|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
This November, Massachusetts voters may be asked to approve a state income tax cut from 5% to 4%. Supporters say the tax cut would give the state a competitive edge, boost the economy and improve affordability. But opponents, including four New Bedford lawmakers, argue it could put public programs at risk and threaten an already strained state budget.
The question has put business leaders at odds with union leaders and the state Legislature.
House Speaker Ron Mariano has said that raising other taxes is a possibility if voters approve the ballot question in November, but he recently indicated that he’s open to negotiating a compromise with the committee that organized the ballot question. The committee said it’s open to the idea.
Proponents point to outmigration, affordability challenges
According to ballot measure supporters, someone moves out of Massachusetts every 11 minutes and 38 seconds. They claim that lowering tax rates is an important step in curbing outmigration and making Massachusetts a more attractive place to live.
“Yes, we’re No. 1 in education. Yes, we’re a safe state,” said Chris Keohan, the spokesperson and consultant for the Taxpayers for an Affordable Massachusetts ballot committee. “But what does it tell you if we’re losing people to states that are less safe, that have less level of education? It tells you that we’re at a breaking point and something absolutely has to be done.”
In making the case for the tax cut, the executive director of the Pioneer Institute, Jim Stergios, points to North Carolina.
According to a Pioneer report, North Carolina reduced its individual and corporate tax rates from 2014 to 2025. In recent years, the number of new residents and jobs in the state has spiked. Between 2020 and 2025, North Carolina added 448,900 private-sector jobs, while Massachusetts lost 18,000.
Stergios told The Light that migration to North Carolina is not solely due to lower taxes — the state has long had lower energy and housing costs — but that taxes are a significant factor.
Several business groups support the tax cut. The ballot question is backed by Mass Opportunity Alliance, a group formed by the Massachusetts High Technology Council, Pioneer Institute and the Massachusetts Competitive Partnership. The question is funded by Mass Opportunity Alliance, the Massachusetts High Technology Council and the Pioneer Institute.
According to Keohan, the Retailers Association of Massachusetts, the Massachusetts Fiscal Alliance and the National Federation of Independent Businesses also support the question.
Proponents argue that the income tax cut would also benefit businesses.
According to Keohan, over 140,000 businesses in Massachusetts, mostly small businesses, are treated as pass-through entities for tax purposes, meaning their income is taxed as personal income. The proponents’ analysis found that reducing these businesses’ taxes will create between 43,000 and 48,000 new jobs.
The tax cut proposal attracted 58% support in a February poll of 670 Massachusetts voters conducted by the University of New Hampshire Survey Center. It found 21% opposed and 21% neutral or not sure.
Critics warn of dire consequences
Four New Bedford lawmakers told The Light that they don’t support the ballot measure.
Rep. Mark Sylvia, D-Fairhaven, acknowledged that the cost of living is an issue in the state, but he said that cutting the income tax would have “a catastrophic impact” on the budget, especially amid cuts from the federal government.
Rep. Steven Ouellette, D-Westport, said he’s concerned that current expenditures in his district could be cut, noting that the state supplements school budgets.
“The funds not only help the communities as a whole, it adds to the economic engine that we are trying to expand,” Ouellette wrote in a statement to The Light.
Like his counterparts, Rep. Christopher Markey, D-Dartmouth, said he’s “not a fan” of the proposed tax cut because it could put public services in jeopardy.
“We don’t know what’s going to happen with federal reimbursements to programs that have always been in existence,” Markey said. “To keep our environment clean, keep our schools number one in the country — all of those things matter. Maybe we’ve taken some of the stuff for granted, and we don’t realize that there’s a cost to all of these things, but I do think that we have a pretty good balance right now.”
Rep. Christopher Hendricks, D-New Bedford, said that reducing the income tax would be “disastrous,” as the state is already operating on a small budget.
Rep. Antonio F.D. Cabral, D-New Bedford, did not take a stance on the measure, noting that it is still before the Joint Committee on Initiative Petitions.
“Until the committee acts, we’re not sure if it will be on the ballot,” Cabral said. “So we have to see how that process moves forward.”
Sen. Mark Montigny, D-New Bedford, declined to comment on the ballot measure.
