Posted on 12/10/2001 10:12:58 AM PST by Fixit
Small Government Act to End the Income Tax Qualifies for Ballot
57,100 Signatures Required
75,516 Certified Signatures Filed
On Tuesday, December 4th at 11am, Carla Howell filed 75,516 certified petition signatures and held a News Conference at the Secretary of State's Election Division Office in the McCormack Building.
The Small Government Act to End the Income Tax
Summary (as appeared on petition sheets circulated Fall 2001):
The proposed law would provide that no income or other gain realized on or after July 1, 2003, would be subject to the state personal income tax. That tax applies to income received or gain realized by individuals and married couples, by estates of deceased persons, by certain trustees and other fiduciaries, by persons who are partners in and receive income from partnerships, by corporate trusts, and by persons who receive income as shareholders of “S corporations” as defined under federal tax law. The proposed law would not affect the taxes due on income or gain realized before July 1, 2003.
The proposed law states that if any of its parts were declared invalid, the other parts would stay in effect.
Full text:
An Initiative Petition for a Law Known as The Small Government Act to End the Income Tax
Be it enacted by the people, and by their authority:
SECTION 1. This law, to be known as The Small Government Act to End the Income Tax, is enacted upon the following findings and declarations: The government of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts today is Big Government, and
Big Government has a harmful impact on those who rely upon it, and
Big Government cannot work. It is inherently flawed and unreformable. High taxes feed and increase the size and scope of Massachusetts Big Government. High taxes reduce our standard of living and drive jobs out of Massachusetts. Government spending rises to meet government income. To dramatically shrink government spending, we must dramatically shrink government income. Ending the personal income tax is intended to dramatically shrink the revenue of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. Ending the personal income tax is designed to be a bold step in making Massachusetts’ government small. Small government leaves us free and unburdened to fashion our own lives, and
SECTION 2. Chapter sixty-two of the General Laws, as appearing in the 2000 Official Edition, is hereby amended by inserting at the beginning of Section 3 of said Chapter sixty-two a new paragraph to read: “No income or other gain realized on or after July 1, 2003 shall be taxable, or subject to tax, under the provisions of this Chapter.” Said Chapter sixty-two is hereby further amended by inserting the words “Subject to the introductory paragraph at the beginning of Section 3 of this chapter”, followed by a comma, at the beginnings of each of Subsections (f), (g) and (h) of Section 2 of Chapter sixty-two.”
SECTION 3. Section 4 of Chapter sixty-two B of the General Laws, as appearing in the 2000 Official Edition, is hereby repealed, effective July 1, 2003.
SECTION 4. Chapter sixty-two C of the General Laws, as appearing in the 2000 Official Edition, is hereby amended by inserting at the beginning of Section 6 of said Chapter sixty-two C a new paragraph to read: “The term ‘taxable year’ as used in this Section or Section 7 of this Chapter, and applied to a natural person or to a partnership consisting only of natural persons, shall not include any period beginning on or after July 1, 2003.”
SECTION 5. This law is not intended to impair the operation of G.L. Chapter sixty-two E. Therefore, Section 2 of G.L. Chapter sixty-two E, as appearing in the 2000 Official Edition, is hereby amended by excising from the first sentence thereof the phrase “required to deduct and withhold taxes upon wages under the provisions of chapter sixty-two B” and the phrase “and any identification number such employer is required to include on a withholding tax return filed pursuant to said chapter sixty-two B”.
SECTION 6. Notwithstanding the provision of Sections 2, 3 and 4 hereof, this law shall not be construed to impair the collection of moneys due the Commonwealth for income or other gain realized before July 1, 2003, nor shall it be construed to affect the responsibility of any person to comply with the requirements of G.L. Chapters sixty-two B or sixty-two C as either pertains to income or other gain realized before July 1, 2003.
SECTION 7. The provisions of this law are severable, and if any clause, sentence, paragraph or section of this chapter, or an application thereof, shall be adjudged by any court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, such judgment shall not affect, impair, or invalidate the remainder thereof but shall be confined in its operation to the clause, sentence, paragraph, section or application adjudged invalid.
This is huge. Tax-achusetts voters will have the opportunity in November 2002 to get rid of their state's income tax.
I just cannot figure out why this has not seen any coverage. Does the media not want people to get too comfortable with this idea? Are larger parties ticked that the Libertarians actually got around to doing something about the income tax?
Why no coverage? Thoughts?
You think the Boston Globe is going to cover this story ? They are frantic that giving this any publicity will result in voters approving the measure. This translates into less welfare benefits, less abortion benefits, and less government spending. All elements that the paper's management thrives on.
Hip hip hooray, for my peoples republic of Massachusetts !
Possible, but Mass is a funny place, the socalists pratice here before the unlesh their propaganda on the rest of the world. The socalists have not been able to pass an override of prop 2 1/2 in my town in the close to 20 years that I have lived here, for any reason.
Money issues mean a big voter turn out watch Gavin and it doesn't get any bigger than this.
And if by some miracle, the citizens of the Commonwealth were to approve this ballot act (over the loud objections of every "public interest" group ("But what about the Children?", and state employee's unions ("But what about my relatives?"), you have to know that the Legislature will find some way to kill or disregard it. So, Happy Holidays--but still keep both hands on your wallet.
Heck, I live in Connecticut, so I am forbidden by law to keep my hands on my wallet. I know that this will face many challenges, but initiatives have been very successful out west for years now, and maybe the broad based appeal of this will make it hard to challenge.
I just thought of yet another reason this will not see much support. Though they talk a good game, most politicians owe their careers to spending other peoples' money. They just could not risk losing such a delicious high quality, easy, pre-installed money machine like the income tax.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.