Teachers Unions Spent $22 Million Backing Massachusetts 'Millionaire's Tax'
The constitutional amendment is an attempt to undermine the state's flat income tax system.

Teachers unions in Massachusetts have spent big bucks trying to convince voters to approve a massive tax hike.
Voters in the Bay State will decide on Tuesday whether to impose a new 4 percent "fair share" tax on income in excess of $1 million—on top of the 5 percent flat income tax that all Massachusetts residents pay. The new "millionaire's tax" constitutional amendment has some deep-pocketed supporters in the state, with teachers unions having ponied up $22 million to back the initiative, according to the Boston Globe, which surveyed state campaign finance reports.
That accounts for nearly 85 percent of the $26 million spent trying to convince voters to support the tax hike, the Globe reports, and it dwarfs the $13 million that's been spent by a variety of individuals and groups opposing the tax increase. The teachers unions are literally outspending the millionaires.
The unions' efforts are also somewhat misleading, as Reason contributor and Education Next managing editor Ira Stoll notes. One mailer, for example, incorrectly says that residents forced to pay the new tax will have already gotten $1 million for "free"—which of course ignores both the fact that the income was earned somehow and already subject to a 5 percent tax.
It's not much of a surprise that teachers unions are pushing this tax hike. This year's ballot question is the culmination of a campaign that the Massachusetts Teachers Association (MTA) launched back in 2015. Go to the MTA's website and you'll be greeted not by information about how to educate students better or protect teachers' rights as workers, but by an argument for higher taxes.
"The MTA has coughed up $13.3 million for the so-called Fair Share Amendment, while its national counterpart, NEA, has doled out $7.2 million," the Globe reports. "Which begs the question: What do the teachers want?"
Maybe a better question would be: Is there anyone else who actually wants this tax hike to pass?
Sure, a tax on millionaires would mean more money for the state to dole out to schools and to everything else the Massachusetts government funds. A study from Tufts University says the new tax would apply to about 0.6 percent of the state's residents and would generate about $1.3 billion in additional revenue next year.
That's a lot of money, of course, but really not all that much in the context of the state's $52 billion annual budget.
On the other hand, as Tuft's report notes, the downsides could be significant. "Some high-income residents may relocate to other states," it warns, adding that "tax avoidance could be widespread."
A separate report from the Beacon Hill Institute, a free market nonprofit, estimates that the new tax would generate $1.23 billion in new taxes in 2023 while costing the state more than 9,000 jobs and reducing the state's overall gross output and real disposable income—a reflection of wealthy residents shifting assets and investments elsewhere.
So why are the teachers unions so heavily invested in backing a policy that could cost thousands of jobs and won't generate more than a modest amount of new tax revenue? Perhaps because they have bigger plans down the road.
Massachusetts is one of just a handful of states with a flat income tax—a policy that has a number of benefits, including making it easier for taxpayers to know exactly what they owe the government. Disrupting that system with a new tax on millionaires creates a mechanism for future tax increases on other groups, argues Chris LaBella, a state policy associate for Americans for Tax Reform, which opposes the tax increase.
After all, a "fair share" is in the eye of the beholder—and, for now, it's up to the vast majority of voters who won't have to pay it.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
I would not be surprised for this one to go down. We shall see. But whatever issues I have with Massachusetts it is a very politically active state and a lot of folks there are aware of the costs of their measures.
But, who knows? It's also very liberal.
The more home-schooling catches on the faster we can remove teacher unions from the roadblock to education. Even in voter suppression type of local school board/budget elections the truth of declining enrollment will be exposed and most people who don't vote in school budgets will start. Public monies for kids education should follow the kid not the school
Great article, Mike. I appreciate your work, I'm now creating over $35000 dollars each month simply by doing a simple job online! I do know You currently making a lot of greenbacks (ugv-04) online from $28000 dollars, its simple online operating jobs
…
Just open the link——————————>>> http://Www.RichApp1.Com
Google pay 200$ per hour my last pay check was $8500 working 1o hours a week online. My younger brother friend has been averaging 12000 for months now and he works about 22 hours a week. I cant believe how easy it was once I tried it outit..
🙂 AND GOOD LUCK.:)
HERE====)> ???.????????.???
Will never happen. Even if 90% of parents homeschool, or send their kids to a private school, teachers unions will make sure that there are 100 teachers for the 10 kids left in each public school
Massholes are actually pretty stingy with their own money, 20 years ago they almost voted to get rid of the state income tax, and more recently repealed a gas and beer tax hikes. Outside of Boston, taxes are pretty unpopular. It’s also one of the wealthiest states.
