[deleted]

This really needs to be the first order of business if question 1 passes. What’s the sense of more revenue if it just has to be returned?

Question one is a constitutional change that will require the revenue go to public education and transport so I don’t think it would be impacted by the law that required these refunds of excess revenue.

Q 1 is forward looking and would start in the 2022 tax year at the earliest. The refunds are for what people already paid.

And if we collect too much revenue once again?

Doesn't it say the revenue from question 1 will go to public education and transportation?

The last time we collected too much taxes was over 30 years ago. Knowing we have more tax money between getting extra this year and the extra from Q1 they will budget accordingly and we will have more money to spend on improving education, infrastructure, and other things to improve the quality of life for residents.

Doesn’t work that way.

Sure, but it doesn’t say they have to increase overall funding from last year.

>and transportation

Somehow I don't feel like more money going to the MBTA as it stands is going to help anything. Actually I feel as if I'd rather watch a pile of money burn in front of me.

Loving 62f , finally high PAYERS getting something back after all the freeloaders qualify for all the programs we don’t

Jeez, I bet they won't move funds by removing them from current school and transport line items as they are paid by the new line item.

Right on time for the election.

You must not have gotten the memo…….this state is blue

Diehl is losing by 30-40%

BTW, Baker is a republican

Much of the surplus is due to federal relief……it’s not going to happen every year

Not that you know how it works

Which candidate is going to benefit from this?

I mean…I sort of do.

>Chapter 62F is a Massachusetts General Law that requires the Department of Revenue to issue a credit to taxpayers if total tax revenues in a given fiscal year exceed an annual cap tied to wage and salary growth in the Commonwealth.

So we keep our well funded schools well funded and fund other things…sounds great to me.

There's no reason to think this year will be the new forever normal. Years of surplus and deficit come and go.

It’s actually got nothing to do with surplus (and the state can’t run a deficit). It’s a maximum amount of tax revenue as a proportion of incomes.

Doesn’t work that way. There’s a limit on the amount of tax revenue collected, not federal aid received.

[deleted]

Almost. It’s related to tax revenues in a given fiscal year exceeding an annual cap tied to wage GROWTH.

No on 1 : duh we have a surplus

Yes please tax us more... /s

Federal aid is revenue to the state

It’s not tax revenue

"Try it." - Every local teacher union, the AFT, the MTA, the NEA, the MBTA, and the BCU 589.

Diehl is a right wing extremist so it's inevitable Healy is gonna win. We had a sane period where Baker kept the loonie Dems under control but Healy is a spend Spend SPEND maniac so get ready for some massive tax hikes. This means you, middle class voter.

Lol yeah I'm sure you're a high payer, heard door dash pays very well for unskilled labor

It’s revenue

[deleted]

Lmao dd is my weekend hustle, oh never mind you know nothing of hustling when all you collect is handouts from my paycheck. Well this time thanks to citizens for limited taxation. I get some of my hard earned money back to myself, I know , what a novel concept to communists like yourself

Lol alright bud, best of luck to you. DD on the weekends, full time troll

At least the fire would be nice in winter I suppose.

Lol “duh” describes most of your thoughts I’d wager

Nah

>”Excess State Tax Revenues” means the amount by which net state tax revenues, as defined herein, for a fiscal year exceed the allowable state tax revenues, as defined herein, for said fiscal year.

https://malegislature.gov/Laws/GeneralLaws/PartI/TitleIX/Chapter62F/Section2

You are very confused on this

Give me a break with that bs, it’s a society and country that you live in that gives you an opportunity you arrogant, condescending Elitist schmuck .

Anytime rich people have to pay any tax they whine like a bunch of babies

Then the money from the feds has been deemed tax revenue …. Which when get down to it, it is

Lol right? I’m a scientist and I work with a bunch of engineers, MDs and Lawyers. All of the directors and VPs I know are delivering for door dash on the weekend as a side hustle!

You really are clueless. I hope you have more intelligence than you sound in this response. Equating not being for the manic Democrat spenders in MA as being a right wing terrorist supporter. You really need to get an education as you're as dangerous as those terrorists you pretend to hate.

If you bothered to read the link you sent it defines what tax revenue is. Since covid relief funds would not fall under a reimbursement and it's also not a proceed from a bond or investment it would be classified as a receipt of revenue received and recognized as a tax for the purpose of this discussion. Covid money was aimed at giving additional assistance to states so it's not a reimbursement of any kind. Hence the tax status.

''State Tax Revenues'' means the revenues of the Commonwealth from every tax, surtax, receipt, penalty and other monetary exaction, and interest in connection therewith, including but not limited to, taxes and surtaxes on personal income, excises and taxes on retail sales and use, meals, motor vehicle fuels, businesses and corporations, public utilities, alcoholic beverages, tobacco, inheritances, estates, deeds, room occupancy and pari-mutuel wagering; but excluding federal reimbursements, proceeds from bond issues, earnings on investments, tuitions, fees, service charges and other departmental revenues, and revenues directly attributable to the additional taxes levied pursuant to section eighty-eight of chapter six hundred and eighty-four of the Acts of nineteen hundred and seventy-five.

Oh fuck 😂

[deleted]

We are already discovering our mistakes in too much funding for schools. Our town has a 15% management cost before we get to the actual school. They are taking on construction projects in their budget. Nobody can explain the empty buses situation well. In a very well paid state teachers salaries are keeping up and thats not counting their fringe benefits. Class sizes have dropped to 20 or less students with aids in almost every class through elementary school. Meanwhile the output is a less educated student. So regardless of how this vote goes we are going hold the line on our spending until inflation get it back to some sort of normalcy.

