“Health-care costs are already a burden for many families and employers across Massachusetts,” Eileen McAnneny, president of the Taxpayers Foundation, said in a prepared statement. “Massachusetts should use its health-care dollars to focus on more pressing priorities, like mental health care and addiction treatment, rather than this self-serving ballot initiative,” she said.

While House leaders touted areas of investment, the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation recently cautioned that a growing portion of state revenues are being consumed by a few priorities, leaving a lot less money for lawmakers to invest in programs important to their constituents.

The business-backed Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation has said lawmakers should establish a contingency plan in case the income tax question is not passed and the sales tax question passes. The foundation said one important step would be to commit a large amount of money to the state's rainy day fund and put any surplus money from this year into the rainy day fund.

The president of the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation told the assembled lunchtime crowd that the state's economy was strong. What's more, the economic recovery has lasted longer than those in the past, and state tax receipts are coming in above estimates.

Health care spending is the leading culprit as to why the state budget has been so tight despite good economic times, according to Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation President Eileen McAnneny.

Eileen McAnneny, president of the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation, a business-backed budget watchdog group, said State Police overtime pay partly reflects the increased demands on law enforcement in an era of heightened concern about terrorism.

It's not clear where that money would come from. “It’s a big expenditure,” says Eileen McAnneny, president of the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation. “It’s being added to a budget that already has a structural deficit. So, figuring out how we pay for that is critically important.”

Mass. Taxpayers agrees, noting “Massachusetts already has a migration problem.” A net 475,000 people ($18.9 billion in adjusted gross income) left the state from 1993 to 2016. “The additional 4 percent income surtax will surely drive more Massachusetts taxpayers to change their state of tax residency.”

The new $10,000 limit will therefore cost those filers more than a third of their deductions and the aggregate cost is enormous. According to the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation, the state’s filers will lose approximately $7.5 billion in deductions under the new law.

The Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation has estimated about 19,600 tax filers would be affected by the 4 percent tax, generating about $1.9 billion a year.

The out-of-pocket costs of retiring debt are reflected in Gov. Baker's fiscal 2019 budget, which sets aside $2.66 billion to make debt service payments over 12 months, a $49 million increase from this fiscal year's projected debt service spending, according to the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation.

The idea for the commission came from the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation, which released a report in late September suggesting that a third transportation finance commission was needed because existing revenues were uncertain, particularly because of cutbacks in federal spending and the rise of ride-sharing and electric vehicles, both of which have the potential to upend funds coming in from t

The plaintiffs who oppose it include top executives at Associated Industries of Massachusetts, the National Federation of Independent Business, the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation, Massachusetts High Technology Council, and the Massachusetts Competitive Partnership.

The Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation, Associated Industries of Massachusetts, the Massachusetts Competitive Partnership and the state chapter of National Federation of Independent Business also joined in the suit challenging Democratic Attorney General Maura Healey's 2015 ruling that certified the initiative petition.

Eileen McAnnenny, a member of the Group Insurance Commission board and the president of the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation, said she abstained from the vote because she wanted more time to study the proposal.

Eileen McAnneny, president of the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation, said her group would like more money directed to the reserve fund. But she praised Baker’s overall fiscal management. “I think limiting the growth in spending to the overall rate of revenue growth is really important,” she said.

The Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation is "concerned long-term about potential impacts on federal revenue as our debt increases and federal spending could be reduced," McAnneny said. She said the law contains $6 trillion in cuts offset by $4.5 billion in hikes, for a net reduction in taxes of $1.5 trillion. What that revenue loss means for states is not yet clear, McAnneny said.

Eileen McAnneny, president of the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation, a business-backed budget watchdog, was more upbeat in her assessment. She praised Baker’s proposal for increasing funding for opioid addiction services, education, and aid to cities and towns. “My initial impression is a positive one,” she said.

One member of the new commission, Eileen McAnneny, is the president of the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation, a business-backed watchdog group.

The Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation estimates that about a third of the state's taxpayers claim the deduction on state and local taxes, with the average deduction totaling about $17,000 in the 2015 tax year. The group estimates the $10,000 cap will result in the aggregate loss of about $7 billion in deductions.

