Ballot Question 1
There are ballot questions awaiting Massachusetts voters in the general election on 8 November. Ballot questions are laws submitted directly to voters for approval, or disapproval, alongside the regular slate of candidates.
Voters will discover four different questions on their ballot:
Question 1: Millionaire’s Tax
Question 2: Regulation of Dental Insurance
Question 3: Expanding Alcohol License Availability
Question 4: Driver’s License for Undocumented Immigrants
Question 1: The Millionaire’s Tax
This ballot question is also known by the more neutral moniker “Fair Share” amendment.
The Secretary of State’s office summarizes the proposed amendment as follows:
This proposed constitutional amendment would establish an additional 4% state income tax on that portion of annual taxable income in excess of $1 million. This income level would be adjusted annually, by the same method used for federal income-tax brackets, to reflect increases in the cost of living. Revenues from this tax would be used, subject to appropriation by the state Legislature, for public education, public colleges and universities; and for the repair and maintenance of roads, bridges, and public transportation. The proposed amendment would apply to tax years beginning on or after January 1, 2023.
The SoS also passes along the following arguments for and against from proponents and detractors of the proposed amendment
FOR
Cynthia Roy
By voting Yes on Question 1, you will make sure that the very richest in Massachusetts – those who make over $1 million a year – pay their fair share. Current tax rules allow multimillionaires to pay a smaller share in taxes than the rest of us. Question 1, the “Millionaires’ Tax,” will make the extremely wealthy pay an additional 4 percent on the portion of their yearly income above $1 million.
The additional money is constitutionally guaranteed to go toward transportation and public education. Question 1 means every child can go to a great school. We can fix our roads, expand access to vocational training, and make public colleges more affordable. Excellent roads and schools help our small businesses grow, create new jobs, and build strong communities. Question 1 means creating opportunity for everyone.
Vote Yes on Question 1. Only the very rich will pay — not the rest of us.
HDN Comments:
Who would object to a Millionaire’s Tax besides millionaires and their brainwashed lackeys?
If you’ve driven around Massachusetts or have a child in school, you know the roads need help and the education system needs funding. As long as the “constitutional guarantee” that funds will go to the right places, an added 4% cut on income over a million per year seems like a modest contribution from the state’s wealthiest citizens.
AGAINST
Paul D’Amore, Small Business Representative
Coalition To Stop The Tax Hike Amendment
SMALL BUSINESSES, FAMILY FARMERS, HOMEOWNERS, AND RETIREES URGE NO ON QUESTION 1
Question 1 nearly doubles the state income tax rate on tens of thousands of small-business owners, large employers, and retirees.
Question 1 treats one-time earnings—the sale of homes, investments, businesses, pensions, and inheritances—as income. This would suddenly force many residents into the new, very high tax bracket, depleting the nest eggs of small-business owners and longtime homeowners whose retirement depends on their investments.
Record inflation, supply chain difficulties, and continuing COVID-19 issues make now the worst possible time for massive tax increases—especially when Massachusetts already has a giant budget surplus!
There is absolutely NO GUARANTEE revenue from this huge tax hike would actually increase spending on education and transportation. Politicians are giving themselves a blank check, with no accountability.
Organizations representing over 20,000 small businesses and family farmers urge: Vote NO on Question 1.
HDN Comments:
You’ve got to love the SoS for preserving the ALL CAPS formatting of the AGAINST side. Reads like a Trump tweet.
The laundry list of stakeholders who are “against” Question 1 is questionable. Any individual, business owner, homeowner, retiree, or whatnot, who is earning over one million dollars in taxable income per year, is doing all right. The real stakeholders against Question 1 are the very, very wealthy.
The AGAINST side has tried to frame the argument in terms of “one-time earnings” to make the tax sound like it impacts more middle-class individuals than it does. Few people can imagine raking in over a million dollars per year, but a lot of middle-class homeowners can imagine selling their house for hundreds of thousands of dollars. Will a “Millionaire’s Tax” bite the middle-class in the ass – maybe just as they’re getting ready to retire, sell their house, and live off the proceeds for a blissful retirement?
In short, no. When we remind ourselves that the additional 4% tax only applies to income earned over a million dollars, anxiety about lost nest eggs lose their punch. For example, if you had a “one-time earning” of $1,100,000.00 in a year, the first million would still be taxed at the flat rate of 5% as usual (same for all taxpayers, regardless of income). Only the $100,000.00 above the first million would be taxed at the increased 9% rate, which comes out to an extra $4,000.00.
On the other hand, is there truth to the claim that the revenue generated from this targeted tax increase will not go to improving transportation, education, etc., as promised? That’s worth looking into.
Verdict: Vote Yes on Question 1
The “Fair Share” amendment is justly called the Millionaire’s Tax because no one besides millionaires should be worried about it. The millionaires hiding behind the Coalition To Stop The Tax Hike Amendment group should be embarrassed to be putting effort into killing a bill that will ask those earning a lot in the Bay State to contribute a little more for the common good.
Despite all the silly noise from conservatives about “Taxachusetts,” wealthy individuals do pretty well here. There is no graduated income tax in Massachusetts – schoolteachers theoretically pay as much as Robert Kraft, a flat tax of 5% on income. The Millionaire’s Tax puts the question to the people whether they think that state of affairs is just and equitable.
Counter arguments to the proposed amendment rely on misleading framing of the bill and empty rhetoric designed to inflate “tax hike” anxiety in the minds of people who will not be taxed and who will benefit from the overall increased tax revenue. In other words, the counter arguments are bad arguments.
Stay tuned for more analysis on the remaining ballot questions…