Massachusetts 2026 Gubernatorial Race

Every biotech IPO could make a few new millionaires. Every year some big law partners cross the threshold as well. Your model seems to focus on the existing pool of rich people and not account for the HBS grad who’s 6 years away from making 7 figures. Attracting talent, being friendly to entrepreneurs, and fixing the damn housing issue could slow any outmigration issue and continue to draw in people of all kinds.

I love NH and FL but they simply can’t compete on the talent level that makes MA special.
 
Justbuildit said:
Every biotech IPO could make a few new millionaires. Every year some big law partners cross the threshold as well. Your model seems to focus on the existing pool of rich people and not account for the HBS grad who’s 6 years away from making 7 figures. Attracting talent, being friendly to entrepreneurs, and fixing the damn housing issue could slow any outmigration issue and continue to draw in people of all kinds.

I love NH and FL but they simply can’t compete on the talent level that makes MA special.
Click to expand...
Yes, exactly. It's not like MA only just suddenly became a higher tax state. We are and remain one of the most desirable places in the nation for successful people to live and work. If we focus on the fundamentals rather than get caught up in the race to the bottom on taxes we'll be just fine.
 
Justbuildit said:
Every biotech IPO could make a few new millionaires. Every year some big law partners cross the threshold as well. Your model seems to focus on the existing pool of rich people and not account for the HBS grad who’s 6 years away from making 7 figures. Attracting talent, being friendly to entrepreneurs, and fixing the damn housing issue could slow any outmigration issue and continue to draw in people of all kinds.

I love NH and FL but they simply can’t compete on the talent level that makes MA special.
Click to expand...
I’m a big law partner who practices in biotech. Trust me we can (and do) move to and work from Florida! 5%->9% is an 80% increase in tax rate.

Many business owners (tech and biotech) folks will move before selling or exercising stock options and generating big money. So Mass will never see that.

Many folks will travel here but live elsewhere and work remotely in order to avoid being subject to Mass income taxes.

5% is ok but 9% is outrageous when you add to everything else.

Plus the data wont show it yet but it does take some time for people to be able to move and get tax residency elsewhere to a level of certainty in those income levels.
 
TallIsGood said:
I’m a big law partner who practices in biotech. Trust me we can (and do) move to and work from Florida! 5%->9% is an 80% increase in tax rate.

Many business owners (tech and biotech) folks will move before selling or exercising stock options and generating big money. So Mass will never see that.

Many folks will travel here but live elsewhere and work remotely in order to avoid being subject to Mass income taxes.

5% is ok but 9% is outrageous when you add to everything else.

Plus the data wont show it yet but it does take some time for people to be able to move and get tax residency elsewhere to a level of certainty in those income levels.
Click to expand...
I brought it up because my father, who is a biotech exec in Boston, moved to NH because of the millionaires tax. (Many of his current and former colleagues at his pay grade have done similar) He saves around 80-90k a year living in Salem NH which pays off the price of buying a 2bed condo in just over 5 years. He only commutes once or twice a week so the 10 minute increase in his commute (versus living in Andover) is negligible. The quality of life difference of living in an MA suburb and NH or FL just isn't enough to discourage people from moving to states with favorable taxes.
The average lifestyle for a millenial or young gen X would obviously be different but for people 55+ moving away is very attractive.
 
22marc said:
I brought it up because my father, who is a biotech exec in Boston, moved to NH because of the millionaires tax. (Many of his current and former colleagues at his pay grade have done similar) He saves around 80-90k a year living in Salem NH which pays off the price of buying a 2bed condo in just over 5 years. He only commutes once or twice a week so the 10 minute increase in his commute (versus living in Andover) is negligible. The quality of life difference of living in an MA suburb and NH or FL just isn't enough to discourage people from moving to states with favorable taxes.
The average lifestyle for a millenial or young gen X would obviously be different but for people 55+ moving away is very attractive.
Click to expand...
While anecdotal this is why I say people are leaving mass (or not coming or structuring timing of gains around it) and it’s all because of the 80% increase. Remember it goes from 9% to 0% when we go. That pays for the second house.
 
TallIsGood said:
5%->9% is an 80% increase in tax rate.
Click to expand...
Okay, but do you understand how marginal tax rates work? That's not remotely an 80% increase in your effective tax rate. You still pay 5% on the first million. If you make above $1 million, the additional 4% is only for the amount above that level. So if you made $2,000,000, your tax liability goes from $100,000 to $140,000, which is to say a 40% increase. Sure, maybe that's enough to make you move to Florida if you are one of the few people earning that much income. I can't really speak to that, but at least understand how the tax actually works before you make that decision.
 
22marc said:
I brought it up because my father, who is a biotech exec in Boston, moved to NH because of the millionaires tax. (Many of his current and former colleagues at his pay grade have done similar) He saves around 80-90k a year living in Salem NH which pays off the price of buying a 2bed condo in just over 5 years. He only commutes once or twice a week so the 10 minute increase in his commute (versus living in Andover) is negligible. The quality of life difference of living in an MA suburb and NH or FL just isn't enough to discourage people from moving to states with favorable taxes.
The average lifestyle for a millenial or young gen X would obviously be different but for people 55+ moving away is very attractive.
Click to expand...

After a quick perusal of Zillow, living in a Salem NH condo on a ~$1.5m annual income just to die with a few more toys gives off some serious Hetty Green vibes.