Its time for some real change in education and more money is simply not the answer.

lmoa. dd is your weekend hustle. ha. anyone that makes a high income would not subject themselves to making 15$/hr doing door dash. you wanna be 1 percenter

That's what people don't understand. This money will go to other causes anyway as nth of education/transportation is how they do it. If there is a surplus, why not just use that for both. Another instance of people believing the propaganda.

Hmmm, maybe it will happen again? So what? Better to get it back. More revenue from the ultra rich can give some back to those that could use it. Our bridges & infrastructure are crumbling and need maintenance. Education can never hurt in keeping us number 1 in the country. Our taxes aren’t bad when you compare to other states. Seems like the smart thing to do. And 99% aren’t affected by the cost. Just gain the benefit.

Federal aid is not state tax revenue. If I’m wrong, by all means show me a link that says so. Nothing that you’ve said addresses federal aid.

I'm a Democrat, you idiot. Perhaps if you had a brain you'd understand not every Democrat is from the loonie side of the party. Next time use your brain if you had one instead of embarrassing yourself.

I’m honestly puzzled by the reaction here. I voted yes. But I also think we need to make serious changes before it’s implemented. And the reaction seems to be “noooo! Just collect money and it will be okay!”

There’s nothing in this question that forces the state to increase education and transportation spending. In fact the legislature could cut education and transportation spending down to the amount collected by the surtax and no laws would be broken. I doubt that will happen but I also doubt there will be any increase to education spending. They could just dump this new tax revenue into state police salaries. There’s nothing stopping them.

You're using the conditions of your town to justify opposition to a state-level question in a state where educational conditions are grossly disproportionate on a town by town level.

MA was a hundred years ahead of Brown vs the Board, and integrated schools in 1855 because we had redlined minority populations and used a township funding model, meaning that wealthier families on one side of the tracks got better schools than poorer families on the other side.

I bring this up because the result is that MA schools have been inequitably funded through ~170 years of disinvestment that has resulted in gross imbalances in education needs, spending levels, and outcomes from one town to another.

Your halcyon circumstance living in a community that puts too much money in schools, has tiny classes for your youngest kids, and has an aid in every classroom is an exception, is no reason to oppose the distribution of resources to towns that are overfilled, under-budgeted, and short-staffed.

And using learning outcomes as a justification for stripping money from your school system because those kids went through a pandemic like the rest of us is just plain gross.

Let me reframe what this person appears to be saying for anyone reading this far down: "I'm going to vote down a question on the ultra-rich that will provide much needed funding to the poorest schools in the state because the staff in my wealthy district has it too easy and didn't offer themselves up on a sacrificial altar, defying regional norms for schools. And, despite all indication to the contrary, I'm presuming that's everywhere so fuck'em."

Please don't take that approach to this question when you vote. If you have a fortunate situation, even if you're dissatisfied with your schools, do not take it out on every school in the state. We have schools competing for subs and the poorer districts are losing. We have schools that are pretty and new with limited behavioral concerns and, because of staffing shortages, people are leaving poorer, rougher schools to enjoy the change in cultural climate. Our schools are Swiss cheese right now, and if you aren't dealing with a hole, your neighbor is.

---

As for my original "Try it" comment--which frankly has nothing to do with this unique situation-- I'm more trying to clarify that concerns that the money will simply be re-appropriated without push-back are false. There will be plenty of push-back, and the state senate will have to include in their calculation the fact that if they cook the books and are caught, they'll have a considerable, organized response to contend with.

[removed]

My approach to voting is my approach to life. I use basic ethics. I won't take from someone something that is not needed. I absolutely will not single out a group to pay more just because they are perceived as able to pay. This is terrible legislation that will backfire and that's not just due to ethics, it's due to basic common sense.

Dude read the above statute. Any money the state takes in that isn't defined under the guidelines laid within means it's a receipt of revenue and would count under the guidelines of revenue received triggering the tax rebate. It's not just about taxes that's what you don't understand

It literally says state tax revenue and then lists a dozen state taxes and fees. The only thing I’m seeing that says “federal aid too” is you (except the part that says excluding federal reimbursement).

You’d be wrong dud

Right it says excluding federal reimbursement and several other federal payouts so the covid money falls under a part that means the state got more money than it should and thus had to give it back to the citizens it's not complicated.

You want to act like you're smarter than all the lawyer's and legislators but you're not. Lol

You don’t know what you’re talking about. The state collected more state tax revenue than allowed by the formula set in the law. That’s it.

The only one that doesn't know what they're talking about is you hence why you've been down voted on every comment you've made. I'm done with you.

LOL. Internet points? Really? Just point me to something that says federal aid is the reason for the tax refund and that’s the end of it. If that’s the reason, it should be easy to find.

I already did your just to stupid and ignorant to understand how the law works and I'm tired of explaining it to you.

>I ready did your just to stupid and ignorant to understand how the law works and I'm tired of explaining it to you.

It literally, specifically, excludes federal money.

No it excludes federal aid specifically. Federal aid is defined as money the state already receives on an annual basis. Read the fucking law! Any money the state already regularly receives on an annual basis is considered tax revenue for the purpose of the definition. Covid money doesn't meet that standard or definition that's why it's counted different it's not money the state gets every year.

Federal aid would be money for schools and police vehicles and roads and bridges not covid money.

Then it should be really easy to find a link that says “this refund is because of federal Covid money.”

That sounds like shifting the new tax dollars into the general fund with extra steps. That's a no from me.

You probably don't even understand what a libertarian believes.

They're never going to be serious changes once it passes.

It's not the only reason for the refund just part of it, god are you this insufferable to your family???

Still waiting for that link.