These provisions would be in addition to the current filing requirements made to the attorney general.
As we learned from the financial meltdown, self-regulation simply doesn’t work. Accountability and transparency are vital to good governance – both in the public and private sector. When major institutions amass a great deal of wealth and gamble their endowments in the markets, it jeopardizes the financial stability of all of us, and they should disclose more about what they are doing. This legislation will put vital information in the hands of citizens, legislators, and concerned stakeholders including students, alumni, faculty, unions, and communities. Through awarding these institutions the valuable tax-exempt status, the public invests deeply in private higher education.
Colleges and universities that fall within the guidelines would be required to calculate annually the dollar amount of all subsidies and tax exemptions they receive from the state or federal government and report that figure to the AG’s office in 2013.
Colleges and universities would be required to list all employees making over $250,000/year, report on any contracts that meet the threshold of $150,000 annually whether they are for services rendered or received, require that individuals on their boards and their immediate families file individual conflict of interest disclosures, and provide a listing of their assets and real property at the time of the annual filing with the office of the attorney general.
These tough economic times require that we squeeze every penny out of every dollar, and that we know where each of those pennies are spent. Massachusetts is in a real budget crisis, and need more information to understand the implication of all our budget decisions, including subsidies to private higher education. This new legislation seeks to ensure that Massachusetts taxpayers’ hard-earned money is used wisely.
that there was the same interest and focus and determination to bring sunshine to the other tax subsidies that Massachusetts has, like the film credit, etc.
<
p>We know that Massachusetts colleges are tremendous drivers of our economy. They employ oodles of folks, they bring in talent, and the companies which come out of them are dynamic, important, cutting edge, and can be tremendous employers themselves. Plus, they generate plenty of hospital and medical work, huge drivers too.
<
p>In my opinion, let’s figure out if the film credit etc are generating that kind of benefit first, and prioritize the focus on the tax benefits which provide the least amount of public good. My suspicion is that it ain’t the universities which are providing a drag on the public budget.
This effort to wring more money out of universities seems incredibly misguided, considering how much of our state’s innovation economy comes from them.
<
p>I agree with stomv – before targeting universities, lets figure out the cost of our corporate subsidies. How about the same disclosure requirements for every corporation receiving state aid?
<
p>Also, what’s the linkage between this …
<
p>”Colleges and universities would be required to list all employees making over $250,000/year, report on any contracts that meet the threshold of $150,000 annually whether they are for services rendered or received, require that individuals on their boards and their immediate families file individual conflict of interest disclosures, and provide a listing of their assets and real property at the time of the annual filing with the office of the attorney general. “
<
p>… and this …
<
p>”As we learned from the financial meltdown, self-regulation simply doesn’t work. Accountability and transparency are vital to good governance – both in the public and private sector. When major institutions amass a great deal of wealth and gamble their endowments in the markets, it jeopardizes the financial stability of all of us, and they should disclose more about what they are doing. This legislation will put vital information in the hands of citizens, legislators, and concerned stakeholders including students, alumni, faculty, unions, and communities. Through awarding these institutions the valuable tax-exempt status, the public invests deeply in private higher education. “
<
p>How would getting a salary list of well compensated employees prevent “gambling in the markets”? Furthermore, what are universities supposed to do with their endowments? Put the millions/billions in the bank and collect 0.5% interest? Endowment income pays for a whole host of things at most major universities (like tuition assistance) … increasing it is important.
<
p>This whole bill seems like a parochial play to vocal anti-university voices in small neighborhoods instead of a legitimate response to any real concern.
As a sponsor of An Act related to economic development and fiscal accountability she’s doing just what you ask. So, now that we’ve dealt with your critique, can we ask whether the proposed legislation is ALSO worthwhile?
<
p>It seems pretty clear that it is. I don’t know off the top of my head what the film tax credits are worth, but let’s go crazy and say they’re worth $100 million. How does that compare to the subsidy that Harvard, Tufts, MIT, MGH, Brigham & Womens and Beth Israel Deaconess get? Given the billions in revenue they generate annually, and the massive real estate holdings they have, which they pay only a fraction of what private citizens and for profit companies pay, I’d say knowing more is worthwhile.
<
p>Hate to break it to you guys, over the last few years, we’ve handed over much of Alston to Harvard and because they gambled irresponsibly with their endowment, they further delayed the developments they’ve promised. Why are our health insurance rates so high? MGH, Beth Israel and UMass Memorial, so high in fact Blue Cross (another non-profit that should have to disclose more) set up an insurance plan that specifically encourages people not to use those hospitals.
<
p>Does the state’s education sector create jobs and innovation, of course they do, but that doesn’t mean they shouldn’t be held to an even higher standard that is already required.
As tuition to private “elite” colleges and universities becomes less and less affordable for working and middle class families and continue not to pay property taxes on their assessed property value, or pay sales taxes on any of their millions of dollars of equipment and materials, and spend another million or two on lobbyists to win government grants………..we might learn a thing or two.
<
p>And yes, Stomv, we should continue to invest in our future by increasing support for our public higher education system, instead of reducing it. We now rank 46th in the country in our support for Higher Education. To our shame — and frankly the Governor’s.
I completely agree with stomv that our higher education institutions are crucial to our economy. That doesn’t mean they should be exempt from discussion of costs and benefits.
<
p>I also agree that all tax credits are spending, and should be as transparent as line items and grants. Many of us in the legislature have been pushing for more transparency on all forms of spending. For example, I’ve cosponsored Sen. Eldridge’s legislation on economic development and transparency both last session and in the new session.
<
p>I was one of the few dissenters on the 2008 Life Sciences bill. I quoted Governing magazine in a sort of executive summary of my remarks:
“Tax incentives have long been endorsed as the highway to prosperity — attracting businesses, providing jobs and enriching the state. That’s been the conventional wisdom in most states and cities.
“One problem: Most public finance experts consider them bad policy. Tax incentives that target specific companies, create inequities, complications and inefficiencies — and they shrink the tax base. Meanwhile, there’s little evidence that targeted incentives bring growth in good-paying jobs. In short, big-ticket targeted tax incentives fail the test of any investment: the presence of a clearly identifiable return.”
<
p>More extensive remarks are in my newsletter:
http://actionmill.createsend.c…
<
p>Sen. Eldridge’s work on transparency is responsible for our ability to assess the film tax credit’s success. The most recent report on the film tax credit is quite informative, not to say discouraging, and it’s available at http://revenue.blog.state.ma.u…
<
p>Perhaps folks on BMG would like to comment on this as well as other tax expenditures.