Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
That's it. I thought I would put it off for a few more years but this is the final straw. I'm moving to Colorado in mid August and will not be buying anything from Massachusetts in my life ever again after August 1st.
Ridiculous. The change puts the sales tax at 6.25%, with groceries, utilities, returnable containers, and clothing and footwear up to $175 exempted. Before this change MA sales tax was in the bottom half of the US. Guess what, it still is.
The following states and localities have sales tax at 6% or higher.
Alabama: 7.5% in Montgomery, 8% in Birmingham, 4% minimum statewide. No food exception.
Alaska: 108 towns have a local sales tax, some as high as 7%.
Arizona: Phoenix has a TPT of 7.6%. Does not appear as a sales tax to consumers, because the merchant pays it, but it is passed on to consumers via higher prices to cover it.
Arkansas: 6% plus local taxes in some cities.
California: 8.25% plus local taxes in some cities.
Colorado: 7.72% in Denver, similar in surrounding suburban areas.
Connecticut: 6%.
District of Columbia: 6%, 10% on restaurant meals.
Florida: 6% plus local taxes in most counties. Often totals 7%.
Georgia: 7% in the vast majority of counties.
Hawaii: Transactions tax of 5.7-6.2%. Like Arizona, does not appear as a sales tax to consumers, because the merchant pays it, but it is passed on to consumers via higher prices to cover it.
Idaho: 6% plus local taxes in some cities.
Illinois: 6.25% plus local taxes in many cities.
Indiana: 7%, with additional taxes on some items in some cities.
Iowa: 6% plus local taxes, for a total of 7% in virtually all cities and counties.
Kansas: 5.3% base, but local taxes totaling 7.45% in Topeka and the same or higher in other towns.
Kentucky: 6%.
Louisiana: 9% in New Orleans, 6% or above in several other parishes.
Maryland: 6%.
Michigan: 6% plus a 6% tax on items brought into the state by residents that were bought elsewhere.
Minnesota: 6.825% statewide, closer to 8% in the Twin Cities and suburbs.
Mississippi: 7% plus local taxes.
Missouri: 4.225% base, but local taxes totaling up to 9.1% in some cities and counties.
Nebraska: 5.5% base, but local taxes totaling up to 7% in some cities and counties.
Nevada: 6.85% base, total of 8.1% in Las Vegas area, 7.75% in Reno area.
New Jersey: 7%.
New Mexico: Gross receipts tax of 5.4% to 8.6%. Like Arizona, does not appear as a sales tax to consumers, because the merchant pays it, but it is passed on to consumers via higher prices to cover it.
New York: Generally around 7%, 8.875% in New York City, 8.75% in Utica, similar in other larger cities and counties.
North Carolina: 7.75% in 92 of 100 counties.
Ohio: 5.5% base, up to 7% in some areas.
Oklahoma: Total of 7.5% to 8.5% in most areas.
Pennsylvania: 6%, 7% in Pittsburgh area and 8% in Philadelphia area.
Rhode Island: 7%.
South Carolina: 6% plus local taxes in some cities.
South Dakota: 6% in larger cities.
Tennessee: 9.25% in most counties.
Texas: 6.25% base, total of 8.25% in most cities and counties.
Utah: 4.7% base plus local taxes, ranges from 5.95% to 8.35% in most places.
Vermont: 6%, 7% in Williston.
Washington: 6.5% plus local taxes, goes up to 9.5% in Seattle.
West Virginia: 6%, 3% on food.
Wisconsin: 5.5% generally, 6% in Green Bay.
Wyoming: 4% base, total of 7% in many counties, 10% in resort areas.
Holden, that post was from nearly a year ago. Hopefully he's in CO right now and not too surprised that they have a similar sales tax (higher in spots). Maybe he would enjoy learning that despite the conspiracy theories, the sky HASN'T fallen over MA yet.
Big deal. Pay your taxes if you want police, fire, public schools, road repair, snow removal, services for elderly and disabled and children, etc.
The problem IS....big pensions for state workers who had cushy jobs, and were able to retire early; many of these people are overpaid as it is. Especially, when after receiving one pension, many will take up another "state" job earning time towards a second pension. The irony of this of course, is that after many of these state workers retire they move out of state because Massachusetts is too expensive.
There is no reason why more state jobs cannot be outsourced! Why should state workers be immune to what is going on in the private sector. Why shouldn't tax payers have a say in determining how their tax dollars are spent? Taxes are way too high and when you look at the cost of living in the Boston metro area it seems clear that children of most residents will not be able to stay here because they won't be able to afford to live here.
The problem IS....big pensions for state workers who had cushy jobs, and were able to retire early; many of these people are overpaid as it is. Especially, when after receiving one pension, many will take up another "state" job earning time towards a second pension. The irony of this of course, is that after many of these state workers retire they move out of state because Massachusetts is too expensive.
