New York State tax policy encompasses the various taxes and fees levied by the state and its localities, including personal income, corporate, property, and sales taxes. This page covers CBC’s work on structural budget gaps, spending growth, economic development incentives, school aid formulas, and the state’s overall fiscal competitiveness.
This page was created with AICBC Insights uses AI to group, analyze and present data and recommendations from CBC's publications. Always reference the cited sources to verify important details..
State leaders should focus on enacting a smart, future-proofing budget that focuses on affordability and program quality, curbs ballooning spending growth, and holds the line on New York’s nation-leading taxes.
The State should adopt the smart choices the Governor proposed to streamline SEQRA.
The State should reduce auto insurance costs.
The State should recalibrate the CLCPA.
Key Data
In February 2026 testimony, the CBC noted that New York City residents face the nation's highest combined top marginal personal income tax rate of 14.776%, while business activity in the city is taxed at 17.44%, compared to 11.5% in New Jersey.
A January 2026 study found that in fiscal year 2025, statewide business tax collections totaled $19.7 billion, which included $6.8 billion from the State corporate franchise tax and $1.9 billion from the MTA surcharge.
In a January 2026 report, the CBC highlighted that in 2023, New York State and its localities led the nation in taxes, collecting $12,495 per capita (78% more than the national average) and the second most per $1,000 of personal income at $153 (52% more than the national average).
The CBC reported in August 2025 that resident millionaires, who make up less than 1% of tax filers, paid 44% of New York State's and 40% of New York City's personal income taxes in 2022.
According to November 2024 testimony, New York State has spent over $5.8 billion since 2007 on film and commercial tax credits, despite these programs returning less than 30 cents in State tax revenue for every dollar awarded.
The state's fiscal plan adds $5 billion in spending above the executive proposal, increasing future budget gaps and the risk of a fiscal wall. Instead of raising taxes like a pied-a-terre tax, the state should prioritize reducing inefficient spending and bolstering recessionary reserves.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
The State should prioritize stabilizing the budget by reducing inefficient spending rather than enacting a pied-a-terre tax or raising other taxes.
The State should add energy rebate funds to recessionary reserves that are currently less than half of what is needed.
The State should relieve the City from the Class-Size Reduction Mandate to help stabilize the budget.
Key Data
$5 billion
— Amount added above the Executive proposal for fiscal year 2027, which likely grows future budget gaps.
$1 billion
— Amount allocated for energy rebate checks that could be better used for recessionary reserves.
$268 billion
— Total amount the State plans to spend in the upcoming budget.
New York State's budget is currently two weeks late for the seventh consecutive year, prompting calls for lawmakers to return from recess and finalize a fiscal plan. The proposed budget should prioritize affordability and program quality while curbing spending growth and maintaining current tax levels.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
State leaders should focus on enacting a smart, future-proofing budget that focuses on affordability and program quality, curbs ballooning spending growth, and holds the line on New York’s nation-leading taxes.
The State should adopt the smart choices the Governor proposed to streamline SEQRA.
New York's state budget is late for the fifth consecutive year, prompting calls to curb ballooning spending and maintain current tax levels to ensure fiscal stability. Policymakers are urged to prioritize spending discipline and avoid unnecessary pension enhancements to protect the state's economic competitiveness.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
The State should hold the line on taxes, as New York State and its local governments already collect the most taxes per person in the country.
Policymakers should reject costly, unnecessary Tier 6 pension enhancements that may drive property tax increases or service cuts.
The State should curb ballooning spending growth to avoid a self-inflicted fiscal crisis that weakens competitiveness.
Key Data
$30 billion
— Amount spending has increased more than inflation in the last decade.
$5 billion
— Amount the Legislature proposes to add to the budget next year.
$12.8 billion
— Size of the Executive Budget gaps in fiscal year 2030.
$14 billion
— Current amount in principle reserves.
$1.2 billion
— Potential savings for New York City if the class size mandate is relieved.
New York State already collects the highest taxes per capita in the nation, and further tax increases risk driving away high earners and businesses that are critical to the state's economy. Instead of raising taxes, the state should focus on fiscal restraint and targeted tax credits for low-income families to improve affordability and competitiveness.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
Reject proposed personal income, corporate income, unincorporated business, pass-through entity, and real property transfer tax increases to avoid harming New York's competitive position.