The administration first announced it would create this transportation review commission in September, after the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation released a report that was critical of the state for not having an updated blueprint of how it is going to address transportation infrastructure and financing needs in the next decade, saying such a blueprint is needed given the advances in technology

The foundation estimates that the state's first commercial pot shops — expected to begin opening this summer — could generate between $32 million and $54 million in sales and excises taxes for the state.

According to the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation, unrestricted local aid increased between fiscal 2016 and 2018 by 3.6 percent, 4.3 percent and 3.9 percent, respectively, while Chapter 70 aid increased by 2.54 percent, 2.58 percent and 2.57 percent.

As you read the bullish reports in the economic outlook in this week’s pages, be aware that cloudless skies don’t mean a storm can’t hit. A recent Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation report points out that the state’s overall budget has doubled from 15 years ago, while the so-called “rainy day fund” is $400 million lower.

The Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation has recommended, sensibly, setting aside that above-benchmark revenue to guard against changes in the tax structure next year, when two controversial questions related to taxes will be on the ballot. MTF also calls for a “sizable” deposit in the state’s rainy-day fund.

The hearing comes on the heels of a report released last week by the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation reporting that of the $19 billion Bay State taxpayers could deduct under the system in place in 2015 before the passage of the new law, some $7.5 billion of that will no longer be available.

The Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation, a business-backed group, said in an analysis that budget writers "struck a middle ground between conservative and optimistic approaches" in setting the consensus revenue figure. It also notes that the budget estimate does not take into account the potential impact of two proposed ballot questions that will appear on the November 2018 ballot.

In a report earlier this week, the business-backed Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation noted that tax collections are running nearly $730 million above benchmarks through December and recommended the state use above-benchmark revenues to build its rainy day, or stabilization reserve, an area that credit rating agencies have flagged as a concern.

"For a lot of people in Massachusetts, they are going to feel the effect of the cap," Eileen McAnneny, foundation president, told the News Service. "People with higher incomes tend to deduct and itemize at a greater percentage than folks with more modest incomes.

"The revenue challenges of these ballot questions are compounded by problematic timing," according to MTF. "The fact that these questions will not be voted on until November -- more than four months after the FY 2019 budget is finalized, makes planning for them especially difficult."

There are more than 600 earmarks in the budget, totaling $121 million in spending, according to the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation. Chandler said she met with the governor a “couple of weeks ago,” saying only that they talked about “things in general, basically. Just pleasantries.”

When she announced the commission at a Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation forum, Polito said the governor would sign an executive order "in the coming weeks" and that the commission would "further review, analyze and better inform the state's transportation capital needs," and look at how state revenues – the gas tax and vehicle registration fees, for instance – could shift along with changes

"This is just one more reason why Massachusetts might consider doing a comprehensive review of its tax code," Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation President Eileen McAnneny told the News Service on Tuesday. She said, "It absolutely has to be an academic exercise, not a political one."

The Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation said in a midyear budget update that it's unknown how many Puerto Rican families are staying with friends and relatives here after Hurricane Maria landed a devastating blow on the island. Some school districts "already dealing with an unexpected influx of students related to the disaster," the foundation said.

The business-backed MTF, over the years, has become known for its sobering assessments of budget conditions that elected officials often portray in mostly positive terms. Its assessment of the $39.4 billion fiscal 2018 budget sticks to that theme, outlining issues to watch for in the coming months.

You can’t blame Eileen McAnneny, MTF’s president, for being a spoilsport. The GOP tax cuts could total $1.5 trillion over 10 years. It’s a no-brainer, McAnneny says, that Massachusetts will receive less from D.C. going forward as a result. (Federal funds support more than a quarter of the state’s budget.) The fact we have an all-Democratic delegation doesn’t help.

“Forecasting state tax revenues 18 months into the future is always risky as unforeseen events often undermine predictions as the past three years have shown,” the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation said in a statement. The nonpartisan fiscal research group offered a more conservative estimate of 2.8 percent growth in state tax collections next year.

