tax and lowering the sales tax.
Brownsberger said that in order to keep up with
inflation and make a difference for a broad
swath of the population struggling in the modern
economy, the exemption would have to be raised
to nearly $50,000.
That would also require a hike in the income tax
rate to about 9 percent, which would be a
difficult sell politically, he said.
"I don't even think people should spin their
wheels on it," Brownsberger told the group.
In an interview after the meeting, Brownsberger
was also dismissive of the idea of a smaller
increase in the exemption, which would mostly
impact people on the lower end of the income
ladder.
"Sure, it's not a game-changer, though," he
said.
The group is also exploring changes to a laundry
list of other tax policies, including corporate
tax rates and reporting requirements, real-time
sales tax remittance, the state's
competitiveness with respect to deeds excise
taxes and real estate transfer fees, the earned
income tax credit and the value of being coupled
with federal tax code with regard to everything
from charitable deductions to the child tax
credit.
Hinds said the next goal for the group is to
narrow its areas of focus and give the
Department of Revenue a list of priority areas
by Thanksgiving so that the agency can start
crunching some numbers.
"I do feel like we're on track for sure," Hinds
said. "As you know there are other discussions
going on with regard to transportation revenues,
and I think we're well placed to have a set of
recommendations by the end of this legislative
session."
House leaders are trying to put together a
package of revenue raising reforms for a vote
before the end of November that would be
dedicated to transportation infrastructure and
public transit improvements.
The
Boston Herald
Tuesday, October 29, 2019
Tax on music downloads eyed by Senate revenue
working group
By Mary Markos
Millennials beware — a committee charged with
revamping the state’s tax code is eyeing music
downloads and streaming services.
A tax on digital goods — including music — is
“worth looking into,” said attorney David
Sullivan, a member of the sales subcommittee
within the Senate Revenue Working Group.
“People don’t buy CDs for their music these
days, they download. CDs are clearly taxable,
downloads not so much. So what do you do about
that? It’s a difficult question,” Sullivan said
during the meeting.
He also pointed to providers like Pandora or
Spotify, which require subscriptions, as another
potential source of revenue.
“It seems like something that we need to worry
about,” Sullivan, a Senior Democratic Voter
Protection Attorney, said. “One of the problems
that we’re confronting is that, not only do we
have a narrow sales tax base, but it’s getting
narrower because of the way that the economy is
changing. There are fewer goods and more
services in the economy and that means the sales
tax won’t be bringing in as much revenue as
before.”
According to Sullivan, the measure would need to
be broad in order to avoid singling out one
particular industry, which he said could result
in “active” lobbying against it. He also noted
the history in the state with this type of tax
reform, after former Gov. Michael Dukakis
attempted a broad tax on a range of services in
1990 and Gov. Bill Weld campaigned on a promise
to repeal it when he was elected in 1991.
State Sen. Adam Hinds (D-Pittsfield) chairs the
21-member group of stakeholders with outside
interests, which was established in April, and
is working toward a goal to make legislative
recommendations by the end of the session.
“Today’s meeting was a result of months and
months of work at the subcommittee level to
really be clear on how we can modernize and
simplify our tax code and make it more fair,”
Hinds told the Herald.
“We are starting to narrow down where we think
the more detailed conversations will go,” he
added, “so it’s a good point to check in with
the Department of Revenue to see what type of
revenue impact each of these ideas have.”
State House News Service
Tuesday, October 29, 2019
New York Among Three States That Are Not All-in
on TCI
By Chris Lisinski
The exact effects of a still-in-development
regional partnership to cap transportation
emissions will depend on three states that are
participating in discussions but have not yet
committed to the pact, a Massachusetts official
said Monday.
Three of the 13 jurisdictions involved in the
effort are doing so as "observers." Maine, New
York and New Hampshire did not sign the same
December 2018 agreement to a cap-and-invest
system as others including Massachusetts and the
District of Columbia, according to Kate Hichter,
assistant secretary for policy and coordination
in the Department of Transportation.
"It is the collective hope that they will come
in at the end, but there is a robust internal
negotiation, I would say, going on around those
things," Hichter told MassDOT and the MBTA's
boards during a joint meeting Monday.
Fichter, who is leading MassDOT's participation
in the Transportation and Climate Initiative,
said that final decision by observers could
change the targets for each state that will
impose regulations. The three states remain
involved in discussions in the meantime, and
parties released a draft framework this month
indicating they plan to target on-road fuel
sources for emissions caps.
"Depending on how the pie is sliced, it changes
both the emissions budget for each state that
does participate as well as the allowance
proceeds that they get coming back," Fichter
said. "There is a bit of a chicken and egg. We
have to know how many states are participating
to know exactly how the allocation formulas work
out. I think that will shake out quite a bit
over the next few months."
The
Boston Globe
Wednesday, October 30, 2019
Businesses plead for solution to alleviate
traffic congestion woes
By Jon Chesto
Nearly
every major business organization in
Massachusetts has united behind a call for more
government spending to expand public transit and
improve the roads, with the hope that a new
infusion of cash can help solve the
congestion-related woes that vex their workers.