Enact the lower-income tax credit for filers with dependents, supported by spending offsets, to provide relief to those with the greatest financial need.
Key Data
31 percent
— The amount by which New York’s share of the nation’s millionaires plummeted between 2010 and 2022.
$13 billion
— Additional personal income tax revenue the State and City would have collected had New York’s share of millionaires stayed at 2010 levels.
$211 million
— Cost of the Assembly’s proposed tax credit that would eliminate New York State personal income tax liability for many filers with dependents.
21.37 percent
— New York City’s nation-leading combined business tax rate under the proposed increases, which is nearly double New Jersey’s 11.5 percent top rate.
New York State currently collects significantly higher taxes per capita than the national average, California, and New Jersey, creating a competitive disadvantage for residents and businesses. Instead of implementing new rebate checks or increasing spending, the state should prioritize fiscal stability to hedge against looming federal cuts and economic uncertainty.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
The State should spend less, not more, than the executive budget proposed.
The State must ensure its own fiscal stability, and any one-time aid should serve as a bridge with the condition that the City is accountable for bringing spending in line with its current revenue base.
Rather than sending checks to New Yorkers who may not need them, the State should be saving these resources as a hedge against the looming risks of economic uncertainty and federal cuts.
The State should avoid hiking our nation-leading taxes, as making the State less competitive to prop up inefficient, often ineffective programs is the wrong prescription.
Key Data
$20 billion
— Structural budget gap facing the State.
78 percent
— Amount more in taxes per capita collected by New York State and its localities than the national average.
40 percent
— Amount more in taxes per capita collected by New York State and its localities than California.
37 percent
— Amount more in taxes per capita collected by New York State and its localities than New Jersey.
$263 billion is the size of the FY27 State budget proposed by Governor Hochul. With strong tax receipts, the State has enough to close next year's gap and put a dent in future gaps, plus fund universal childcare. But risks abound, including a structural budget gap and federal changes to…
New York State and its localities currently collect the most taxes per person in the country, with New York City residents facing a combined top marginal personal income tax rate of 14.776 percent. Rather than raising taxes, the State and City should focus on efficiently managing their existing $263 billion and $127 billion budgets to ensure fiscal sustainability and competitiveness.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
The State and New York City should hold the line on taxes.
Legislators should not include State or City tax increases in their one-house or the enacted budgets.
The State and New York City should double down on getting the most out of their budgets by efficiently delivering high-quality services.
Key Data
14.776 percent
— The combined top marginal personal income tax rate for New York City residents.
17.44 percent
— The tax rate on business activity in New York City.
$11 billion
— The amount of additional State personal income tax receipts that would have been generated if the State had maintained its share of the nation's millionaires.
140,000
— The number of people who moved from New York State to other parts of the country in 2024.
$29.5 billion
— The amount by which State operating funds spending has increased more than inflation over the last 10 years.
$76 billion
— The potential savings if New York State and its localities spent like New Jersey.
Blake G. Washington is the Budget Director for the State of New York, appointed by Governor Kathy Hochul. Mr. Washington is responsible for the development and management of the New York State budget and leads a team of public servants to administer the fiscal duties of the state, including economic…
New York City businesses currently face the highest combined corporate tax rate in the nation at 17.44 percent, and further tax increases would threaten the state's economic competitiveness. Instead of raising taxes, the state should focus on reducing burdensome regulations, curbing ineffective economic development tax breaks, and shifting funding toward priority needs.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
The State should hold the line on taxes.
The State should review and reduce burdensome regulations that do not serve New Yorkers’ interests.
The State should curb the $5 billion in economic development tax breaks, capital spending, and programs that fail to deliver results.
The State should shift funding from lower-impact programs to affordability and other priority needs.
The State should drive service quality and efficiency improvements with performance data, accountability, and targeted programs.
Key Data
17.44%
— Top combined corporate tax rate faced by New York City businesses.
$19.7 billion
— Statewide business tax collections in fiscal year 2025.
$5 billion
— Amount in economic development tax breaks, capital spending, and programs that fail to deliver results.
