SJC ruling victory for business groups
The Supreme Judicial Court struck down a proposed so-called millionaire tax in a long-awaited ruling that finds the proposal ran afoul of the state constitution by combining the unrelated subjects of a tax increase and spending on education and transportation.
The decision is a victory for business groups that fought the controversial ballot question in court in order to preserve Massachusetts’ “strong, competitive business climate.”
The question, signed off on by the Legislature and Attorney General Maura Healey, would have asked voters to approve a 4 percent surtax on personal income beyond $1 million. The estimated $2 billion in revenue would have then been earmarked for education and transportation.
In a decision written by Justice Frank M. Gaziano, the court said the ballot measure improperly cobbled together three subjects in the single question — taxation, education and transportation — when it required the subjects of a question be related.
“The two subjects of the earmarked funding themselves are not related beyond the broadest conceptual level of public good,” Gaziano wrote. “In addition, they are entirely separate from the subject of a stepped rather than a flat-rate income tax, which, by itself, has been the subject of five prior initiative petitions.”
The Massachusetts High Technology Council, whose president Christopher Anderson was the lead plaintiff against the tax, said it was encouraged not only by the decision “by how various community members and organizations throughout the state came together on such a critical issue to ensure the preservation of the commonwealth’s strong, compet- itive business climate.”