The business community’s call to action is due
to be released Wednesday, several weeks before
the House of Representatives will debate a major
transportation bill that could lead to billions
of dollars in improvements.
While there was wide support for some form of
additional revenue, there was less consensus
about how best to raise the money, according to
a report issued by the business groups.
Increasing the state’s gas tax garnered support
from only a slim majority in the poll of
business groups. While that majority did not
agree on a specific increase, the Greater Boston
Chamber of Commerce backs a 15-cent increase,
phased in over three years, and many others
support a similar increase. At that size, it
would be the biggest hike in a generation.
More popular options included raising fees on
Uber and Lyft rides, and considering expanding
the use of tolls, such as adjusting the price
based on the time of day a commuter uses the
roads.
“This is what I would call a watershed moment,”
said Richard Dimino, president of A Better City,
a business group that has focused on
transportation as far back as the Big Dig. “We
can’t really have a transformative 21st-century
system without new revenue.”
The business group efforts were organized by
Greater Boston Chamber of Commerce chief
executive James Rooney, a former head of the
Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority. The
cross section of 28 chambers of commerce and
other associations undertook months of
discussing various initiatives and then each
group was polled on its preferred solutions.
One goal, Rooney said, is “to create pricing
that’s not just based on how much money we need,
but what behavior we want to incentivize,” such
as encouraging more drivers to switch to public
transit, or commute in off-peak hours.
Another goal: to find ways to pay for popular
projects, such as electrifying the commuter rail
system and expanding South Station, that lack
funding today.
The groups were spurred in part by a call from
House Speaker Robert DeLeo for their ideas to
prepare for the upcoming transportation debate.
Senate President Karen Spilka has also asked
business leaders for ideas.
Business support could help give some political
cover as lawmakers tackle the tough topic of
raising taxes and fees to deal with what many
executives consider to be a full-blown crisis.
While Rooney did not indicate how each business
group voted, two major organizations have
already declined to support a state gas tax
increase.
For now, the Massachusetts High Technology
Council and Associated Industries of
Massachusetts are only willing to back a
climate-change fee on motor vehicle fuels that
is being championed by Governor Charlie Baker,
and not a straight-up gas tax increase as Rooney
and other chamber members propose. Though the
fee would likely drive up the cost of gasoline,
Baker and other proponents have resisted calling
it a tax increase.
This to-be-determined charge is being considered
by several Northeast and Mid-Atlantic states as
part of a group effort to reduce greenhouse gas
emissions. It would not need the approval of the
Massachusetts Legislature.
AIM and Mass. High Tech said the state needs to
reform the way it spends money on transportation
projects before considering additional revenue
sources. These measures include streamlining
procurement and better integrating the design
stages of a project with construction, and are
outlined in an $18 billion transportation bond
bill Baker filed earlier this year.
“There’s a whole lot of structural problems that
are preventing the T and the DOT from spending
the money they have now,” said Chris Geehern,
executive vice president at AIM. “Dumping a
boatload of money on that situation strikes us
as really inefficient.”
Meanwhile, a separate, smaller coalition led by
the Kendall Square Association submitted its own
recommendations to the Legislature that echo
those of the bigger group: a gas tax increase of
18 cents a gallon, new Uber and Lyft fees, and
congestion pricing through tolls on the
highways.
“We’re in a genuine crisis,” said KSA president
C.A. Webb. “The system has been underfunded for
at least a generation.”
Representative William Straus, the House
cochairman of the transportation committee, said
House leaders met for 90 minutes on Monday to
work on the transportation bill. Those
deliberations will continue, to prepare a bill
in time for a floor debate in the third week of
November. The Senate will then take up the issue
in 2020, with both sides needing to reach an
agreement by the end of next July.
More than 30 states have a tax higher than the
current Massachusetts gas tax of 26.5 cents a
gallon, according to the Tax Foundation. A gas
tax hike would be the first since a 3-cent
increase in 2013, when the Legislature also
adopted an automatic increase going forward
indexed to inflation. That indexed increase was
subsequently repealed by voters in a ballot
initiative in 2014.
Still, the 2013 increase was itself the first in
more than two decades; meanwhile the cost of a
monthly T pass has essentially tripled since
1991, according to the Greater Boston Chamber.
The vast majority of business groups agree on a
higher charge for Uber and Lyft rides than the
current 20-cent-per-ride fee on ride-sharing
trips, to at least $1 a trip. A slight majority
support even higher rates for trips during peak
times.
Then there is the future of tolls. Most business
groups say the current system is inequitable;
only a small segment of commuters pay tolls
today. They recommend a state task force that
could analyze the most effective places to put
new electronic toll gantries, and whether to use
time-of-day pricing to encourage drivers to hit
the road at less-congested periods.