$4.7 billion
— Total Payroll Mobility Tax collections in 2026.
New York State and its localities lead the nation in tax collections, with residents paying the highest amount per capita and the second-highest amount relative to personal income. Additionally, the state ranks third in the nation for per-capita government spending, exceeding the national average by 40 percent.
Key Data
$12,495
— Total state and local taxes collected per capita in New York, ranking as the highest of all states.
$15,894
— Total state and local expenditures per capita in New York, which is 40 percent more than the national average.
$153
— Total state and local taxes collected per $1,000 of personal income in New York, the second-highest rate in the nation.
$18.4
— Corporate income tax revenue per $1,000 of state GDP in New York, the highest among all states.
$3,454
— Local property tax collections per capita in New York, which were 71 percent higher than the national average.
$2,890
— Sales tax revenue per capita in New York, which is higher than the collections in 42 other states.
New York State's fiscal plan for 2027 faces a structural gap exceeding $15 billion, driven by spending growth that outpaces inflation. To maintain competitiveness and affordability, the state should avoid tax increases, prioritize core programs, and reduce wasteful spending on economic development and aid to wealthy school districts.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
The Governor and Legislature should hold the line on taxes to keep New York competitive for families and businesses.
The State should scale back less impactful spending, including wasteful economic development programs and school aid to shrinking and wealthy districts.
The Governor and Legislature should prioritize core programs and avoid adding unaffordable spending to improve New York State’s affordability.
The State should add to the recessionary reserves rather than using them to offset recurring federal cuts.
Key Data
17.44%
— The rate at which business activity in New York City will continue to be taxed.
$5.1 billion
— Total amount New York State spent on economic development in fiscal year 2025.
$2.6 billion
— Amount of education aid directed to districts that self-fund a sound basic education in school year 2026.
$469 million
— Amount of 'hold harmless' funds provided to districts with declining enrollment.
New York must prioritize fiscal stability and targeted spending to address a massive structural budget gap and potential federal cuts. Maintaining current tax levels is essential to bolster state competitiveness and ensure residents and businesses continue to contribute to the economy.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
Governor Hochul is right to hold the line on taxes to continue to bolster New York’s competitiveness.
The State should target new programs to those in greatest need, fund them sustainably, and stabilize New York’s precarious future finances.
New York faces a $20 billion structural budget gap and maintains the nation's highest tax burden, yet continues to increase spending at rates significantly outpacing inflation. To ensure long-term economic competitiveness and fiscal stability, the state must prioritize holding the line on taxes, eliminating ineffective programs, and reallocating funds from wealthy school districts and underperforming economic development initiatives.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
Albany should hold the line on taxes because higher taxes risk dislocation and are unnecessary.
The state should curb the $5 billion in economic development tax breaks and programs that fail to deliver results.
State leaders should redirect $2.5 billion in state aid provided to wealthy districts that already self-fund a sound basic education.
Albany should end aid increases to districts with declining enrollment to save $500 million annually.
The state should protect and build Rainy Day reserves because they are currently insufficient to weather a recession.
Key Data
$20 billion
— The state faces a massive structural budget gap.
17.44%
— The combined corporate tax rate in New York City, which overshadows New Jersey’s 11.5% rate.
$10 billion
— The amount of additional revenue the state would be collecting annually if its share of the nation’s millionaires had held steady since 2010.
$5 billion
— The amount of economic development tax breaks and programs that fail to deliver results.
$500 million
— The annual savings from ending aid increases to school districts with declining enrollment.
$2.5 billion
— The amount of state aid provided to wealthy districts that already self-fund a sound basic education.
New York State faces a structural budget gap of $20 billion annually, driven by spending that exceeds recurring receipts and necessitates a reevaluation of ineffective economic development subsidies and tax incentives. To improve fiscal stability and economic competitiveness, the state must prioritize cost-effective investments, reform high-cost programs like Medicaid, and avoid increasing the already-highest state and local tax burdens in the country.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
State leaders should reduce the cost of doing business by letting the business tax surcharge expire.
State leaders should leverage proven, cost-effective tax incentives to attract and retain businesses and shrink or eliminate tax incentives and economic programs that are not proven to create jobs or increase output.
