|
Good Monday morning.
Senate Democratic leaders this afternoon plan to release their version of a roughly $500 million tax cut package that would kick in a full year before the House-backed changes and take a different approach to estate tax reform that would cost the state $22 million less.
House and Senate leaders announced an agreement last week on a framework for tax relief that included $500 million in rebates by October and $500 million in additional reforms. The House passed its bill on Thursday, but the Senate tax plan, which will be included in a broader economic development bill, proposes that the policy changes take effect for the 2022 tax year, rather than 2023, an official familiar with the bill told MASSterList.
This would mean taxpayers could take advantage of things like the expanded child care tax credits and credits for renters, when they file their taxes next spring and not have to wait until the following year.
The approach recommended by Senate leaders would also create a tax credit of $99,600 on all estates, effectively eliminating all taxes and the "cliff effect" on estates worth up to $2 million. In contrast, the House last week voted to increase the estate tax trigger from $1 million to $2 million and to apply the tax to only the value of an estate above $2 million rather than the full amount.
The Senate plan, according to officials estimates, would impact roughly 2,500 estates and cost the state $185 million, or about $22 million less than the House plan. Child and dependent credits, the earned-income tax credit expansion, rental deductions and increases in the senior circuit breaker all mirror the House bill, the official said.
-- PALFREY BACKS LIMITS ON BULK GUN SALES: Democrat Quentin Palfrey says the Legislature should ban the manufacturing of assault weapons in Massachusetts and put limits on the "number and timing" of gun purchases as a way to further reduce gun violence.
Palfrey is the second candidate for attorney general to call for a cap on gun purchasing, telling MASSterList the limits are part of his broader plan to address gun violence that he intends to release today. Former Boston City Councilor Andrea Campbell previously recommended annual and lifetime limits on gun purchases as part of her plan to address gun violence.
Efforts to revisit Massachusetts's already strict gun ownership laws come as state leaders look for ways to respond to the Supreme Court's decision to limit how states can restrict access to permits to carry firearms in public. The Globe's Matt Stout reports that police in Boston, Springfield and other cities are taking steps to remove restrictions on thousands of gun licenses after being told by Attorney General Maura Healey that the court's decision means they can no longer enforce a requirement that an applicant demonstrate "good reason" for needing to carry a gun outside their home.
Palfrey's plan calls for "vigorously" enforcing existing state laws and looking for opportunities to challenge federal laws that shield gun manufacturers from civil liability when their products are used to commit acts of violence.
While the former assistant attorney general said he supports the new Biden administration rules cracking down on "ghost guns," he said more can be done at the state level to track and regulate homemade weapons.
Palfrey blames the influence of the gun lobby in Washington for the reluctance of Congress to take more aggressive action on gun control, and said Massachusetts must partner with other states in the region to stop the interstate transportation of weapons that are illegal here. Finally, his plan calls for more community engagement to stop violence and investments in suicide prevention, mental health and awareness of the state's "red flag" laws that can be used to keep guns away from people who may pose a danger to themselves or others.
While the third Democrat in the race Shannon Liss-Riordan once called for abolishing the Second Amendment while running for U.S. Senate in 2019, Palfrey said it should be possible to respect people's rights and put "sensible" restrictions on gun ownership.
"There are ways in which I disagree with the Supreme Court's interpretation of the scope of the Second Amendment, but it seems to me we can uphold the Second Amendment and leave some space for hunters, sportsmen and home defense and also protect our communities from gun violence," he said.
| 