Baker, meanwhile, has suggested allowing
motorists to pay their way out of congestion by
building toll lanes that charge for the right to
zip past backed-up traffic in adjacent lanes. In
August, the Baker administration released a
report that acknowledged the Boston area’s epic
traffic jams had reached a tipping point. The
governor has proposed using the new climate fee
to fund some of the projects in his $18 billion
bond bill.
During the past few years, transportation has
emerged as a top issue for members of many
business groups as their workers wrestle with
frequent train and bus delays and the occasional
derailment, and brave the seemingly ever-growing
rush hours.
“It’s so counterproductive to be stuck in this
quagmire,” said Newton-Needham Chamber president
Greg Reibman.
“We know it’s bad for our economy, and it’s bad
for productivity, but it’s also really bad for
morale,” he added. “It was really important that
the business community get together and speak
collectively.”
The
Boston Globe
Wednesday, October 30, 2019
Transportation debate highlights differences in
state’s business community
By Jon Chesto
House Speaker Bob DeLeo made a bold request to
the state’s business community in March: Come up
with some transportation policies that everyone
can unite behind.
Good luck with that one, Mr. Speaker.
Nearly 30 business groups from across the state
have huddled for months, essentially to heed
that noble call, with the results becoming
public Wednesday, a few weeks ahead of the big
transportation debate in the Massachusetts
House. On its face, there’s a semblance of
unity. The Greater Boston Chamber of Commerce
reported near-unanimous support for some kind of
increase in government-controlled revenue,
provided the additional money is paired with
structural reforms, to address the state’s
numerous road and public transit woes.
But reaching a consensus on the particulars has
proved to be more elusive. Chamber chief
executive Jim Rooney, who shepherded these
talks, initially strove for unanimity on a
package of solutions that these disparate groups
from across the state could endorse. In the end,
Rooney and his colleagues opted instead to
release an “a la carte” menu of options, each
with varying levels of support.
A strong majority of participants polled by the
chamber backed an increase in fees on Uber and
Lyft rides, and the creation of a tolling task
force to study time-of-day pricing and new
locations for electronic gantries. But a
proposed increase in the gas tax proved more
divisive. A smaller majority of the business
groups that participated in the poll backed some
increase in the gas tax; the Greater Boston
Chamber suggested a 15-cents-a-gallon increase
and others supported something in that range.
But others don’t want the gas tax raised at all.
For example, Associated Industries of
Massachusetts rejected the gas tax and chose to
back the Baker administration by supporting its
$18 billion bond bill, which includes a number
of systemic reforms to the state’s
transportation bureaucracy, and a multistate
charge on fuel aimed at curbing vehicles’
greenhouse gas emissions, nicknamed “TCI.” But
the money from TCI is years away, and in the
interim, AIM argues the state doesn’t need other
new revenues to improve transportation. The
Mass. High Technology Council took a similar
stance. Ditto the Massachusetts Competitive
Partnership.
Eight of the 28 participating groups didn’t end
up responding to Rooney’s poll. And the National
Federation of Independent Business chose not to
even participate from the start. State director
Chris Carlozzi said his group was worried the
end result of all these meetings would be new
fees or taxes. NFIB hates that idea. Some of its
roughly 5,500 small-business members here
struggle to get by.
Part of the issue is geography. NFIB and AIM
members are spread throughout the state, many
far from the nearest T stop, and are less
alarmed by Red Line derailments and Orange Line
shutdowns than the Boston-focused groups.
Rooney recognized this could be a potential
issue when he started these talks last winter —
which is why he included groups from all
corners, from Cape Cod to the Berkshires. He
knows he needs statewide support for an
ambitious agenda to succeed at the State House.
Some of these far-flung groups signed on, but
not everyone.
The coalition’s members met with DeLeo and with
Senate President Karen Spilka in August to brief
them on the progress. Soon after those two
meetings, Rooney says, it became clear that the
typical business-group statement, in which
everyone involved endorses it, would not be in
the offing.
Even a smaller, separate group orchestrated by
the Kendall Square Association and the
left-leaning Alliance for Business Leadership
couldn’t reach an agreement on everything. The
Kendall Square crew issued a statement calling
for an 18-cent increase to the gas tax,
time-of-day toll prices, and new fees on
ride-share trips. Missing in action: the
Alliance. That board decided it couldn’t sign on
because it would only endorse a plan that also
included the millionaires tax. This surcharge on
high-earners will likely go to voters in 2022 as
a constitutional amendment, although it has been
doggedly opposed by many business groups.
So much for unity.
But Representative Bill Straus, the House
transportation committee chairman, says he
actually prefers to receive a diversity of
thought as House leaders hammer out a
transportation bill in time for a floor debate
expected in the third week of November.
Sometimes, Straus says, when coalitions try to
unite behind grand statements, minority views
get silenced. That could mean lawmakers end up
with less input, not more. One thing’s for sure:
they won’t be lacking for ideas and opinions
from the business community this time around.