"Predicting revenues in FY 2019 is more daunting than usual because there are several upcoming events over the next 12 months, any one of which will have major impacts on state tax revenues, but those impacts are unknowable right now," MTF wrote in its forecast. "Taken together, these events could dramatically alter the state's fiscal health." MTF said federal tax legislation could have "a major impact" on the state's finances, but said that three possible 2018 ballot questions — imposing a 4 percent surtax on income greater than $1 million, reducing the sales tax rate from 6.25 percent to 5 percent, and a paid family and medical leave initiative -- "could make irrelevant the forecasts presented at today's hearing."

"But whenever it comes in, it is one-time revenue, and we're suggesting that that money go into the stabilization fund," McAnneny told the committees. "We think this is really important for two reasons. One, there is a statutory requirement that excess capital gains be deposited into the stabilization fund, but also I think because there is a very atypical and perhaps unprecedented amount of uncertainty regarding other tax revenues." With the pending federal tax legislation and a trio of potential ballot questions that could shake up the state's finances -- a sales tax reduction, a surtax on incomes over $1 million, and a paid family and medical leave program -- MTF recommended that the state deposit at least $500 million from this year's and next year's revenues into the rainy day fund.

The business-backed Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation said any movement on tax reform could result in a one-time surge in capital gains tax revenues, as investors sell assets based on the anticipated shift in tax policy.

McAnneny also warns that some of the money from the millionaires’ tax might not materialize. “It’s likely to be less than [what the state estimates],” she said. “We’ve seen that in other states that have enacted similar policies, namely New Jersey and Connecticut.

The plaintiffs run influential business-backed groups, including the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation, the Massachusetts High Technology Council, and the National Federation of Independent Business’s Massachusetts arm.

That announcement came after the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation released a report critical of the state for not having an updated blueprint of how it is going to address transportation infrastructure and financing needs in the next decade, saying such a blueprint is desperately needed given the advances in technology and climate change.

Don't worry about the rich. They can move or remain in Massachusetts no matter the tax burden. It's the businesses that won't expand or take root at all - and all the jobs they would create -- that should be our main concern if the added tax on those high earners becomes law.

Eileen McAnneny, president of the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation, said the ballot initiative, which would amend the state constitution, is a bad idea.

Eileen McAnneny, President of the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation, told 22News, “We’re concerned that the question is not properly before voters, that it violates the constitution.” “This question combines several unrelated matters into one question and then it gives voters a kind of hobsonian choice if you will,” said McAnneny.

The plaintiffs in the complaint against the proposed amendment, along with Anderson, are Christopher Carlozzi, the Massachusetts state director of the National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB); Richard Lord, president and CEO of Associated Industries of Massachusetts (AIM); Eileen McAnneny, president of the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation (MTF); and Daniel O'Connell, president and CEO

"We are challenging the ‘how’ of this ballot initiative, not the ‘what’ or the ‘why,'” said Eileen McAnneny, president of the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation, a business-backed fiscal research group that is also party to the Supreme Judicial Court lawsuit. “This is about process, not policy.”

“Essentially, if this ballot initiative is allowed to go forward, we’re saying voters have the power to raise revenue and appropriate it,” said Eileen McAnneny, president of the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation. “It kind of becomes the Wild West of budgeting.”

And the business-backed Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation said the state needs to have a better plan to confront challenges, including from climate changes and the loss of gas tax money as more vehicles become electric-powered. And in response to the Taxpayers Foundation report, the Baker administration this week said it would form a commission to study funding and infrastructure challenges.

The Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation strongly suggests that just throwing money at problems isn't enough.

Ford is developing a fully autonomous vehicle — no steering wheel, brake or gas pedals, and no driver required — by 2021, Ford Smart Mobility's director of city solutions Jessica Robinson said Wednesday at a transportation forum hosted by the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation.

The Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation report also found that factors such as climate change, ride-sharing services, electric vehicles and self-driving cars will affect state revenues. For example, if fewer people buy cars, Massachusetts will get less money from registration fees. More fuel-efficient cars means the state will lose gas tax money.

In addition to the loud message sent by the ballot question, the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation also released a report on transportation just hours before the Senate study was unveiled that says money isn’t the panacea for the aging network. The taxpayer report cited the growing impact of climate change on various modes of transportation and said those will cost money as well.

The taxpayers foundation this week released a report critical of the state for not having a updated blueprint of how it is going to address transportation infrastructure and financing needs in the next decade, saying such a blueprint is desperately needed given the advances in technology and climate change.

