Massachusetts Ranks 25th in Taxes in FY 2010 (Mass Budget)
from MassBudget — Taxes are the amount that we all pay towards—and the primary source of funding for—everything the people of a state choose to provide together through government, such as: public education; police and fire protection; roads, bridges and other infrastructure; environmental protection, parks, playgrounds, libraries; and a safety net to protect access to health care and other supports families depend on—particularly when they are faced with acute challenges.
Looking at the new Census data, we can see that Massachusetts’ level of taxation (10.24 percent) was below the national average (10.59 percent) in FY 2010.
Had Massachusetts’s taxes been at the national average, state and local governments would have raised an additional $1.1 billion in that fiscal year.
The comparisons in this fact sheet present taxes as a share of income. This measure is used—rather than per-capita taxes—because the per-capita measure conflates two separate elements: tax rates and incomes. This issue is most easily understood in the context of the income tax. If one state has an income tax rate of 5 percent and an average (taxable) income of $50,000, then the per-capita tax is $2,500. If a state where the average (taxable) income is lower—for example, $30,000—has a tax rate of 6 percent, than the per-capita tax in that state is $1,800. Thus, even though tax rates are higher in the low income state (6 percent rather than 5 percent), a per-capita ranking would show the state with the higher tax rate as having “lower taxes.” Using taxes as a share of income avoids this problem. For a more complete discussion of this issue, please see this MassBudget Facts At A Glance
The Census data and the analysis we present in this fact sheet differ somewhat from that presented by a commonly cited source, the Tax Foundation. The Tax Foundation, like MassBudget, uses the basic structure of comparing taxes as a share of income. The Tax Foundation, however, makes a number of adjustments to the data. Two of these adjustments are particularly important. First, the Tax Foundation attempts to project current-year taxes as a percent of current-year income (which we don’t do because we choose to report actual data—which lags by several years—rather than provide projections). Second, it seeks to estimate the taxes paid by residents of a state rather than taxes collected in the state. The second adjustment means that property taxes paid by a Massachusetts resident on a vacation home in Maine would count as Massachusetts taxes. While there are contexts in which such an adjustment may be helpful, for comparing tax policies of state and local government, it makes the most sense to look at the taxes collected by those governments.
Finally, one important shortcoming in the state personal income data (compiled by the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis) that are used for calculations in this fact sheet is that these data omit income derived from capital gains. The tax data (compiled by the U.S. Census), by contrast, include all taxes, including the taxes paid on capital gains income. As a result, the measures presented in this fact sheet overstate the share of economic resources paid in taxes, making public services appear more costly to state residents than they in fact are.