State House News Service
Wednesday, October 30, 2019
Retailers Draw Line on Size of Gas Tax Increase
By Michael P. Norton
Massachusetts retailers support an increase in
the gas tax tied to a multi-state effort to cut
carbon emissions, but would not back a further
hike in the fuel levy beyond that.
As interest groups and politicians ready
themselves for a House debate on proposed
transportation taxes and revenues, Retailers
Association of Massachusetts President Jon Hurst
said Wednesday that his group supports Gov.
Charlie Baker's efforts to enlist Massachusetts
in a new market-based program to reduce
transportation emissions as long as the increase
in the price of gas as a result the
Transportation Climate Initiative (TCI) is
limited to between 5 and 15 cents a gallon.
"We oppose additional gas taxes on top of TCI,
because they are avoidable by going over the
border for car and trucker drivers alike,"
according to Hurst. "Tax avoidance and the
regressive nature of excessive increases are
real concerns."
The retailers also support a $1 increase in
ride-sharing fees as long as the fees are
transparent, "some steps on tolling," including
a look at state border tolls, and investments in
lower cost "gateway cities" with less traffic
congestion.
Motorists pay 24 cents per gallon in state gas
taxes, fractions of a penny below the national
average, according to the U.S. Energy
Information Administration.
For each gallon of gas, drivers also pay a fee
of roughly 2.5 cents to support the Underground
Storage Tank Petroleum Product Cleanup Fund.
When all state and federal assessments are
calculated in, about 45 cents of every gallon of
gas pumped in Massachusetts goes to taxes or
fees.
State House News Service
Wednesday, October 30, 2019
Biz Groups Support Gas Tax, TNC Fee Increases
By Colin A. Young
Just think about it: congestion pricing, managed
lanes, tolling on routes other than just the
Massachusetts Turnpike, money drawn from drivers
being invested back into public transit, and a
transportation system that could adapt to meet
future needs.
That's what most of a coalition of business
groups supports asking the Legislature to tell
the smartest minds in the state: start thinking
seriously about the options for reducing
congestion on roads, improving accessibility and
service on public transportation, limiting
greenhouse gas emissions and raising the money
to pay for it in a fair and
geographically-equitable way.
But in the meantime, get to raising the revenue
necessary to take care of immediate needs --
like structurally deficient bridges and poor
roadway conditions -- by taxing customers a
little more for gasoline and increasing the fee
built into ride service fares, much of the
Massachusetts Business Coalition on
Transportation agrees.
The consensus ranges from agreement among all
but one group that the state needs additional
revenue for transportation to very narrow
majority support for specific approaches to
raising that revenue. It came as the result of
months of talks among the statewide group of
chambers of commerce, research and planning
firms, and industry associations.
"So I want the Legislature to adopt a short-term
revenue strategy that enables us to think more
with a greater sense of urgency about the
problems we need to address, put that money to
work," James Rooney, president and CEO of the
Greater Boston Chamber of Commerce and co-chair
of the MBCT, said. "I would ask them to also
make a statement, 'we're not done yet.' We want
to know what the 21st-century pricing structure
should do for the consumption of mobility, that
deals with incentivizing behavior and equity
statewide and helping us deal with other public
policy issues like housing."
There is "strong majority support" among the
MBCT member groups for creating a 21st Century
Roadway Pricing Task Force that would be helmed
by private citizens and given one year to come
up with a specific plan -- including toll gantry
locations, pricing rates, a timeline, and
options for mitigating social and geographic
inequities -- that could be used like a menu of
options for policymakers.
"We support the idea of a commission that will
actually start spreading some numbers ... start
understanding, whether it's vehicle miles or
where a toll gantry might go, some real specific
data to figure out if one of these revenue ideas
or several of these revenue ideas would actually
generate what we hope they could generate and be
a positive and not a negative, because pricing
something could sometimes hurt more than it can
help," MBCT co-chair and Cape Cod Chamber of
Commerce CEO Wendy Northcross said.
The group would ideally be given specific
questions to consider and answer -- What are the
federal hurdles? What would a statewide tolling
system cost to implement and administer? What
kind of a system would be sustainable in the
future, when the gas tax might not be as
reliable of a revenue source? -- and would
present the Legislature and public with a range
of alternatives.
Before the various regional business groups
could fully back any one strategy or approach,
Northcross said, they want to see the details
and better understand what it would mean for
their regions.
"I don't think we're ready to legislate anything
other than a demand that smart people think
about it and be very specific about it," Rooney
said.
A Crisis Point
The business community has increasingly decried
the Boston area's public transportation woes as
a hindrance to growth. Traffic and congestion on
the roads all over the state make for long and
frustrating commutes by car, and the
unpredictable nature of public transportation in
all regions frequently makes workers late to
their jobs.
A Better City released a report this year
detailing an $8.4 billion shortfall in revenues
needed to ensure state roads, bridges and MBTA
infrastructure are in a state of good repair
over the next 10 years. And a March poll
conducted by MassINC Polling Group found that 66
percent of resident think action is "urgently
needed" to improve the state's transportation
system.