People can't have it both ways. If the state is too expensive for these people to stay in, maybe they're not getting such massive pensions. In any event, the fact that they're leaving (increasing supply of available homes and decreasing demand) would, if anything, lower the cost of living in Massachusetts.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1979
There is no reason why more state jobs cannot be outsourced! Why should state workers be immune to what is going on in the private sector. Why shouldn't tax payers have a say in determining how their tax dollars are spent? Taxes are way too high and when you look at the cost of living in the Boston metro area it seems clear that children of most residents will not be able to stay here because they won't be able to afford to live here.
That the area is too expensive for some local kids to stay is a problem, but it's not because of taxes, which are not out line with most other areas in the US. It's because of the high cost of real estate, which results from supply and demand.
This is an area with a highly educated workforce and is very desirable to a lot of people. It also draws a lot of high-income people. The cost of housing goes up as a result, and it's a big problem for people who don't have as high an income. I think it's tragic, because it's changing the character of the area and it's unfortunate for the people who feel forced to move away, but it's not due to taxes.
Outsourcing does not often lead to significant efficiency improvements, it just adds another layer of bureaucracy as the state has to select, contract with and monitor the contractors. Who are looking to make a profit and don't always know what they're doing.
People can't have it both ways. If the state is too expensive for these people to stay in, maybe they're not getting such massive pensions. In any event, the fact that they're leaving (increasing supply of available homes and decreasing demand) would, if anything, lower the cost of living in Massachusetts.
That the area is too expensive for some local kids to stay is a problem, but it's not because of taxes, which are not out line with most other areas in the US. It's because of the high cost of real estate, which results from supply and demand.
This is an area with a highly educated workforce and is very desirable to a lot of people. It also draws a lot of high-income people. The cost of housing goes up as a result, and it's a big problem for people who don't have as high an income. I think it's tragic, because it's changing the character of the area and it's unfortunate for the people who feel forced to move away, but it's not due to taxes.
Outsourcing does not often lead to significant efficiency improvements, it just adds another layer of bureaucracy as the state has to select, contract with and monitor the contractors. Who are looking to make a profit and don't always know what they're doing.
Well, it is easier to keep home prices higher when you keep the supply low. Basically just have very restrictive zoning and don't let anyone build any homes. With the state being so small and you can get to NH, RI, and CT all within in an hour...it helps limit the supply of housing.
When you factor in all the taxes and fees we pay in MA, and the high cost of living it is very difficult to take any tax hike at all. Especially when you see all the waste and crap our state government does. Many states do have a higher sales tax, but they also don't have as high property taxes, income taxes, and tax on every other thing you can possibly own. Some places in Texas have a 8% sales tax, but their property taxes are lower for the house you can get, your car insurance is lower, you have no state income tax, and in return going out to eat or buying many items the price is actually lower.
I wouldn't have as big an issue with a 6.25% sales tax if they started to lower our other taxes. They still refuse to lower our state income tax to 5% even though it was only supposed to be higher for a temporary time. But when does any government every lower a temporary tax...they usually just keep it and hope everyone forgets or makes an excuse that they can't do it for budget reasons.
Well, it is easier to keep home prices higher when you keep the supply low. Basically just have very restrictive zoning and don't let anyone build any homes. With the state being so small and you can get to NH, RI, and CT all within in an hour...it helps limit the supply of housing.
When you factor in all the taxes and fees we pay in MA, and the high cost of living it is very difficult to take any tax hike at all. Especially when you see all the waste and crap our state government does. Many states do have a higher sales tax, but they also don't have as high property taxes, income taxes, and tax on every other thing you can possibly own. Some places in Texas have a 8% sales tax, but their property taxes are lower for the house you can get, your car insurance is lower, you have no state income tax, and in return going out to eat or buying many items the price is actually lower.
I wouldn't have as big an issue with a 6.25% sales tax if they started to lower our other taxes. They still refuse to lower our state income tax to 5% even though it was only supposed to be higher for a temporary time. But when does any government every lower a temporary tax...they usually just keep it and hope everyone forgets or makes an excuse that they can't do it for budget reasons.
Texas has no state income tax, but it has a higher sales tax and places like Austin and the Houston area tend to have much higher property taxes than the Boston area. And most of the rest of Texas is, frankly, too much like a third world country. I know plenty of people who moved to these "cheaper" places and then found out that the schools were nowhere near as good. And if they moved to a district in Texas, or NC, or whatever, with excellent schools, the taxes were just as high as here.
Zoning has something to do with home prices being high, but it also has something to do with Massachusetts not looking like Houston. Personally, I'd like to see more high density development near T stations throughout the system. That would provide more housing without chewing up the landscape, and foster use of public transit instead of choking the roads even more. The Romney administration, and Doug Foy, did try to do this, but too many towns don't want to hear about anything like that. A better system needs to be worked out to make sure the towns get the revenue they need to keep the schools as good with more people living in town, etc.
Waste and crap is not just a Massachusetts issue. It's also not just a public sector issue. I don't know anyone who works for a private corporation and hasn't seen plenty of waste and crap. It's kind of hard to avoid when you're organizing large numbers of people. Stupid meetings, multiple departments doing the same thing, or not communicating, or operating at cross purposes. Product lines that don't work out. Tons of money for unhelpful consultants.