On Tuesday, the business-backed Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation released a report arguing that more money alone will not fix Massachusetts' transportation problems. Rather, the report said there needs to be a full review of the state's transportation assets to figure out what the system needs and how it should be funded.

The foundation is pressing for a complete, detailed picture of the transportation system. Gov.

The state needs a new blueprint to address its transportation infrastructure, which faces new threats and remains in problematic condition despite major investments in recent years, according to a business-backed foundation that is recommending a new independent review.

The alliance and 25 other business groups, including the Associated Industries of Massachusetts, Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation, Greater Boston Chamber of Commerce and Retailers Association of Massachusetts, signed on to a statement opposing the Rush and Decker bills.

Eileen McAnneny, president of the business-backed Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation said legislating through the Constitution is a big mistake. "The downside is that if there are problems with this new tax increase, the legislature does not have the ability to change it," said McAnneny.

Gov. Charlie Baker signed a $39.4 billion fiscal 2018 budget in July and vetoed nine of the budget's outside sections and $320.3 million across 169 line items, including $202 million related to the MassHealth changes he proposed in June. The net impact of the vetoes, after accounting for federal revenues, is $193 million, according to a Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation analysis.

The Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation, an independent watchdog group, welcomed the appointment of Ramirez. “Mr. Ramirez’s business background and expertise in complex turnarounds makes him the ideal person to lead the authority forward,” President Eileen McAnneny said.

Eileen McAnneny, president of the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation, said the dilemma points to the hazards of letting voters decide complex tax issues. "More often than not a ballot question is written by its proponents," she said. "It's very one-sided and it's not a good way to make policy."

In mid-July, the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation speculated about the situation that has come to pass.

“The cost of inaction is too high,” Eileen McAnneny, president of the business-backed Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation, said at Tuesday’s hearing at the State House.

Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation President Eileen McAnneny, also testifying in support of the governor’s plan, expressed concern that spending on MassHealth has outpaced investments in programs such as subsidized child care 44 times over.

Baker’s vetoes stretched across 169 line items, with $202 million in vetoes associated with MassHealth reforms, according to the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation. He also vetoed $42 million in spending that lawmakers earmarked in an attempt to force appropriations for favored projects.

Baker's latest vetoes stretched across 169 line item vetoes, with $202 million in vetoes associated with MassHealth reforms, according to the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation (MTF). He also vetoed $42 million in spending earmarks.

Jon asked McAnneny if the latest budget the state legislature passed was a responsible one. “I will say it was responsible in several senses,” she said.

Led by groups like Associated Industries of Massachusetts, the Massachusetts Business Roundtable and the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation, the coalition called for the “rapid approval of the reform package in its entirety by the end of July.” “On its own, the employer assessment negatively impacts thousands of businesses around the state.

The Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation in June predicted that trust fund balances might be eyed to plug holes in the state budget.

“When the administration was seeking support for their package, they made it clear to the employer community that they would accept this as a package only,” said Eileen McAnneny, president of the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation.

The Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation, however, has cautioned that if one-third of the 900 tax filers projected to make more than $10 million annually were to relocate, total income tax revenues would drop by approximately $750 million, including $410 million in taxes from the current rate and $335 million projected under the surtax.

The Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation says the fiscal 2018 shortfall could go as high as $1 billion.

But that's only part of the problem. Tax revenues have risen only about 1.2 percent during the previous 12 months, making the 3.9 percent increase forecast for the next 12 months, "very optimistic and I would say unrealistic," said Eileen McAnneny, president of the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation.

A study by the Center on Wealth and Philanthropy at Boston College found that, in the four years following New Jersey’s income tax increase, $70 billion in wealth left the state, while the expected amount of charitable giving fell by $1.1 billion.

The Baker administration has thrown the Legislature — and the taxpayers — a lifeline when it comes to dealing with rising Medicaid costs — which account for nearly 40 percent of the state budget. Lawmakers should grab it.

Officials with many of the major business groups and some health plans, including the Retailers Association of Massachusetts, the Mass High Tech Council, Fallon Health, Boston Medical Center and the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation are backing the reform package.

