‘Mansion tax’ the wrong fit for Conn.

Acommon theme among various measures winding their way through the General Assembly this session has been a need for new revenue. A pandemic-induced slowdown will do that, and lawmakers are turning over every rock looking for ways to pay for government functions.

That is behind drives to legalize recreational marijuana and sports gaming. A group of progressive legislators is seeking widespread tax increases on wealthier residents. And Senate President Martin Looney has proposed a statewide property tax, on top of the local property tax everyone pays, to help cities that have an overabundance of nontaxable properties within their borders.

His aim is laudable. But this is not the time to be adding to the tax load for a wide swath of state residents who may already be struggling to pay the bills.

The rate would be one mill, or $1 for every $1,000 of assessed value, and it would only apply to properties assessed at $300,000 or more. Because assessed value in Connecticut is 70 percent of market value, that means only homes that sell for about $430,000 or more would be subject to the surtax.

This has led some to dub the plan a “mansion tax” and argue that those subject to it wouldn’t be hard-pressed to pay it, or maybe even notice it.

That’s certainly true for many. But anyone familiar with Connecticut real estate, especially in Fairfield County, knows that home prices here are not like they are in the rest of the country. There are homes that could have been owned for decades that are now assessed at mansionlike prices, but that doesn’t mean the owners are wealthy.

At the same time, Connecticut is reporting an influx of new residents, apparently a reaction from out-of-staters, specifically New Yorkers, who are interested in some breathing room amid a still-ongoing pandemic. The last thing we want to do is dissuade people from considering a new Connecticut home.

The problem the tax aims to solve is real. Cities are excessively burdened with properties that serve the public good but are not subject to regular property taxes, such as government buildings and hospitals. The state has a program known as PILOT that is meant to fill those gaps, but it rarely comes close to paying out what cities could otherwise earn. It leaves struggling cities in an even deeper hole.

Regardless of the plan’s specifics, Gov. Ned Lamont has shown no indication that he would sign such a bill, were it to pass. He has made a lack of tax increases one of his signature policies, and is unlikely to go back on it now. Whether that remains tenable going forward is uncertain, but he’s not going to sign on to this proposal.

None of this solves the real problems cities find themselves in with nontaxable properties. The state has revenue needs that go beyond digging our way our from the pandemic slowdown.

But a new property tax isn’t the way to get there. If anything, the property tax system that communities depend on to fund local government needs a wholesale rethink. The state shouldn’t become even more dependent on it.

There are homes that could have been owned for decades that are now assessed at mansion-like prices, but that doesn’t make the owners wealthy.