As it worked to find consensus with other
business groups, the Greater Boston Chamber of
Commerce looked at the work done by the
executive branch's Commission on the Future of
Transportation and extrapolated it to infer that
the problem that's already causing stress for
the state economy is only going to get worse if
nothing is done.
"On a daily basis, this issue of mobility is
affecting personal lives, workers, business and
commerce. But as importantly, it is not allowing
us to deal with some other public policy issues
or have confidence that our economic growth
strategies can continue to sustain if we don't
deal with this," Rooney said. "So we view it as
a moment -- and we've used the word crisis to
describe it -- that we need to have a strategic
plan, including revenue, that deals with it."
Back in March, House Speaker Robert DeLeo used a
speech before the Greater Boston Chamber to call
upon business groups to be part of the solution.
He said it's crucial that "the business
community clearly articulates the transportation
policies that it can unite behind" and present
"what employers can bring to the table as we
think about the state's transportation
networks."
"It's all on the table," DeLeo told reporters
after his remarks. He added, "Quite frankly, I
think we're at a situation relative to
transportation we're at a critical point. If
we're going to continue to grow our economy here
in Massachusetts, transportation has to be one
of the major factors that we address."
The speaker specifically mentioned the gas tax
to reporters that day and Transportation
Committee Chair Rep. William Straus has
repeatedly said since that it would be hard --
"not impossible, just hard," he said this week
-- to put together a transportation financing
proposal that didn't include an adjustment to
the gas tax.
MassINC's March poll showed 80 percent support
for the general idea of raising new state
revenue to spend on transportation
infrastructure and public transit.
Preparing For The Future
Rooney said the idea isn't fully baked just yet,
but the thought is that the state could create a
high-tech and statewide network of tolling
gantries or some other technology that would be
flexible enough to accommodate different
approaches to roadway pricing -- tolls,
congestion pricing, demand pricing, etc.
"It becomes a tool, think of the technology as a
tool," he said.
One idea the business community wants a task
force to delve deeply into is tolling other
interstate highways to collect toll revenue from
various parts of the state. That would require
legislative authorization since the Department
of Transportation's authority to impose tolls is
limited under current state law to the Mass.
Turnpike and the metropolitan highway system.
Rooney said any statewide tolling system would
have to be as fair as possible to all regions.
"Right now, our system of tolling is not
equitable, it's just the east-west travel on the
Turnpike and people who take the bridges. It's
just not," he said. "So how do you create a
statewide equitable program that says, 'OK,
we're all in this.'"
Rooney and other business leaders interested in
statewide tolling might find an ally in Senate
President Karen Spilka, who represents a
MetroWest district that relies heavily on the
Turnpike.
"Simply put, and I put this out there, if tolls
are a good idea for my district, my region, I
believe we should explore the possibility of
expanded tolling, including possibly at our
borders," Spilka said in April when she spoke to
the Greater Boston Chamber. "Our best ideas
won't matter if we can't find a way to make a
21st-century transportation infrastructure a
reality and find a way to pay for it."
Who pays -- whether it be tolls or other pricing
strategies the system that Rooney envisions
could support -- and how the money raised is
spent is of critical importance to the Economic
Development Council of Western Massachusetts.
"We can certainly appreciate the pressures and
the needs to do something with the T but, quite
frankly, not on the backs of Western Mass. or
disproportionately on the backs of Western Mass.
and we have other needs out here," Rick
Sullivan, the group's CEO and a co-chair of the
MBCT, said. "We have been advocating for a
larger definition of transportation
infrastructure to include communications
infrastructure -- so broadband, internet, wifi,
cell service -- so we have the ability out here
in Western Mass. to take advantage of the
current and up-and-coming technolgoies whether
they be Uber-like or whatnot."
The 2013 transportation financing law required
MassDOT to "develop a comprehensive tolling plan
for additional Interstate and limited access
state highways within the Commonwealth ... and
study and report on the feasibility of
establishing additional Interstate tolls along
the borders of the Commonwealth."
That MassDOT report, released December 2013,
found that "tolling additional Interstate and
limited (i.e. controlled) access state highways
supports the policy goals set forth in The Way
Forward Plan by providing an efficient and
equitable source of transportation revenue
enhancement, which can also be used as an
effective tool for congestion management by
setting toll rates lower for off-peak travel
times."
The report, though, noted that "significant
further easing of Federal restrictions on
tolling the Interstate Highway System and other
Federal-aid facilities must occur in order to
implement" statewide tolling.
Short-Term Fixes
Rooney and the other business leaders are
cognizant that creating a one-year task force
doesn't generate a dime of the revenue they
think is needed to address the state's weighty
problems. Instead, at the same time as it
specifically directs a task force to come up
with options for future solutions, the
Legislature should also "adopt immediate revenue
streams and begin to apply it to things that
need to be done now."
"And we think that the immediate revenue can
come from the gas tax and TNCs," Rooney said,
referring to transportation network companies.