Several grassroots organizations and union leaders also oppose the ballot measure.
The Coalition for Social Justice, an activist organization with ties to New Bedford, argues that it will result in cuts to public services.
“It jeopardizes our safety net for working families and people on fixed incomes,” said Executive Strategist Deb Fastino. “If people rely on things like MassHealth coverage, food assistance, fuel assistance, childcare vouchers, it makes it harder for working families in our area to make ends meet.”
Fastino identified several programs in the Greater New Bedford area that could be “harmed” by state tax cuts, including PACE and Citizens for Citizens, both of which have Head Start programs and offer fuel assistance. She also pointed to HealthFirst Family Care Center and New Bedford Community Health Center.
According to Andrew Farnitano, the spokesperson for the union-backed organization Raise Up Massachusetts, the tax cut would lead to shuttered hospitals, schools and libraries, and layoffs of teachers, firefighters and police officers.
Raise Up has pushed several companies to resign from the Massachusetts High Tech Council and the Massachusetts Competitive Partnership due to the groups’ support of the tax cut ballot proposal. Farnitano said these calls to action are working, citing recent reporting that some business leaders are now opposing or concerned about the question.
Tax cut by the numbers
Opponents of the ballot measure argue that the tax cut would overwhelmingly benefit the richest residents. Farnitano claimed that the bottom 80% of taxpayers would see an average tax cut of $534 per year, or around $10 per week.
“If your roads are filled with potholes because they haven’t been maintained, and you have to replace a tire, $10 a week is not much,” Farnitano said. “If your health care is taken away and you have to pay out of pocket for the surgery you need, it’s not much.”
In a statement to The Light, SEIU Local 509 President Dave Foley said that the CEOs and corporate investors backing the question would not be the ones to face its consequences.
“Those consequences will fall squarely on working people: the anxious parent being pushed out of the workforce because their access to childcare is limited, or the direct care worker who has to look a client in the eye and tell them the program they depend on is closing,” Foley said.
Evan Horowitz, executive director of the Center for State Policy Analysis at Tufts University, analyzed how much residents would save if the ballot measure passes. His data shows a $37,352 gap between the savings of the richest and poorest residents.
Proponents, on the other hand, said the tax cut is meant to help the middle class. Rebekah Paxton, a consultant for Mass Opportunity Alliance, said the average resident would save $1,300, and the median household would save $1,100.
Between 2020 and 2024, the median income in New Bedford was $56,981. According to Taxpayers for an Affordable Massachusetts’ calculator, median earners in New Bedford would save $570 a year if the measure passes.
Opponents and supporters of the measure also disagree on how the tax cut would affect the state’s revenue, citing vastly different figures.
Though the exact figures vary, policy analysts have found that once fully implemented, the tax cut would cost the state about $5 billion per year, a number that opponents such as Farnitano cite in their arguments. The state income tax raised $26.7 billion in fiscal year 2025. The state’s total budget this year is about $61 billion.
The Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation estimates that the tax cut would result in a $5.4 billion annual revenue loss for the state. Doug Howgate, president of the foundation, told The Light that this is a static analysis, meaning the calculation does not account for changes in economic activity.
Using a dynamic analysis, Horowitz at Tufts concluded that the ballot question will cost the state $5.1 billion per year beginning in fiscal 2030. The center’s report states that this would more than offset the revenue gains from the millionaires tax, which raised $3 billion in fiscal year 2025.
Proponents claim that these numbers are incorrect because the cut could boost the overall economy. Mass Opportunity Alliance estimates that the state would lose around $2.2 billion over three years, but by fiscal 2030, they predict the state will see an increase of $500 million.
Horowitz said that the proponents’ $2.2 billion figure is “interested advocacy” rather than a “modeling or statistical disagreement,” but added that the tax cut is an important question for voters.
“This is exactly the kind of question that belongs on the ballot,” Horowitz said. “The debate has to happen honestly, and we need to be clear and honest about the implications of going from 5% to 4%. But once we are, it’s totally reasonable to say to voters, ‘What do you think?’”
Jamie Perkins is a graduate student in journalism covering state government for The Light as part of the Boston University Statehouse Program. Email them at jperkins@newbedfordlight.org.