I get paid over 190$ per hour working from home with 2 kids at home. I never thought I’d be able to do it but my best friend earns over 10k a month doing this and she convinced me to try. The potential with this is endless. Heres what I’ve been doing..
HERE====)> ???.????????????.???
But, who knows? It’s also very liberal.
More like very illiberal, but Liberal worked also.
After all, a "fair share" is in the eye of the beholder—and, for now, it's up to the vast majority of voters who won't have to pay it.
Just wait a few more months, Biden's
inflationsuper duper economy will soon make us all millionaires!!!!Yeah, with a $200 can of tomatoes, a $600,000 used car, and a $40,000 cheap suit made in China.
What I wonder is how much Obama makes in one year from speechifying fees. After deductions, of course.
They tried that horseshit in Illinois two years ago with the progressive tax amendment to the 1970 Illinois Constitution. It, unfortunately, got a majority, but failed to meet the 60% threshold to become part of the state constitution.
Disband the public sector unions!
FDR, is that you?
The founders sensibly limited voting to white male landowners. Return to that system and America will flourish.
I would settle for limiting suffrage to net tax payers.
Agreed
Let them pass it, and let the wealthy people take their money to Florida. As long as they don't bring blue voting habits with them.
There's a reason John Kerry parked his yacht in New Hampshire.
Funny how rich Marxists (something that should never exist) are cheap fuckers that never want to pay their taxes.
Traitor!
I wouldn't doubt it if someone from Mass. told me the tonier neighborhoods are full of signs supporting this tax. Here on the Main Line in Phila. it isn't unusual to find Fetterman signs on the lawns of multi-million dollar mansions. Someone earlier called them Neiman Marxists. I'm stealing that. These are the sheep voting with the wolf who is deciding what's for dinner tonite, forgetting, of course, that the wolf will be hungry each and every future night too.
I've made $84,000 so far this year working online and I'm a full time student. I’m using an online business opportunity I heard about and I've made such great money. It's really user friendly and I'm just so happy that I found out about it. The potential with this is endless.
Here’s what I do..........>>> topcitypay
What if the Union just kept the $22 million and invested it in a pension fund for their members? Why can’t they do that? Seems like a much more useful allocation of teacher funds.
The union doesn’t exist to serve its members.
The union LOVES to stick their members in place where they don't belong! THAT is the reason why the taxpayers get ass-fucked!
Seems like $22 million could’ve bought a lot of school supplies. Or is that not a thing teachers gripe about paying for anymore. I can’t keep track of all the false flag operations.
The most interesting thing about this initiative is the veracity gap between the two opposing sides' publicity campaigns. Opponents make an exuberant claim that the 4% tax on income over $1 million it will destroy the earnings of "tens of thousands" of seniors who sell their homes. Supporters make the more reasonable claim that the effect on senior sellers will be limited to the ultra-rich. Neither side offers empirical modelling.
It boils down to a duelling reality contest in which one side is clearly fantasizing an impossible economic disaster.
I just joined the forum so there are so many things I don’t know yet, I hope to have the help of the boards, and I really want to get to know you all on the forum run 3
I do not know what to say really what you share very well and useful to the community, I feel that it makes our community much more developed, thanks
People are idiots. Sit down and total your assets, home, vehicles, savings and checking accounts and now add in your retirement accounts. If you are solidly middle class, over fifty, have worked hard, not misused credit and saved you are worth more than a million dollars, which really isn’t much these days. Though many that may have been there no longer are under the Biden administration.
Also remember, most of those retirement accounts are taxable when you take your withdrawals. So remember it is your money they are after, those actual rich multimillionaires and billionaires will never pay much for taxes, they have tax lawyers.
Yeah, vote for this crap and YOU WILL BE THE ONE PAYING MORE.
The article says it is an income tax.
So while your house and retirement funds and automobiles are worth up to over $1 million in possessions, the income stream from your retirement will be way less than $1 million.
If you have 1 million in the bank and take out 10% a year your income is $100,000 a year.
Even if you live in a $5 million house.
Close but not quite right. Even if I take $100,000 out of my $1,000,000 bank account, that is still not "income". The income in this scenario would only be the interest earned on the bank account (regardless of whether I withdraw it or not). Taking out principal is not a taxable event. Cheers.
Transexuelle a Nantes is wonderfull web place with hot ladies ready for casual chat contacts in France
We can get rid of teacher unions as a barrier to education faster as homeschooling gains popularity. The reality of dwindling enrollment will be revealed, and most people who don't now vote in school budgets will start to do so, even in local school board/budget elections where voter suppression is an issue. Public education funding need to follow the child rather than the institution. https://nearestlandfill.com