Among the MBCT, there is "strong majority
support" for increasing the fees on rideshare
services at least $1 per ride, with some groups
supporting increases of as much as $3 per trip.
And a "fragile majority" of the member groups
support adopting a model similar to surge
pricing, under which the per-ride fee would
increase at peak times and for luxury cars, and
decrease for pooled rides.
For the Greater Boston Chamber, an important
part of the discussion around TNC fees is where
that new money would get spent. Under a plan
developed by the chamber, the current 20-cent
fee would continue to go to the municipality
where the ride originated and the Commonwealth
Transportation Fund, but the additional amount
raised by the fee would go to public transit,
either the MBTA or the regional transit
authority that serves the municipality where the
ride began.
"The key concept here is the money stays at
home, wherever it is raised," Rooney said.
"Money raised in Springfield stays in the
Springfield region, Worcester stays in the
Worcester region, for public transportation."
There's also support among the coalition --
roughly 70 percent of the groups, Rooney said --
for a gas tax increase of between five and 25
cents, separate and apart from the governor's
proposed regional transportation emission
effort. The Greater Boston Chamber of Commerce
backs a 15-cent gas tax increase phased in over
a three-year period.
Motorists currently pay 24 cents per gallon in
state gas tax, fractions of a penny below the
national average, according to the U.S. Energy
Information Administration. For each gallon of
gas, drivers also pay a fee of roughly 2.5 cents
to support the Underground Storage Tank
Petroleum Product Cleanup Fund. When all state
and federal assessments are calculated in, about
45 cents of every gallon of gas pumped in
Massachusetts goes to taxes or fees.
Every penny added to the state's gas tax could
produce roughly $32 million in new annual
revenue, the Massachusetts Budget and Policy
Center wrote in a report earlier this month. The
report also warned that increasing the gas tax
will disproportionately impact low- and
moderate-income households, and may be
undermined by the state's long-term goal of
reducing its carbon footprint.
Political Realities
Many of the themes that emerged from the MBCT's
months of discussions seem to overlap with ideas
that House lawmakers gave voice to this week
after meeting for 90 minutes with DeLeo to
discuss the House's upcoming transportation
revenue package.
"What we've been doing is looking at the
different options that are predictably out there
and seeing whether they could fit in or out of
an overall revenue package that members would be
comfortable with," Straus said Monday.
Revenue Committee Chairman Rep. Mark Cusack said
that new revenue would be "sourced from
transportation for transportation" to the extent
possible.
Majority Leader Ronald Mariano told the News
Service that no decision has yet been made on
how large of a revenue package to pursue, but
that the House still plans to put a bill before
members for a vote before the Legislature
recesses for the year on Nov. 20.
The
Boston Herald
Thursday, October 31, 2019
Gas taxes could leave drivers doubly down in the
dumps
By Mary Markos
Drivers could be hit twice with price hikes at
the gas pump as lawmakers consider two measures
that would drive up the cost of fuel, which
critics say puts the state’s financial burden on
the backs of working people.
“Legislative leaders are trying to ram through
two taxes and it will only drive up the cost of
living,” MassFiscal Alliance Spokesman Paul
Craney said. “If you actually want to have a
discussion on transportation infrastructure, you
have to start with how we’re spending our money
before we ask taxpayers, who are the most
generous in the country, to fork over more money
so that Beacon Hill politicians can just spend
it.”
Legislators have been mulling over an adjustment
to the gas tax for months as a way to raise new
revenue for transportation infrastructure and
public transit improvements, which was discussed
during a meeting between Speaker Robert DeLeo
and House leadership earlier this week.
Meanwhile, Gov. Charlie Baker is engaged in a
multi-state Transportation Climate Initiative,
which would charge transportation fuel companies
for the carbon emissions associated with the gas
and diesel they sell. Half of that money would
go towards Baker’s $18 billion transportation
bond bill, which includes major investments in
the MBTA.
A Baker spokeswoman said the measure, “has been
met with a broad coalition of support,” from
folks in the business and environmental fields,
including the Mass. High Tech Council, the
Associated Industries of Massachusetts,
MassTaxpayers Foundation and the Environmental
League of Massachusetts.
Those carbon fees would be passed along to the
consumer through gas prices and drive up the
cost of living, according to Craney and
Christopher Carlozzi, the State Director of the
National Federation of Independent Business.
“Lawmakers talk about affordability and wanting
to make sure residents can afford to live in
Massachusetts and yet here we are talking about
taxes that are going to be raised on every
commuter, worker, consumer, small business and
working family,” Carlozzi said. “This will just
be one more thing that makes Massachusetts
unaffordable.”
Raise Up Massachusetts officials argued that the
gas tax increases are too regressive in a letter
to legislators Thursday as well.
The Massachusetts Business Coalition on
Transportation and the Greater Boston Chamber of
Commerce have indicated their support for the
Transportation Climate Initiative and a 15-cent
gas tax increase phased in over a three-year
period.