However, detractors like the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation and Associated Industries of Massachusetts say the new surtax will drive wealthy residents from the state, causing estimates of tax revenue to drop as well.

Critics say it would drive away jobs and hurt businesses in the state. A recent report by the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation predicts the plan could also backfire by giving wealthy residents a significant incentive to move away.

Backers of the surtax say the state needs the estimated $1.6 billion to $2.2 billion in new revenues to invest in public education and transportation infrastructure, but critics, including the business-backed Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation, warned this week that the proposal could cause wealthy Bay State residents to move to less expensive states and warned new revenues would likely be needed

The foundation’s report delivered to legislators two days before the scheduled vote said that if just one-third of the 900 state taxpayers who make more than $10 million a year were to leave the state, projected revenue would drop by $750 million.

“This proposal, unfortunately, combines questionable benefits with an extraordinary level of risk,” the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation wrote in a withering analysis of the proposal released Monday.

The Democrat-controlled Legislature has siphoned more than $2.2 billion from the reserve fund to cover operating expenses between fiscal years 2012 and 2015, according to the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation, a nonpartisan watchdog.

"The millionaire's tax does not align with the state's economic interests because it taxes talent -- Massachusetts' principal competitive advantage," the analysis says. "The appeal is easy to understand -- it is projected to raise almost $2 billion per year; does not require legislators to take a vote on a tax increase; and targets a small number of wealthy taxpayers.

But the foundation says the amendment would “tax talent – Massachusetts’ principal competitive advantage.” “The appeal is easy to understand — it is projected to raise almost $2 billion per year; does not require legislators to take a vote on a tax increase; and targets a small number of wealthy taxpayers,” the foundation says in its report.

Eileen McAnneny, president of the business-backed Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation, predicted legislators will have to slice between $750 million and $1 billion from their $40.3 billion budget. That won’t all be in program cuts, she said, but it won’t be painless. “Eight years into an economic recovery, we have seen state tax revenue slow down considerably.

Andrew Bagley, vice president of the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation, also voiced support for Shortsleeve, saying “he’s brought stability to the organization.”

The Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation says a "substantial downgrade to (FY18) revenue is likely, and if it occurs, will require major spending reductions" in the final budget.

"It really is the equivalent of the state looking under the couch cushions for any revenue that it can find in various accounts where there's a balance and sweeping that money to make up the deficit," Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation President Eileen McAnneny said, adding that fixing a budget gap at the end of the fiscal year will be hard because much of the state's money has always been spent.

Other influential business groups — such as the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation, Associated Industries of Massachusetts, and the Massachusetts Competitive Partnership — also oppose the labor-backed surcharge. Among their strategies: filing a lawsuit later this year that challenges its constitutionality.

As the budget debate neared an end Thursday night, Eileen P. McAnneny, president of the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation, noted how much the disappointing revenue collections influenced budget crafting.

By 1:30 p.m. Thursday, senators added $35.9 million in spending to their fiscal 2018 budget, according to the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation. Doug Howgate, the foundation's director of policy and research, said earmarks accounted for about $24.7 million of the spending by his tally.

The Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation, which includes the transfer in its estimates, tracked the final House budget at about $40.8 billion and Gov. Charlie Baker’s proposal at $40.9 billion.

In 2013 as part of a $1.9 billion tax package that was dismissed by the Legislature, former Gov. Deval Patrick targeted 44 personal income tax exemptions and deductions, according to a Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation analysis of the proposal.

The Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation has been fighting the amendment, arguing the additional tax could hurt the economy by “driving the risk-takers, investors and entrepreneurs out of state,” said the foundation’s president, Eileen McAnneny.

After the administration faced significant pushback from employers on the assessment plan, Baker entered into talks with the business community -- including Associated Industries of Massachusetts, the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation and Retailers Association of Massachusetts -- about possible alternatives.

“Anytime a proposal is in two of three versions of the budget, there’s a likelihood it can survive in one shape or form, particularly if it’s a priority,” said Eileen McAnneny, president of the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation.

“Given the track record of revenue growth over the last 18 months, it’s important to begin fiscal year 2018 with a lower and more realistic tax estimate so as not to compound the problem,” said Eileen McAnneny, who leads the business-backed Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation.