One place to start is with the ONE Massachusetts concept. If you’re not familiar with this “network in formation” please check out this write-up and get involved.
At a more specific level, please support the current “loopholes” campaign underway by an informal coalition of public advocacy groups. You can get information here about how to help out.
Please share widely!
the burden of taxes is gauged in two manners.
<
p>
1. How much is coming out of my pocket.
2. How much value am I getting in return.
<
p>
It seems to me that a lot more is coming out of my pocket because of rising real estate taxes. Now I’m not actually sure whether my overall tax burden has risen or not, but the rapid rise in the RE tax leaves me with the perception that my tax burden has increased.
<
p>
What would remove this perception? Maybe a tool or tangible example of some sort that shows that while RE taxes have risen, income taxes (others?) and fees have decreased or run well below national levels. Showing me tangibly that my tax burden would be much larger in other states would go a long way in convincing me.
<
p>
Good luck with your effort Michael.
<
p>
a poll would come out that posed precisely your question?
<
p>
Ie
<
p>
Which are you more concerned about….
<
p>
1. How much state taxes you pay?
2. How much value you get in return?
<
p>
or “How efficiently those taxes are spent?”
is that most people are more concerned about how much tax they pay.
<
p>
and you?
I guess I was so focused on state taxes that I didn’t think about the real estate tax angle, but I’d say you’ve hit the nail on the head. That is what is on people’s minds these days. Lots of override votes are taking place around the state, which is a symptom of how much pressure localities are under because of inadequate state aid.
<
p>
You point is also well taken, that we should come up with some statistics that show TOTAL taxes, including state and local. I’ve seen these numbers, but don’t have them right at hand. I believe Massachusetts is still below the national average, but I’ll report back once I locate the actual data.
<
p>
I also hope you’ll join me in banishing the phrase “tax burden” — this is one of the more successful right-wing frames that invokes the “government is bad” image. Taxes are not a burden, they are simply the way we pay for the things we have decided to do together. Part of our challenge, it seems to me, is to change the discussion, away from the obsession with taxes, toward a more productive discussion of what kind of an educational system we want to have to help train our future workforce, and how we can most efficiently provide healthcare as a public good, and so on.
<
p>
So, please talk about tax “rates” or “amounts” but not “burden” — thanks!
burden has been banished!
Michael,
<
p>
thanks for identifying the framing and use of words that makes the challenge of creating revenue even more difficult. For whatever reason, investment has not caught hold but I think that the issue raised earlier about “what people get for their money” is an important part of the equation. If we just focus on what people must pay and not what they get, its a losing scenario. The compelling notion is that people are putting something in and getting more than the sum of the parts out. This concept is powerful. Given this I would even suggest not even using the “tax rate” language – it still evokes being ‘done to” rather than getting something out of.
<
p>
I’m starting to get a spark of hope that with enough chatter out here in cyperland, we can get the big boys to shift their discussion as well.
<
p>
Michael
Higher priority, for me, is to get the Governor to stop talking about “property tax relief” — we all favor what he is trying to do, but “tax relief” implies pain and suffering, and taxes should not be cast that way…
<
p>
Ah well, I think you’re right — the reframing has to start right here (and now!).
<
p>
Thanks for your support!
I would imagine more than a teeny part of it might be the fact that most people are just coming off or planning on filing their income tax returns. It’s similar to asking if there’s too much commercialization on Christmas on December 24th.
ask me how nervious i am about going to the dentist tomorrow versus for the next appointment in 11 months. timing in polls is very important.
I wish, both the Feds and the State would do away with payroll withholding and require all taxpayers to send in a quarterly check. That would change the perception of how much taxes you pay rather quickly.
Obviously, anything that makes it harder for people to file their taxes is going to piss people off and make them hate taxes more, so that seems like a pretty stupid idea. Furthermore, getting rid of withholding will make it more likely that people will cheat.
Is your opinion of the taxpayers of Mass. so low that you want the hated corporate masters to keep tabs on them? Why? If they lie about the wages paid, then they can save their half of the match!
<
p>
Or are you afraid people will demand reform if they have to pay out of pocket every 3 months, and then MORE on April 15?
work-reproducing and impractical. It would cost way more to administrate. But it would make people like taxes even less, so I can see why it applies to fiscal conservatives.
but rather as someone who thinks (a) that government should spend lots of money on service provision (and I mean government as opposed to the private sector) and (b) that people should be as closely engaged as possible in the mechanics of governing. Since those mechanics include financing, I’m more than happy to have people be reminded every three months – hell, why not every month? – that such-and-such is what it costs.