State leaders should hold the line on taxes to demonstrate a commitment to a competitive future.
State leaders should prioritize phasing out ineffective economic development subsidies, such as the film tax and theatrical tax credits that a State study found have low return on investment.
State leaders should focus on reforming tax incentives to make housing development financially feasible.
Key Data
$258 billion
— The fiscal year 2026 All Funds budget amount.
$20 billion
— The amount by which State recurring spending exceeds its recurring receipts annually, creating a structural budget gap.
12 percent
— The growth rate of adjusted State operating funds spending this year.
80 percent
— The amount by which New York State's per-capita Medicaid spending exceeds the national average.
New York's share of the nation's millionaires dropped from 12.7 percent in 2010 to 8.7 percent in 2022, resulting in a significant loss of potential tax revenue. If the state and city had maintained their 2010 share of millionaires, they would have collected an additional $10.7 billion and $2.5 billion in personal income tax revenue, respectively, in 2022.
Key Data
12.7 percent
— New York's share of the nation's millionaires in 2010.
8.7 percent
— New York's share of the nation's millionaires in 2022.
$10.7 billion
— Additional state personal income tax revenue New York would have collected in 2022 if it had maintained its 2010 share of millionaires.
$2.5 billion
— Additional city personal income tax revenue New York City would have collected in 2022 if it had maintained its 2010 share of millionaires.
14.776 percent
— Top marginal personal income tax rate for New York City residents earning over $25 million annually.
$34 billion
— Personal income tax revenue contributed by millionaires to New York's tax base in 2022.
The fiscal year 2026 financial plan reveals that state spending has increased by over 12 percent, significantly outpacing inflation and creating future annual budget gaps of $14 billion. To maintain competitiveness and fiscal stability, the state must prioritize core programs, protect reserves, and avoid tax increases while addressing a long-run imbalance between receipts and disbursements that exceeds $20 billion.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
State leaders should preserve core programs that have the greatest impact.
State leaders should shrink other programs despite their likely popularity.
State leaders should protect recession-mitigating reserves.
State leaders should hold the line on taxes to ensure New York’s competitiveness.
Key Data
12 percent
— Increase in adjusted State Operating Funds spending, which is approximately four times the rate of inflation.
$14 billion
— Future annual budget gaps resulting from ballooning spending and lower projected receipts.
$20 billion
— Long-run imbalance between receipts and disbursements once reliance on non-recurring resources is removed.
$49 billion
— Amount the State spent before releasing the financial plan to inform New Yorkers how their money is being used.
New York's fiscal year 2026 budget relies on unsustainable spending propped up by extended personal income tax increases for high earners, while offering ineffective tax relief through small checks and a thinly spread middle-class tax cut. Furthermore, the budget increases the payroll mobility tax, which disproportionately burdens large businesses and threatens the state's economic competitiveness.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
Lawmakers should avoid sending small checks to nearly all New Yorkers, as it is a highly ineffective use of $2 billion.
Lawmakers should reconsider raising the payroll mobility tax, as it concentrates the burden on large businesses rather than spreading it out more fairly.
Key Data
$2 billion
— The amount of funding used for small checks sent to nearly all New Yorkers, which is considered a highly ineffective use of resources.
$254 billion
— The total size of the State budget that ignores looming federal budget cuts and a possible recession.
$20 billion
— The approximate structural imbalance between future receipts and disbursements.
12 percent
— The rate at which the budget increases State Operating Funds spending, which is four times the rate of inflation.
New York State's proposed budget features record-high spending increases between 10.9 percent and 13.8 percent, creating an $18.2 billion structural gap that threatens long-term fiscal stability. To ensure sustainability, the state should avoid tax increases that harm competitiveness, set aside $2 billion for potential federal cuts, and improve transparency by publishing multi-year financial plans.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
The budget should reject tax increases that risk the State’s competitiveness.
The budget should set aside at least $2 billion to mitigate potential federal cuts.
The budget should not spread $3 billion so thinly among taxpayers that it won’t help affordability.
The budget should restrain exploding spending growth.
The budget should fairly fund MTA capital investment.
The State’s leaders should publish basic, multi-year financial plan tables with the enacted budget bills.
