In response to the Occupy Wall Street protest, a pair of Democratic state lawmakers from New York City is repeating some flagrantly inaccurate data about taxes in New York State. In an essay at Huffington Post, Senator Daniel Squadron of Brooklyn and Assemblyman Rory Lancman of Queens support a permanent extension of the so-called millionaire tax. Their version of the “fairness” argument:

For decades, the Republican Party has pursued a long-term strategy to undermine government’s ability to protect workers and the environment by shifting its costs to those who can least afford it: From 1977 through 1997, New York’s top income tax rate was repeatedly cut to the point where married couples in New York making $40,000 a year paid the same income tax rate as someone making $10 million a year, and families making $55,000 a year paid a 22% higher share of their income in combined state and local taxes than did families making over $3 million a year.

“Republican” anti-tax zealots

Wrong.  Wrong.  And wrong.

In fact:

1. Most of the reduction of New York’s top marginal income tax rate between 1977 and 1997 was enacted under Democratic governors.  Gov. Hugh Carey dropped the top rate from 15.35 percent to 10 percent, and Gov. Mario Cuomo signed legislation taking it down to 7 percent, before changing his mind and freezing at 7.875 percent.  These cuts were supported by solid majorities of Democrats in both houses of the state Legislature, including one-sided Democratic majorities in the state Assembly.  Republican Gov. George Pataki was a tax-cutting piker by comparison. His 1995 tax reform cut the top rate by barely a percentage point, generating marginal savings of 13 percent for the wealthiest New Yorkers, while expanding other tax benefits to generate an average cut of 25 percent for middle-income families. As for “shifting its costs to those who can least afford it,” Squadron and Lancman have it backwards.  It was the lone Republican out of New York’s last six governors who spearheaded a massive expansion of the Earned Income Credit (EIC). As a result, over a million of low-income workers pay little or no income tax at all but get an annual EIC check from Albany, with the largest amounts reserved for those who earn the least and have the largest families to support.

2. Married couples with incomes of $40,000 a year do not pay the same income tax rate as someone making $10 million a year.  A childless married couple with income of $40,000 pays income tax of $1,069 — an effective rate of 2.7 percent.  If they have one child, their tax falls below 2 percent.  If they have two, their tax rate falls below 0.5 percent.  By contrast, under the permanent New York law, filers with $10 million in income will typically pay something close to the top rate of 6.85 (over $600,000) regardless of family size.  The temporary “millionaire tax” hike of 2009, due to expire at the end of this year, raised taxes on a $10 million earner by over $300,000 $200,000.

3. The claim that families making $55,000 pay a higher combined state-local tax burden than a family with income over $3 million is apparently derived from a multistate tax distribution model that is flawed and misleading in several respects.  The model, assumes, for instance, that a typical household in the wealthiest one percent of New York families is subject only to the state income tax — when, in fact, the vast majority of such taxpayers live in New York City, where they are subject to a city income tax as well.*  The model also overstates the income tax on middle-class families, and over-estimates the amount a typical middle class family spends on items subject to state and local sales and excise taxes.

To paraphrase the late Daniel Patrick Moynihan, Squadron and Lancman are entitled to their opinions but not to their own facts.  If they think higher taxes are the answer to New York’s problems, they should simply say so, rather than spinning arguments based on partisan historical distortions and misinformation.

(For more on the income tax, see my legislative testimony here.)

* A clarification, as pointed out by a knowledgeable observer: about half of state residents earning over $1 million lived in New York City as of 2006.   However, they accounted for a disproportionately large amount of total taxes generated by the wealthiest filers.

About the Author

E.J. McMahon

Edmund J. McMahon is Empire Center's founder and a senior fellow.

Read more by E.J. McMahon

You may also like

Budget Deal Slows Medicaid Growth But Plants Seeds for Future Spending

The growth of New York's Medicaid spending is projected to slow but not stop as Governor Hochul and the Legislature effectively split their differences over health care in the newly enacted state budget. Read More

Albany Lawmakers Push a $4 Billion Tax on Health Insurance

Legislative leaders are proposing an additional $4 billion tax on health insurance plans in the upcoming state budget – but withholding specifics of how it would work. Read More

As migrants flow to NY, so does red ink 

The influx of foreign migrants to New York could cost the state $4.5 billion more than expected next year, Governor Hochul today warned.  Read More

The Bill Arrives: NY Faces $9B Budget Gap Next Year 

New York’s outyear budget gaps, the shortfall between planned state expenses and state tax receipts over the next three years, has exploded to more than $36 billion, just-released documents show.  Read More

NY school spending again led US, hitting all-time high in 2020-21

Public elementary and secondary school spending in New York rose to $26,571 per pupil in 2020-21, according to the latest Census Bureau data Read More

A Tale of Two Levies

New York school districts are getting record levels of state aid. But how many are using it to cut taxes? Read More

Albany’s Belated Budget Binge 

State lawmakers have begun passing the bills necessary to implement the state budget for the fiscal year that began April 1. Read More

Courts set a limit on NY’s tax reach

Just in time for tax season, New York State's tax agency just lost a major legal challenge to its policy of pursuing maximum income tax payments from wealthy vacation homeowners—even when they live elsewhere. Read More