Rooney argued that the gas tax in Massachusetts
has been held “artificially low” for over 30
years, increasing by “only” three cents since
1991.
“The gas tax has long been an established source
of revenue for transportation funding in the
Commonwealth and, frankly, nationally,” Rooney
said.
State House News Service
Thursday, October 31, 2019
Coalition Urges Members to Back Biz Tax Measures
By Michael P. Norton
Members of a powerful advocacy coalition are
mounting an effort to include business tax
measures in a revenue package designed to
bankroll transportation investments, saying
proposals that add to the costs of gasoline and
tolls are too regressive and will only put a
heavier burden on low-income and middle class
residents.
House leaders are assembling a revenue plan for
debate sometime in the next three weeks, but
have not unveiled any specific revenue-raising
proposals.
In a letter to supporters Thursday, Raise Up
Massachusetts officials argued that any revenue
package should include proposals to create a
tiered corporate minimum tax, address offshore
tax shelters used by businesses, and require
businesses to publicly disclose their tax
burdens. The group, which estimates its ideas
would generate at least $250 million, says
businesses need to kick in contributions toward
needed investments.
Raise Up is the group leading the push for a
constitutional amendment to impose a $2 billion
surtax on wealthy households. In recent years,
the coalition has used the initiative petition
process to force new laws guaranteeing paid
family and medical leave benefits, earned sick
time benefits, and minimum wage increases.
It's unclear whether any of the measures sought
by the group would prevail in the House or
Senate. Democrats hold a super-majority in both
branches, but legislative leaders have been
reluctant to directly impose new tax burdens on
businesses. The House this month approved a
business interest tax measure that's worth a
total of $37 million to affected companies, but
the plan was not embraced by the Senate and
remains under negotiation.
While a formal proposal is still in development,
House leaders say they want to come up with new
revenues for transportation investments by
tapping into users of the transportation system.
That approach could favor an increase in the
24-cent per gallon gas tax, last increased by 3
cents a gallon in 2013, higher or new tolls, and
higher fees on ride services like Uber and Lyft.
While there are divisions within the business
community, some business groups this week
indicated they favor increases in the gas tax
and ride service fees.
"Noticeably absent is a greater contribution
from large, profitable businesses," according to
the unsigned letter from Raise Up, a coalition
that includes 100 labor, faith and community
organizations. "Raise Up Massachusetts does not
support a revenue package comprised entirely of
regressive taxes and fees."
Specifically, Raise Up is calling on lawmakers
to include the following three measures in their
revenue package:
-- Global Intangible Low Taxed Income tax. The
levy would apply to a portion of profits at
multinational corporations who do business in
Massachusetts but use federal tax code
provisions to shift U.S. profits to offshore tax
havens.
-- Tiered Corporate Minimum Tax. The proposal
would switch Massachusetts from the existing
corporate minimum tax of $456 per year to a
tiered structure that Raise Up says "would
ensure that larger corporations pay a minimum in
proportion to the size of their business" in
Massachusetts while small businesses would
continue to pay the minimum.
-- Corporate Disclosure. While the letter does
not detail the proposal, Raise Up wants a
disclosure law that it says would "help identify
bad actors in the business community and allow
us to measure the effects of the loopholes in
our existing corporate tax rules." The group
says a lack of information about the amount of
taxes paid by specific corporations makes it
difficult for researchers to examine "corporate
loopholes."
The corporate tax disclosure measure was the
focus of an initiative petition campaign in 1992
led by Jim Braude, the modern-day talk show host
who back then headed up the former Tax Equity
Alliance for Massachusetts (TEAM). Braude,
working with former Congressman Joseph Kennedy
II, ended up dropping the ballot question in
favor of passage of a watered down disclosure
law that followed talks with Gov. William Weld
and members of the business community.
Massachusetts motorists, in addition to the
possibility of a gas tax increase, could also
face higher gas prices in connection with a
compact Gov. Charlie Baker is pursuing with
other Northeast and mid-Atlantic states to
reduce carbon emissions through a cap-and-invest
program to drive down emissions from cars and
trucks.
The
Boston Herald
Saturday, November 2, 2019
Green gas tax bid could push prices close to $5
a gallon
By Joe Dwinell
Gas tax opponents say they’ll regroup for a new
fight if Gov. Charlie Baker joins an
anti-climate change initiative that could push
prices at the pump north of $4 a gallon.
Baker is eyeing the multistate Transportation
Climate Initiative, which would charge energy
companies for the carbon emissions associated
with the gas and diesel they sell. Half of that
revenue would go toward Baker’s $18 billion
transportation bond bill, which includes major
investments in the MBTA.
Joining the TCI, critics warn, will just hit
consumers at the pump.
According to the AAA Fuel Gauge Survey, the
average price of regular gas in Massachusetts is
$2.56. But in California, where a similar
climate initiative was rolled out, gas prices
have gone as high as $4.90 cents a gallon.
“I don’t think it’s ever a wise policy to raise
sales taxes. It just kills working people,” said
state Rep. David DeCoste, a Norwell Republican.