Key Data
10.9 percent and 13.8 percent
— The range of the largest spending increase in recent State history featured in the Governor’s and Legislature’s proposals.
$18.2 billion
— The size of the structural gap left by the proposed spending increases.
$2 billion
— The minimum amount the budget should set aside to mitigate potential federal cuts.
$3 billion
— The amount that should not be spread so thinly among taxpayers that it fails to help affordability.
New York State's proposed fiscal year 2026 budget faces an $18.2 billion structural gap while relying on tax increases and spending growth that threaten long-term fiscal stability. Rather than distributing $3 billion in 'Inflation Refund' checks, the state should prioritize fiscal restraint and target affordability programs more effectively to ensure sustainable economic health.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
The State should not extend or increase personal income and business taxes.
The State should redirect the $3 billion slated for Inflation Refund checks to more impactful uses.
The State should target 'affordability' programs such as middle-class tax cuts and child tax credit enhancements to have a greater impact, offset by savings elsewhere.
The State should use proceeds from the time-limited Managed Care Organization (MCO) tax for one-time health system improvements.
Key Data
$18.2 billion
— The amount of the structural budget gap left by the proposed budget.
$3 billion
— The total amount of 'Inflation Refund' checks sent to New Yorkers.
$3.5 billion
— The projected fiscal year 2025 surplus.
$2 billion
— The amount of the projected surplus that should be reserved as a contingency fund.
10.9 percent
— The rate at which the Governor proposes to increase State Operating Funds (SOF) spending.
13.8 percent
— The rate at which the Legislature proposes to increase State Operating Funds (SOF) spending.
New York's proposed state budget includes significant spending increases and potential tax hikes, despite an existing $18.2 billion structural gap and the risk of future federal funding cuts. To maintain fiscal stability, the state should prioritize essential services and preserve reserves rather than relying on unsustainable growth or additional tax burdens.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
Lawmakers should hold the line on spending, identify the most critical services and needs, and keep money aside to fund a transition path to a new, lower level of federal aid, if cuts materialize.
Rainy Day reserves should be saved to weather recessions and time-limited emergencies, not depleted to temporarily plug recurring federal reductions.
The state should avoid another round of new tax increases, as New York State and its localities already collect the most taxes in the nation.
Key Data
$18.2 billion
— structural gap in the State budget
$4 billion
— recurring spending added by the Assembly and Senate on top of the Governor’s proposal
13.7 percent
— year-over-year adjusted State Operating Funds growth
$11 billion
— increase in State Operating Funds spending in the Assembly plan
$7 billion
— amount in the Assembly plan to pay off the State’s unemployment insurance trust liability
New York State's government spending is growing at an unsustainable rate, with projected increases of $15.5 billion in fiscal year 2026 alone, creating an $11.0 billion budget gap by 2029. To address the $18.2 billion structural imbalance and allow temporary tax increases to sunset, annual spending growth must be restrained to 2.7 percent through 2029.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
Lawmakers should find savings that restrain spending growth to allow temporary tax increases to sunset.
The State should limit annual spending growth to 2.7 percent starting next fiscal year to close projected budget gaps and eliminate the structural imbalance.
Key Data
$15.5 billion
— The proposed increase in State Operating Funds spending for fiscal year 2026.
10.9 percent
— The projected increase in State Operating Funds spending for fiscal year 2026.
$11.0 billion
— The projected budget gap for New York State in fiscal year 2029.
$18.2 billion
— The structural imbalance masked by temporary receipts.
2.7 percent
— The annual spending growth rate required from fiscal year 2025 to fiscal year 2029 to close the structural imbalance.
$3 billion
— The cost of the proposed Inflation Refund checks included in the fiscal year 2026 budget.
$252 billion is the Governor Kathy Hochul’s New York State Executive Budget for Fiscal Year 2026. How much does it matter that New York State and its localities are already #1 in taxes and #2 in spending nationwide? On today’s episode we talk with New York State’s Budget Director, Blake…
New York's $252 billion Executive Budget for fiscal year 2026 faces an $18.5 billion structural imbalance and projects budget gaps growing to $11.0 billion by 2029. While the budget includes tax cuts and rebates, the State's long-term fiscal health requires restraining spending, such as redirecting $2 billion in aid from wealthy school districts, rather than relying on temporary revenue sources.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
The State should restrain spending elsewhere to afford proposals like the expanded child tax credit and middle-class tax cuts in the long run.