Nobody complains when you pay 15 bucks for a bottle of Tide detergent because Proctor and Gamble needed to boost revenue. (I just made that up, I don't know about their actual revenue situation.) It's only in the public sector that people get up in arms.
Texas has no state income tax, but it has a higher sales tax and places like Austin and the Houston area tend to have much higher property taxes than the Boston area. And most of the rest of Texas is, frankly, too much like a third world country. I know plenty of people who moved to these "cheaper" places and then found out that the schools were nowhere near as good. And if they moved to a district in Texas, or NC, or whatever, with excellent schools, the taxes were just as high as here.
Zoning has something to do with home prices being high, but it also has something to do with Massachusetts not looking like Houston. Personally, I'd like to see more high density development near T stations throughout the system. That would provide more housing without chewing up the landscape, and foster use of public transit instead of choking the roads even more. The Romney administration, and Doug Foy, did try to do this, but too many towns don't want to hear about anything like that. A better system needs to be worked out to make sure the towns get the revenue they need to keep the schools as good with more people living in town, etc.
Waste and crap is not just a Massachusetts issue. It's also not just a public sector issue. I don't know anyone who works for a private corporation and hasn't seen plenty of waste and crap. It's kind of hard to avoid when you're organizing large numbers of people. Stupid meetings, multiple departments doing the same thing, or not communicating, or operating at cross purposes. Product lines that don't work out. Tons of money for unhelpful consultants.
Nobody complains when you pay 15 bucks for a bottle of Tide detergent because Proctor and Gamble needed to boost revenue. (I just made that up, I don't know about their actual revenue situation.) It's only in the public sector that people get up in arms.
I completely agree with you that there is waste in all governments and even the private sector is not immune to this. We need government and the private sector to stop being in bed with each other in the first place. If a private sector company wants to waste their money then fine, because it isn't mine and they can go out of business (unless they get bailed out). What I don't need is the government wasting my money and saying their budget can handle a tax cut as an excuse to raise taxes.
My point with property taxes from state to state was the house you can get for $200k in Texas (or other states) will be far nicer than what you get in MA for $200k. Your taxes will be close to the same in most cases, but when you compare apples to apples, it is different. For that $200k house somewhere else, in MA I might have to pay $350k or $400k and then pay more taxes on that property.
My point with property taxes from state to state was the house you can get for $200k in Texas (or other states) will be far nicer than what you get in MA for $200k. Your taxes will be close to the same in most cases, but when you compare apples to apples, it is different. For that $200k house somewhere else, in MA I might have to pay $350k or $400k and then pay more taxes on that property.
I've lived in both TX and MA and I prefer MA, hands down. Yes, housing costs more (so do lots of things). But the overall quality of life in MA is much better. But here's a caveat: I am a high income person. I can afford the higher costs of MA and still enjoy a good quality of life. For a middle/lower middle income person TX could offer some real advantages, if you can live with the downsides of being in TX.
I would also add that comparing housing is tough. TX houses do not have basements and they tend to come on small plots of land (1/4 and 1/3 acre lots are common). MA houses usually have a basement, which means more living/storage space. A 200 sq. ft. house in MA with a basement offers A LOT more room than a 2000 sq. ft. house in TX. What's more, lots of suburban houses in Boston have more land (1 acre lots, for example). Makes comparisons tricky.
I've lived in both TX and MA and I prefer MA, hands down. Yes, housing costs more (so do lots of things). But the overall quality of life in MA is much better. But here's a caveat: I am a high income person. I can afford the higher costs of MA and still enjoy a good quality of life. For a middle/lower middle income person TX could offer some real advantages, if you can live with the downsides of being in TX.
I would also add that comparing housing is tough. TX houses do not have basements and they tend to come on small plots of land (1/4 and 1/3 acre lots are common). MA houses usually have a basement, which means more living/storage space. A 200 sq. ft. house in MA with a basement offers A LOT more room than a 2000 sq. ft. house in TX. What's more, lots of suburban houses in Boston have more land (1 acre lots, for example). Makes comparisons tricky.
I wasn't directly trying to compare MA to TX, just using housing and taxes as an example. Even if you used NC, SC, GA, or TN. Your paying a lot less for a house. Basements like you mentioned are a factor, and that helps contribute to the higher cost of a home...as basements are expensive. I like basements, especially nice finished basements. Most homes in the south also have 2-car garages which can be difficult to find around here. Obviously living in Texas (or NC,SC, whereever) for example isn't the same as living in MA and someone might prefer one or the other. I just know that you can get a house next to the city in many places for a lot less than the same house you could get here being anywhere near Boston. Most of the private sector jobs in those states pay roughly the same as here.
I just prefer a sales tax over an income tax. If I decide to work two jobs I continue to get hit on the money I'm making. With a sales tax at least, I can decide whether or not I want to pay $20,000 for a car or pay more taxes and buy a $25,000+ vehicle. I realize this would also hit my on groceries and clothes, but I'd take a higher sales tax with no income tax over a 6.25% sales tax and another 5.20% income tax. I also think the income tax in the long run hurts businesses...they can be more competitive in states with a lower overall tax burden.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