Especially on the corporate tax loophole issue. Thank you for passing along the packet of information and sample letters. We need to keep banging the drum on this issue. Here is my latest comment on the issue.
…and for your new post.
<
p>
I agree we need to keep pushing hard on this issue (closing loopholes). This is one we can win. And it’s a real win for everyone. Except maybe the Verizons and the Wal-Marts, but ask me how many tears I’m going to shed for them. Does anyone really think they’re going to pull up stakes and leave the state?
<
p>
I hope those who have accounts (or are willing to create them) on devalpatrick.com will visit the issue page for this and vote for it.
…seeing as how they undersell the competition now?
<
p>
Thanks, Democrats! No more cheap food for me!
If they are underselling the competition now because of their loophole sheltered income, then I say close it and create a more level playing field in Massachusetts.
This:
<
p>
<
p>
Then:
<
p>
<
p>
If Mass is has such darn low taxes, why are corporations shifting their tax burden to the other states? Either taxes aren’t so low, or they aren’t shifting. Right?
<
p>
Tax policy. So confusing.
Where would you put Mass in term of corporate tax rates? Is there another more reliable (in your opinion) study you can reference.
<
p>
Are companies using minimization strategies to avoid Massachusetts or are they more likely to move it out of the country, to say switzerland? I am familar with a couple of companies that do this.
Where would you put Mass in term of corporate tax rates? Is there another more reliable (in your opinion) study you can reference.
Are companies using minimization strategies to avoid Massachusetts or are they more likely to move it out of the country, to say switzerland? I am familar with a couple of companies that do this.
<
p>
Purely anecdotal you understand, but Mass corporate taxes are high. A company with high property investment that is losing money will pay significant state taxes compared to any southern, midwestern or western (not California) state.
<
p>
I say that as a multi-state tax practioner with 25 years in the biz. Forget the bullsh*t studies. Ask anyone who knows anything about multistate taxation: a) Mass taxes are high and that’s why companies pay professionals to minimize them b) there are several method available to minimize them.
<
p>
BUT, state taxes are a relatively low cost consideration. Property costs (rent) and labor costs are a bigger consideration for locating or not locating in the state.
what was to be my follow-up point. Overall, rent and labor costs are the primary motivators for why companies are leaving.
<
p>
I will say that I would be more inclined to believe someone with actual experience over studies. Thanks for the feedback.
<
p>
If anyone recalls just a few months ago with the minimum wage fight, the right was saying it will kill businesses if it was raised. But immediately after Congress passed the new rate, business came out saying that actually it didn’t matter – small and local businesses can’t even offer such low wages; they need to pay more to get quality people that can do the job and will stay around.
<
p>
Similarly, businesses want to come to Mass for quality of life, education, culture, etc. They might get a better deal in some right to work states but can these businesses attract the type of employees to those states who are used to living in Mass and would give up many of our quality of life benefits? Sometimes yes, esp. if housing is cheaper and they need the job but I’d bet many employees would rather stay in the Northeast despite costs.
MA is middle of the pack in the US in terms of local and state tax burden.
<
p>
But I think it’s the perception (and reality) of our combined local+state+fed tax rates as percentage of disposable income which bothers people.
<
p>
MA’s sum of these will be higher given our higher fed tax burden from higher incomes, plus the disadvantage of the Alternative Minimum Tax which eliminates the deductibility of state and local taxes from federal returns. (BTW, CT and NY taxpayers are hit even more than MA.)
<
p>
Add to that how expensive our cost of living is, mostly due to housing, and I suspect taxpayers here feel our tax rates are too high.
<
p>
Given where the AMT tax tables cut in (20+ million US tax payers will pay it in FY 2006,) it is possible to have more after-tax, after-housing disposable income in other states (NC, SC, TN, FL, NH) even with lower salaries!
<
p>
Is it any reason the middle class is moving elsewhere?
When you consider the fact that due to the precarious budget situation a lot of towns are considering prop 2 overrides, property taxes are up in general, and the national economy is not performing as well so taxable income is gradually becoming more precious to the voter. Also the legislature is focused more on the budget process than on healthcare at the moment, even our activist governor is approaching Romney care with a hands off approach to see if it will work rather than proposing his own initiative just yet.