The State should use the $3.7 billion from the MCO tax for a one-time investment in health system transformation rather than building it into the Medicaid spending base.
The State should eliminate "hold harmless" provisions or redirect aid from wealthy districts that do not need it to fund a sound basic education.
The State should use the $3 billion tax rebate to reduce ongoing costs by paying cash for roads, bridges, or MTA infrastructure instead of borrowing.
Key Data
$11.0 billion
— Projected budget gaps by fiscal year 2029.
$18.5 billion
— The State's structural imbalance.
$252 billion
— The total size of the Executive Budget.
$100 billion
— The increase in State spending over the last ten years.
$2 billion
— State aid sent to wealthy districts that do not need it for a sound basic education.
$3 billion
— The amount of the tax rebate that is spread too thinly to have a lasting impact.
New York State faces a $15.6 billion structural imbalance, necessitating spending restraint to afford proposed tax cuts like the expanded child tax credit and middle-class tax relief. While the state currently collects more taxes per capita than any other, long-term fiscal stability requires major savings plans for Medicaid and education aid rather than relying on tax increases.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
The State cannot afford expanded child tax credit and middle-class tax cuts in the long run unless it restrains spending elsewhere.
Major savings plans are needed to make Medicaid and education aid affordable so the State can sustain critical services.
The State should use its surplus funds to restructure State government to be lower cost and higher quality, pay cash for capital projects, and further bolster reserves.
Key Data
$15.6 billion
— The amount of the State's current structural imbalance.
$33 billion
— The size of the funding hole in the MTA’s capital plan.
New York State faces a $15.6 billion structural imbalance, necessitating a shift toward sustainable spending growth and recurring tax relief rather than temporary rebates. The upcoming executive budget must prioritize fiscal stability by limiting spending growth to under 3 percent, protecting reserves, and addressing long-term funding gaps in Medicaid and the Metropolitan Transportation Authority.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
To improve the State’s competitiveness and affordability, recurring tax reductions are needed.
The State should hold State Operating Funds (SOF) spending growth to under 3 percent annually to close the State’s structural gap over the next four years.
The Governor should transfer the full balance of reserves to the Rainy Day Reserve (RDR), as well as add $1.9 billion from the closeout surplus.
The State should address the Medicaid spending imbalance in the budget to provide recurring savings and reduce costs while preserving access to care.
The Governor should propose a funding plan for the MTA that is sustainable—meaning it limits the need to raise taxes every five years.
The Governor should use the one-time tax relief sum to bolster reserves or to invest in reducing the cost of government instead of spreading relief too thin.
Key Data
$15.6 billion
— The estimated structural imbalance by fiscal year 2028.
$3 billion
— The amount of the Governor's proposed one-time tax relief rebate.
7.5 percent
— The slated annual growth rate for State Operating Funds (SOF) spending.
$1.0 billion, $6.2 billion, and $7.1 billion
— The projected budget gaps for fiscal years 2026 through 2028, respectively.
$20 billion
— The total amount of State reserves.
$1.9 billion
— The amount the Governor should add to the Rainy Day Reserve from the closeout surplus.
New York State and its localities lead the nation in tax collections, with residents paying $12,751 per capita, which is 79% higher than the national average. Additionally, the state ranks second in the nation for spending, with expenditures reaching $15,368 per capita, nearly $5,000 above the national average.
Key Data
$15,368
— Total state and local expenditures per capita in New York, which is nearly $5,000 more than the national average.
$12,751
— Total state and local taxes collected per capita in New York, the highest of all states.
$169
— Total state and local taxes collected per $1,000 of personal income in New York, the highest in the nation.
$59
— Personal income tax collected per $1,000 of personal income in New York, which is higher than all other states.
$19
— Corporate income tax collected per $1,000 of state GDP in New York, which is higher than all other states.
$3,319
— Local property tax collections per capita in New York, which were 70% higher than the national average.
