Negotiators reached a deal two weeks ago that cuts the short-term capital gains tax from 12% to 8.5%, a business-backed move that has riled progressives who argue it gives a break to the wealthy. The compromise will cost the state $561 million in fiscal year 2023 and $1 billion a year starting in fiscal year 2027.
The bill also excludes estates valued up to $2 million from the estate tax by allowing for a uniform credit of $99,600.
Sure, there is a cute $50 and $120 increase in rent and dependent child tax credit and some minor benefits for low-income and disabled people (that will often go unused), but the point of this bill is entirely about appeasing to the very rich of this state.
This is a disturbing anti-poor and anti-middle class law fervently pushed by the governor and compromised with the legislature, who thankfully made the bill slightly less anti-poor and anti-middle class than the governor wanted. But still, another dark day for Massachusetts perpetuated by our conservative governor and state legislature.
I wish people didn’t downvote because it looks like I downvoted you, which I didn’t.
Anyway, I most certainly did call her a conservative.
Going out of her way to push for lower taxes that no one is calling for, which overwhelmingly benefits the very wealthy is absolutely a conservative move. This spits in the face of voters who less than a year ago voted to increase taxes on these same people. The media drummed up her support for the millionaire’s tax while completely downplaying her support of lowering other rich people’s taxes. They let her always talk about the renter and child dependent deduction and gave no push back to the money gift wrapped to people who overwhelmingly wouldn’t even know it’s gone. Your bar for “success” isn’t too high.
And a tax that she lowered still being higher than “most states” doesn’t mean she isn’t conservative. This is like saying Alabama can’t be anti-abortion since they don’t have an outright abortion ban like Texas does because they allow for abortion if the mother’s physical health is at great risk. Whereas most reasonable people would say both of these are anti-abortion states.
You’re saying this will cost Massachusetts very little or nothing?
Also, Massachusetts isn’t overtaxed. We provide much better services to a wider range of people at more efficient costs than most other states.