Beacon Hill’s “Double-Dip” Tax Break Misses the Mark for Struggling Communities, Families, and Small Businesses

Statement by Marie-Frances Rivera, MassBudget President, on the PPP “double-dip” tax break
 
“The Legislature’s decision yesterday on Emergency Paid Sick Time and Unemployment Insurance (UI) creates cause for celebration. Providing targeted tax relief for unemployed workers whose income falls below 200 percent of the poverty line is commendable. As stated in our recent brief, Black, Latinx, and Indigenous workers, as well as low-income workers, have particularly benefited from UI. These two policies provide opportunities for an equitable recovery from the pandemic.
 
The Legislature’s decision is also cause for concern because it creates a new “double-dip” tax break only for those business owners who have received Payroll Protection Program (PPP) grants and have been profitable. Despite characterizations to the contrary, the PPP grants do not raise state tax bills. All expenses paid using PPP dollars are already tax deductible. This new tax break will give profitable business owners an additional deduction on these same expenses.
 
The Baker Administration estimates this new double-dip tax break will cost the Commonwealth $130 million in lost revenue. This money could be better spent helping businesses that are really struggling, or getting our K-12 funding plan, the Student Opportunity Act, back on track. There is no shortage of unmet need in our communities.
 
The Legislature’s decision continues to favor profitable business owners who have done well during this dark winter. Yet again, this leaves us with less revenue to support communities, families, and small businesses who are struggling during this pandemic. Without this revenue, we can’t create an equitable recovery in the Commonwealth.”

Latest

Fundamentally Flawed: 62F Formula Overstates “Excess” by $1.4 Billion

The $2.9 billion estimate of 62F “excess tax collections” recently certified by the State Auditor overstates these net Fiscal Year (FY) 2022 collections by $1.4 billion. The problem is not that the Auditor miscalculated but that the calculation as stipulated in the 62F statute fails to account for situations where taxes are received by the Commonwealth in one fiscal year, but corresponding, offsetting tax credits are not applied until the following fiscal year. This is one of the many fundamental flaws in the 1986 tax cap law (referred to as “62F”).

Read More →

Where Might Home Sales Be Subject to the Fair Share Amendment? A Local Breakdown

In the majority of Massachusetts cities and towns, no homes sold for a net gain of $1 million or more, meaning they wouldn’t be subject to any additional taxes under the Fair Share Amendment.

Read More →

62F Credits Benefit the Rich

The “tax cap law,” or what is known as “62F,” sets an artificial limit on how much tax revenue Massachusetts can collect, regardless of the current needs of the Commonwealth. This law in effect transfers to higher income households tax revenue paid by lower income households and does nothing to improve racial or economic equity in our state.

Read More →
Scroll to Top

Get news from Massachusetts Budget and Policy Center in your inbox.