New York State's fiscal year 2024 financial data shows total tax receipts reached $106,447 million, while total disbursements for the state amounted to $234,867 million. These figures reflect the state's overall fiscal position, including significant expenditures on local government grants and state operations.
Key Data
$106,447 Million
— Total tax receipts for New York State in fiscal year 2024.
$110,505 Million
— Taxes collected under governmental activities in fiscal year 2024.
$84,458 Million
— Medicaid grants to local governments in fiscal year 2024.
$234,478 Million
— Total receipts for New York State in fiscal year 2024.
10 and 15 are the districts represented by New York Congressman Dan Goldman and Congressman Ritchie Torres. With a newly elected President and Congress, changes in federal policy, funding, and regulation will affect New York State and New York City. So, what are the opportunities and challenges ahead? Where can…
New York State spends $11 billion annually on economic development programs, with nearly two-thirds consisting of tax incentives that often fail to generate sufficient economic returns. To improve fiscal outcomes, the state should prioritize performance-based incentives, conduct regular evaluations of existing programs, and focus on foundational economic drivers like infrastructure and public services rather than picking industry winners.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
New York should ensure that tax credit programs are designed in ways that reward actual performance in key sectors, rather than hiring or investment that would have happened anyway.
The State should keep what works and amend, narrow, or eliminate programs that are ineffective to improve the cost-effectiveness of economic development.
Lawmakers should waive tax secrecy provisions to grant evaluators access to the tax records needed to evaluate programs effectively.
New York should amend its film tax credit program to target incentives to the segments of the film industry that are at risk, while reducing or eliminating incentives that generate little to no impact.
The State should conduct regular in-depth evaluations of specific incentives and programs, perhaps on a rolling basis, using an impartial and independent evaluator.
Key Data
$11 billion
— Annual cost of economic development programs in New York State and its localities.
30-cent
— Return on investment for every dollar of tax credits in some cases.
$5.8 billion
— Total amount spent by New York State on Film Production, Film Post-Production, and Commercial Production Tax Credit programs since 2007.
$878 million
— Foregone tax revenue cost of Georgia's film tax credit in fiscal year 2023.
17.6 percent
— New York's share of national film production employment in 2022.
6.3 percent
— Georgia's share of national film production employment in 2022.
97 - that's the number of days between this conversation and the release of the Governor's Fiscal Year 2026 Executive Budget. But how the State will close its $16 billion structural gap isn't the only important issue facing New York State. How will the State buttress resiliency, reduce greenhouse gas…
New York's proposed cap-and-invest program could impose a massive new financial burden on the state, potentially reaching $12 billion annually by 2030, while lacking sufficient analysis on its economic impact. The state should recalibrate its emissions goals and provide a detailed plan for the $30 billion in projected revenue to ensure the program balances environmental objectives with economic vitality.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
Conduct and publicly release, before or with the draft rules, a more robust assessment of NYCI’s potential fiscal and economic impacts.
Recalibrate the 2030 emissions reduction goal to be ambitious but feasible, so New York can leverage market-driven, cost-effective emissions reductions that are balanced with economic growth.
Proceed with rulemaking only when comprehensive assessments are public and based on recalibrated targets.
Present a detailed plan to use the program’s revenue—which could exceed $30 billion over the next 5 years.
Permit banking of allowances from the start, instead of after the first compliance period.
Allow limited use of rigorously verified offsets.
Modify design elements to facilitate linkage with other systems and broaden coverage.
Consider regulating co-pollutants separately from NYCI, rather than including firm-specific emissions caps or limitations on emissions trading.
Key Data
$12 billion
— Potential annual cost of the new emissions charge by 2030.
$30 billion
— Potential revenue generated by the program over the next 5 years.
The Industrial and Commercial Abatement Program (ICAP) has seen its costs grow six-fold to over $500 million annually, despite evidence that the vast majority of projects do not require these tax breaks to be financially feasible. The program should not be extended without a thorough, objective evaluation to ensure it is a cost-effective use of public funds.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
The Governor should veto S9822/A10530 because it wrongly extends the Industrial and Commercial Abatement Program (ICAP) for four years without first assessing whether the program is necessary to promote economic growth.
The Governor should sign a one-year extension, negotiated as a Chapter amendment, which would allow time to objectively evaluate whether an extension would be cost-effective.
