Daily Tax Report: State provides authoritative coverage of state and local tax developments across the 50 U.S. states and the District of Columbia, tracking legislative and regulatory updates,...
New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio has proposed a Millionaire's Tax to help pay for decaying infrastructure. In this article Frederick Floss, a Professor of Economics and Finance at Buffalo State College, discusses the costs and benefits of the Mayor's plan.
By Frederick Floss
Frederick Floss is a Professor of Economics and Finance at Buffalo State College, State University of New York, and Senior Fellow at the Fiscal Policy Institute.
New York City is like a family which takes out a home equity loan, spends it on daily living expenses and then has no money when their home needs to be repaired. The City for decades has lived off its capital infrastructure without any concern for what comes next. To be sure this is true for most cities and states in the United States. And not surprising, everyone involved is looking to deflect blame and find others to pay for past sins.
Mayor De Blasio has proposed raising city income tax rates from 3.38 to 4.41% on individual incomes over $500,000 and family incomes of $1,000,000. The City estimates this will bring is approximately $800 million per year, with $550 million going to infrastructure and the rest used to keep fares stable. When looking at current proposals, the City's needs are in the tens of billions of dollars, so additional federal and state funding will be needed to stop the system from deteriorating further. The American Society of Civil Engineers' 2015 Infrastructure Report Card estimates the City will need $68 billion over the next 20 years to repair mass transit to keep it operating. This is needed on top of the $830 million emergency cost proposal from the MTA.
Putting politics aside, the obvious question is: should an increase in the City's income tax rate be used to fund MTA infrastructure or is there a better funding source? The arguments for a progressive income tax are in general, it is efficient to collect, equitable (people with the same income pay the same rate) and meets the ability to pay criteria.
The only question on the fairness of this tax arises when looking at the benefit principle. Do those at the upper income levels benefit from the city's mass transit system and will the improvements in infrastructure be greater for them than the costs. At first blush one might not think high income individuals use mass transit and therefore do not receive direct benefits from transit improvements. That would be short sighted.
First, a good mass transit system draws immigrants into the city increasing both the economy and the tax base. A 2016 study by the Fiscal Policy Institute showed New York City's population would be over 3 million smaller without these immigrants most of who rely on mass transit. FPI further showed that immigrants pay more in taxes than they receive. Over time this means a lower tax burden, other things equal on all taxpayers.
Second, if the mass transit infrastructure is allowed to decay, fewer individuals will use it causing congestion for everyone in the City, making it more expensive for both high income individuals and business to do business.
Third, to the extent high income individuals own or run businesses in the City having a workforce who can get to work easily and on time increases profits and business owners income.
On a $1 million income the 1.03% rise in the income tax rate will amount to an increase of $10,300 which would seem to be less than the direct and indirect benefits accruing to those at the city's higher income levels. The argument about whether this is a good policy is not on cost-benefit criteria but rather on other political considerations.
Copyright © 2017 Tax Management Inc. All Rights Reserved.
All Bloomberg BNA treatises are available on standing order, which ensures you will always receive the most current edition of the book or supplement of the title you have ordered from Bloomberg BNA’s book division. As soon as a new supplement or edition is published (usually annually) for a title you’ve previously purchased and requested to be placed on standing order, we’ll ship it to you to review for 30 days without any obligation. During this period, you can either (a) honor the invoice and receive a 5% discount (in addition to any other discounts you may qualify for) off the then-current price of the update, plus shipping and handling or (b) return the book(s), in which case, your invoice will be cancelled upon receipt of the book(s). Call us for a prepaid UPS label for your return. It’s as simple and easy as that. Most importantly, standing orders mean you will never have to worry about the timeliness of the information you’re relying on. And, you may discontinue standing orders at any time by contacting us at 1.800.960.1220 or by sending an email to email@example.com.
Put me on standing order at a 5% discount off list price of all future updates, in addition to any other discounts I may quality for. (Returnable within 30 days.)
Notify me when updates are available (No standing order will be created).
This Bloomberg BNA report is available on standing order, which ensures you will all receive the latest edition. This report is updated annually and we will send you the latest edition once it has been published. By signing up for standing order you will never have to worry about the timeliness of the information you need. And, you may discontinue standing orders at any time by contacting us at 1.800.372.1033, option 5, or by sending us an email to firstname.lastname@example.org.
Put me on standing order
Notify me when new releases are available (no standing order will be created)