Candidate Survey Response: Revenue & Taxation

I received and responded to a candidate survey from Progressive Mass. In the spirit of transparency, I’m happy to answer candidate surveys from any legitimate organization in Massachusetts as long as they don’t require me to refrain from sharing the questions and my responses.

It was an extremely long survey covering a variety of topics, and it also asked questions related to many topics (see other topics on the platform details page). Below is an excerpt of questions/responses. For brevity, I’ve omitted responses to questions that are already covered elsewhere on this website.

Questions as worded on the survey, my “yes/no” required response on the form, and my additional commentary to provide clarity:

Corporate Tax Breaks. Corporate tax breaks cost Massachusetts more than $1 billion in foregone revenue each year. Companies can secure access to such tax breaks due to political connections whether or not the promised benefits ever materialize. Which of the following accountability steps would you support?

а. Repealing any tax break that does not provide the intended benefits in a cost effective manner?

  • NO — I would not want to damage the credibility and faith in the credit of the state. Instead, we should be more thoughtful about how any tax break legislation is crafted in the future.

b. Establishing sunset dates for all tax breaks so that they must come up for periodic review?

  • YES

c. Ending the current sales tax exemptions for aircraft and aircraft parts, which costs the Commonwealth approximately $30 million each year?

  • NO — Respectfully, in the grand scheme of things, $30 million per year is not that much for aircraft construction relative to the overall Sales & Use Tax collected by MA each year (https://www.mass.gov/lists/massachusetts-dor-blue-book-reports). I would need to understand more about this concern to make an informed decision.


Corporate Disclosure. Would you support legislation to make publicly accessible the reports that are already filed annually by publicly traded corporations, detailing their sales, profits, taxable income, and taxes paid?

  • YES — In theory, I would support this. However, I would need to understand the nuances of what is being suggested here.


Progressive Revenue. In order to accomplish many of the items in a progressive agenda, we will need more revenue. Do you support the following measures to make a more progressive tax code?

a. Raising the corporate minimum tax for larger companies? (The corporate minimum tax is currently only $456.)

  • NO — I am not opposed to this concept, but I would need to see some economic analysis about the overall effectiveness of this proposal and understand any unintended consequences that would result in corporations simply shifting to other more tax-friendly states.

b. Increasing the tax on the portion of corporations' US profits that are shifted to offshore tax havens, in order to restore Massachusetts's conformity with federal tax-avoidance rules?

  • NO — I am not opposed to this concept, but I would need to see some economic analysis about the overall effectiveness of this proposal and understand any unintended consequences that would result in corporations simply shifting to other more tax-friendly states.

c. Raising the corporate tax rate from 8% to 9.5% (where it stood in 2009)?

  • NO — I am not opposed to this concept, but I would need to see some economic analysis about the overall effectiveness of this proposal and understand any unintended consequences that would result in corporations simply shifting to other more tax-friendly states.

d. Creating a graduated surtax on corporations who are paying their CEOs more than 50 times the amount of the median employee compensation?

  • NO — I am not opposed to this concept, but I would need to see some economic analysis about the overall effectiveness of this proposal and understand any unintended consequences that would result in corporations simply shifting to other more tax-friendly states.

e. Levying a modest tax on university endowments greater than $1 billion?

  • YES — I don't know that how effective this would be at raising revenues for the state; however, I would be open to putting guide rails in place that encourage the equitable and responsible use of large endowments for the benefit of the Commonwealth and the country as a whole.


PILOT Reform. Massachusetts is home to some of the world's most prestigious cultural, educational, and medical institutions, but many of them are exempt from property taxes. Do you support enabling cities and towns to require large tax-exempt not-for-profit institutions (i.e., with property valued at or above $15 million) to make payments in lieu of taxes to the municipality equal to 25 percent of the amount that would be paid if they were not exempt?

  • NO — I agree with the concept, but I would need to understand why you have chosen $15 million as a threshold. For example, there are many single family homes in Waltham valued over $1 million, and commercial property values are significantly higher. However, that doesn't mean the non-profits have immediate access to that value in cash. Often organizations only have limited access to the equity and are making mortgage payments that offset the perceived value of a property.

Previous
Previous

Candidate Survey Response: Jobs & the Economy

Next
Next

73T: Public Transit for North Waltham