“Can you imagine $4 a gallon? It would just
cream local retailers and crush the rest of us.”
DeCoste said he’s hoping the governor backs away
from the pact, which would also rope in Maine,
New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York,
Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia,
Connecticut, Delaware and Maryland.
Holly Robichaud, a GOP strategist who helped
lead the repeal of a hike in the state’s gas tax
in 2014, said it’s “outrageous” that any talk of
boosting what motorists pay at the pump is
coming up again.
“They should have gotten the message five years
ago. Any hike in the cost of gas would be a
killer for every small business and commuter,”
said Robichaud. “There’s no need for it. We
don’t have a money problem, we have a spending
problem.”
The Baker team said the governor is mulling the
TCI program, but such a hike is not a slam dunk.
“Governor Baker is pursuing the Transportation
and Climate Initiative and it has been met with
a broad coalition of support from members of
both the business and environmental communities
who believe this initiative will further
mitigate the impacts of climate change, protect
the health of our residents, and build a more
resilient, sustainable and equitable
transportation system for the next generation,”
said spokesman Anisha Chakrabarti.
But drivers say they have it hard enough
already.
John Patterson, 61, of Dorchester, told the
Herald Friday, “It’s unfortunate that gas will
have to go up because it would hurt the
consumers’ pockets. It’s a necessity, and my
means of transportation … is my bread and
butter.”
Lin Li, of Brighton, added she doesn’t think
such a tax would work. “People need to get to
work one way or another it’s just going to cost
them more. I still don’t think it’s going to
alleviate the congestion … that’s not going to
solve that problem.”
The Greater Boston Chamber of Commerce and the
advocacy group Transportation for Massachusetts
says a 15-cent increase over the next three
years is more realistic.
The
Boston Herald
Saturday, November 2, 2019
A Boston Herald editorial
Gas tax is a bad idea
Do you want to pay an additional $1.50 or more
to fill up every time you stop at a gas station?
You would if a proposed gas tax being pushed by
some Massachusetts lawmakers comes to pass.
They’re in fact considering two measures that
would drive up the cost of fuel. Gov. Charlie
Baker’s support for the so-called Transportation
Climate Initiative would lead to hikes, say
analysts, and the House is mulling a 15-cent gas
tax per gallon increase phased in over a
three-year period.
AAA’s ongoing survey of gasoline prices on
Friday morning had the national average per
gallon at $2.614. Surprisingly, Bay State prices
for a gallon of regular is below that at $2.562.
California’s price is $4.07 ($4.348 for
premium), and the best state to buy fuel in is
Louisiana, at $2.233.
The federal government has an 18.4-cent excise
tax on each gallon, but that hasn’t been hiked
since 1993.
California, Connecticut, Georgia, Indiana,
Illinois, Michigan and New York have sales taxes
on gas purchases.
According to the U.S. Department of
Transportation Federal Highway Administration,
Americans now drive an average of more than
13,000 miles per year — the most ever.
But get this: Those same stats say Massachusetts
drivers go an average of 11,759 miles a year. It
may seem like we’re always in cars, but what’s
shocking is that only four states have lower
average annual miles driven.
A gas tax theoretically pays for road
maintenance, and our roads are mostly awful, so
an argument could be made that we need all the
infrastructure help we can get. But government
in the Bay State clearly has shown it is
incapable of maintaining roads; laying the blame
for that at insufficient funding seems bogus.
People in the Boston metro area would probably
prefer not to drive, and finding parking is a
nightmare. Traffic is a nightmare. The MBTA and
commuter rail provides a driving alternative,
albeit an oftentimes unreliable one. Proponents
of the gas tax proposals say they’d use the new
revenue to help improve public transportation.
It certainly needs improvement, but at the same
time — the T’s struggles are not new, and
previous efforts to use taxes to better the
system have not exactly yielded results.
Half of Baker’s $18 billion transportation bond
bill would be paid for by charging
transportation fuel companies for the carbon
emissions associated with the gas and diesel
they sell, with some of that revenue earmarked
for helping the T. But still Beacon Hill wants
more, and their target is the people who need
the roads to get to work and keep their
businesses running.
So taxing the entities who profit from fuel,
rather than the end-users, sounds fair. But
those carbon fees would be passed along to the
consumer through gas prices and drive up the
cost of living, according to MassFiscal Alliance
spokesman Paul Craney and Christopher Carlozzi,
the state director of the National Federation of
Independent Business.
“Lawmakers talk about affordability and wanting
to make sure residents can afford to live in
Massachusetts and yet here we are talking about
taxes that are going to be raised on every
commuter, worker, consumer, small business and
working family,” Carlozzi said. “This will just
be one more thing that makes Massachusetts
unaffordable.”
Massachusetts already duns its people for plenty
in taxes. When the state figures out how to
spend money more efficiently, it won’t have to
always turn to taxpayers to solve its problems.
Until then, we can’t support a gas tax hike.
|
| |
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
|