And all triggered by a ~$20k increase in his total MA obligation.
 
Last edited:
Taxes are just one cost among many, remember. In FL, for example, you're probably living in an HOA, and HOA costs are huge there. Same with insurance, which is only going to get higher as the state gradually becomes completely uninsurable, at least the coastal parts.

I can think of a lot of costs - golf club membership, private school tuition, boat storage, airfares at local airports (or available fights - probably not great to live in NH if you're flying internationally from Logan every couple of weeks), etc. that can add up in ways that challenge these tax burdens. I don't know what they are or which way they point, but state income tax is not determinative on its own.
 
It's also important to note that MA income taxes are paid on income earned in MA, no matter what state one lives in. Simply moving across the board to NH and commuting to a job in MA isn't enough to avoid MA taxes.

Moving out of state will help avoid MA taxes on income earned out of state or non-payroll income (like capital gains).
 
HenryAlan said:
Okay, but do you understand how marginal tax rates work? That's not remotely an 80% increase in your effective tax rate. You still pay 5% on the first million. If you make above $1 million, the additional 4% is only for the amount above that level. So if you made $2,000,000, your tax liability goes from $100,000 to $140,000, which is to say a 40% increase. Sure, maybe that's enough to make you move to Florida if you are one of the few people earning that much income. I can't really speak to that, but at least understand how the tax actually works before you make that decision.
Click to expand...
Yeah as a CPA and an attorney, I certainly understand marginal tax rates. Marginal rates are on the last dollar of income. So an 80% increase. Effective rates are blended on overall income.
 
Equilibria said:
Taxes are just one cost among many, remember. In FL, for example, you're probably living in an HOA, and HOA costs are huge there. Same with insurance, which is only going to get higher as the state gradually becomes completely uninsurable, at least the coastal parts.

I can think of a lot of costs - golf club membership, private school tuition, boat storage, airfares at local airports (or available fights - probably not great to live in NH if you're flying internationally from Logan every couple of weeks), etc. that can add up in ways that challenge these tax burdens. I don't know what they are or which way they point, but state income tax is not determinative on its own.
Click to expand...
I’m well aware of the costs but other costs are lower. Overall it’s cheaper to live there for me. Reduced taxes cover the mortgage plus.
 
JumboBuc said:
It's also important to note that MA income taxes are paid on income earned in MA, no matter what state one lives in. Simply moving across the board to NH and commuting to a job in MA isn't enough to avoid MA taxes.

Moving out of state will help avoid MA taxes on income earned out of state or non-payroll income (like capital gains).
Click to expand...
Correct, so income from business in other states and countries is now free of Mass tax.
 
www.bostonglobe.com

Healey wants to renovate Framingham women’s prison. Advocates say the idea is wrong-headed. - The Boston Globe

Governor Maura Healey's plan, which is nine times more expensive than a replacement pitched during the tenure of former governor Charlie Baker, has drawn pushback from anti-incarceration critics.
www.bostonglobe.com www.bostonglobe.com
Anti-incarceration advocates, who have long opposed the building of a new women’s prison in Massachusetts, said the state should instead focus on releasing and funding services for more women, starting with the elderly, the disabled, those held in minimum security and those who deserve clemency.
“We could be investing in those alternatives instead of a massive, massive construction project,” said Mallory Hanora, director of the Roxbury-based advocacy organization Families for Justice as Healing.
Healey’s plan would reduce MCI-Framingham’s footprint from 260,000 to 200,000 square feet decrease bed capacity, though the governor’s office did not specify the exact number of planned beds. Inmates would be housed in “community-oriented living units” in a “campus-like setting,” and the facility would feature improved facilities for medical care, mental health treatment, and rehabilitative programming, according to the governor’s office.
Click to expand...
 
themissinglink said:
www.bostonglobe.com

Healey wants to renovate Framingham women’s prison. Advocates say the idea is wrong-headed. - The Boston Globe

Governor Maura Healey's plan, which is nine times more expensive than a replacement pitched during the tenure of former governor Charlie Baker, has drawn pushback from anti-incarceration critics.
www.bostonglobe.com www.bostonglobe.com
Click to expand...
"You shouldn't build a new prison to replace the old, inhumane one - you should just let all the inmates out and never try to imprison anyone ever again" isn't the winning argument they think it is.
 
We demand progress!

(works to makes prison life better, downsizes the total prison due to decreasing inmate population, invests public money to accomplish these goals)

No, not like that!

Healey should use this opportunity to left-punch these people. Over-policing is bad and has had some awful impacts on American life, but being "anti-incarceration" as a baseline is an insane luxury belief that should be mocked by any serious politician. Good on the Commonwealth for trying to make prison life better. Shame on these clowns.

Great anecdote at the end of the article:

At its peak in 2007, MCI-Framingham held 844 women. The facility currently holds 218 people, out of a an operational capacity of 598, according to the governor’s office [note, this is great!]. More than 72 percent of that population has been diagnosed with serious mental illness, according to that data.

Jefferson, who spent 31 years in MCI-Framingham for killing her ex-boyfriend, said she wants other women like her to experience freedom and contribute to society.

“What I did was wrong. But at the same time I am giving back to my community,” she said. “The women behind the wall? Give them the same chance they gave me.”

I look forward to these people experiencing freedom after their sentences are up. We shouldn't release murderers early!!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top