Over the coming weeks, a group of six legislators (3 from the House and 3 from the Senate) are negotiating the final details of a tax package.
Back in April, the House passed a fairly regressive tax package, filled with tax cuts for the ultra-rich and large corporations. The Senate, a few weeks ago, passed a more equitable tax package.
At a time when the state’s economic outlook is uncertain, and working families are struggling to get ahead, Massachusetts needs to prioritize spending on what will make our state truly affordable, equitable, and competitive: programs that ensure a labor force adequate to our economy’s needs, not tax cuts for the ultra-rich.
That group of six negotiators, called a “Conference Committee,” consists of Senate Ways & Means Chair Michael Rodrigues (D-Westport), Senate Revenue Chair Susan Moran (D-Falmouth), Senate Revenue Ranking Minority Ryan Fattman (R-Sutton), House Ways & Means Chair Aaron Michlewitz (D-North End), House Revenue Chair Mark Cusack (D-Braintree), and House Revenue Ranking Minority Michael Soter (R-Bellingham). And they need to hear from your legislators.
We’re joining Raise Up Massachusetts in support of five key demands for the Conference Committee.
- Reject the proposed cut to the short-term capital gains tax, which would overwhelmingly benefit wealthy investors who are engaged in complex hedged investment strategies.
- Reject the expansion of the corporate tax policy called ‘single sales factor apportionment,’ which gives a massive tax break to large, profitable multinational corporations that already don’t pay their fair share.
- Minimize the budgetary cost of estate tax reform by limiting the benefits that are extended to estates above $2 million
- Protect the revenue from the Fair Share Amendment by closing the “Single Filing Loophole,’ which could prevent Massachusetts from losing between $200 and $600 million in Fair Share revenue each year.
- Make the outdated 62F tax giveaway system more fair by ensuring an even distribution of any future 62F rebates, rather than maintaining the current system that overwhelmingly benefits the ultra-rich, out of proportion with their contribution to overall state taxes.
