Skip to content

What’s Progressive and What’s Not in Gov. Healey’s Tax Proposal

In her campaign last year, Governor Maura Healey touted a promise to cut taxes and address the high cost of living in Massachusetts. In her recently released budget, she offered her version of tax reform.

Before diving into it, any discussion of taxes must begin with a few acknowledgements:

(1) The “Taxachusetts” myth is just that: indeed, we are middle-of-the-pack when it comes to taxation levels compared to other states.

(2) We have long had a regressive tax code, with a flat income tax such — meaning that someone making $30,000 would pay the same income tax rate as someone making $3 million. Voters, fortunately, chose to take a step forward toward progressivity by passing the Fair Share Amendment last fall, creating a surtax on income over $1 million.

(3) If we want to invest in our collective well-being and our public infrastructure, we need revenue. If we want to maintain public goods and services, we need to invest in them.

Back to Healey’s proposal…

How much? The total tax package would cost $986 million each year. Notably, that is almost the same as the amount of money she plans to designate for Fair Share revenue and appropriations ($1 billion). Healey’s proposed use of Fair Share funds cover many important programs and initiatives, but if we raise $1 billion only to also spend $1 billion in tax cuts, we risk creating a situation where money is just being moved around. Fair Share funds should be truly additive to deliver on the intent of the voters. Moreover, spending so much on long-term tax cuts is also risky as increased federal funding for Mass Health, rental assistance, and SNAP is ending — and could be cut even further if Republicans in Congress get their way.

What’s Most Progressive? According to an analysis from MassBudget, the most progressive parts of Healey’s proposal are the doubling of the the Senior Circuit Breaker tax credit (which helps offset property taxes faced by seniors with modest incomes) and an increase in the Renters Deduction (which, in impact, ends up only $50 for renters who don’t already get a refund). An extra $50 in the pocket of renters ultimately won’t go very far, given escalating rents and costs in general. Combined, these proposals amount to $100 million.

MassBudget: https://massbudget.org/2023/03/16/gov-tax-plan/

What’s Somewhat Progressive? The largest part of the tax package is the child and family tax credit, which would amount to $600 per child under 13 or dependent adult and cost $458 million. It is unclear why parents of teenagers should not get the same benefit: any parent of a teenager will tell you how much it costs to feed a teenager. Families with low and middle incomes will certainly benefit from extra money in their pocket, but $600 will not last long given that two weeks of child care cost more than that. The credit thus does little to address the real drivers of the cost of living in Massachusetts, even if it can help around the edges.

What’s Regressive? Unfortunately, almost $400 million in tax cuts from the package are outright regressive in impact. That includes $117 million in a cut to the tax rate for short-term capital gains: the highest-income 1 percent of households would receive an estimated 77 percent of this – an average of over $7,000 apiece. Even more jarring is the cut to the estate tax, which would amount to $275 million. Healey’s proposal would create a $182,000 tax credit for large estates, wiping away estate tax for estates under $3 million and amounting to a $182,000 giveaway to estates over $3 million.

What Should Change? Any tax reform package should be progressive overall and should also be at least revenue-neutral (meaning that it raises back anything that it spends). Legislators should reject outright the proposed cut to the capital gains tax, as they did last year when Governor Baker proposed it. If legislators are committed to changing the estate tax, they can eliminate the cliff effect that currently exists at $1 million without giving away money to the largest estates. And if legislators want to pass the more progressive parts of Healey’s proposal, they should fund them by embracing progressive tax proposals like increasing the corporate tax rate, increasing the tax rate on offshored income, or creating a tiered corporate minimum tax (so that large corporations can’t get by with only paying $456).

What Can You Do? Write to your legislators! They need to hear from you while they are crafting their own budget proposals.

Share on facebook
Facebook
Share on twitter
Twitter