Policymakers should identify eligibility and benefit changes to improve ICAP’s cost-effectiveness rather than rushing a multi-year renewal.
Key Data
3.6 percent
— of projects receiving ICAP benefits required the tax breaks to be financially feasible.
$81.4 million
— ICAP cost in fiscal year 2017.
$506.3 million
— ICAP cost in fiscal year 2024.
$500 million
— spent per year on the program without first determining that it is an effective use of public funds.
Two-thirds
— of ICAP recipients receive 25-year abatements, even though 10- to 15-year benefits were found to be sufficient for most projects.
New York State should reform its school aid formulas to better direct resources to districts with the greatest need by updating outdated poverty and cost measures and eliminating inefficient funding streams. By phasing out the "hold harmless" provision and ending programs like the School Tax Relief (STAR) and High Tax Aid, the state can improve fiscal sustainability and ensure education funding is distributed more equitably.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
The State should quickly phase out the hold harmless provision to align Foundation Aid with district enrollment and wealth.
The State should revise the expected local contribution to be the higher of the district’s actual contribution or the district’s fiscal capacity.
The State should update district poverty estimates and regional cost measures for a more accurate assessment of need.
The State should reassess arbitrary floors and ceilings in formulas to ensure they are limited to extreme situations.
The State should allocate library, textbook, and software aids based on wealth by modifying the formula or folding the funding into Foundation Aid.
The State should eliminate High Tax Aid, which provides more aid per student to wealthy districts than below-average-wealth districts.
The State should eliminate the School Tax Relief (STAR) program to better allocate State resources to where needed most.
Key Data
$16 billion
— Structural budget gap facing New York State.
$38.6 billion
— Total amount of education aid the State must wisely and appropriately use.
$2 billion
— Amount of State aid sent every year to districts that already spend enough local resources to provide a sound basic education.
$3 billion
— Annual cost of the School Tax Relief (STAR) program.
$223 million
— Total funding for High Tax Aid.
$224 million
— Funding for library, textbook, and software aids.
New York State's enacted budget for fiscal year 2025 includes $239 billion in total spending, which is $2 billion higher than initially reported. This spending trajectory contributes to a projected $16.1 billion structural budget gap by fiscal year 2028, which is partially masked by temporary resources and expiring tax increases.
Key Data
$16.1 billion
— The projected structural budget gap driven by the enacted budget.
$239 billion
— Total All-Funds spending for fiscal year 2025.
7.8%
— The increase in Adjusted State Operating Funds spending in fiscal year 2025.
$2.9 billion
— The amount of the structural imbalance masked by expiring tax increases.
4.1%
— The projected average annual growth rate for Adjusted State Operating Funds spending through fiscal year 2028.
$21.1 billion
— The total amount of state reserves following a $1.5 billion addition.
New York's fiscal year 2025 budget agreement includes $237 billion in spending while failing to provide essential financial plan tables to the public. The state faces a structural budget deficit likely exceeding $16 billion, exacerbated by unsustainable spending growth and the addition of billions in pension liabilities.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
All reserves should be deposited into the Rainy Day Reserve to protect them from potential squandering.
Short-term funds should be used to restructure the Medicaid system to be more sustainable.
State leaders should produce basic financial plan tables immediately.
Key Data
$16 billion
— The estimated future structural budget deficit.
$237B
— The total amount of spending approved in the state budget.
$4 billion
— The amount added to the State’s pension liabilities by Tier 6 retirement-plan sweeteners.
$377 million
— The cost of unnecessary expenses on state and local government budgets next year due to Tier 6 retirement-plan sweeteners.
New York faces a significant structural budget gap of over $16 billion, necessitating restrained spending growth rather than relying on unsustainable recurring expenditures or speculative federal funding. To maintain fiscal competitiveness, the state should avoid tax increases, as New York already collects more taxes per person than any other state.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
The state should reject tax increases, as New York and its localities already collect more taxes per person than any other state.
Lawmakers should restrain spending growth to reduce the structural budget gap that already exceeds $16 billion.
The state should not include speculative, short-term federal money derived from a Medicaid/MCO tax to pay for ongoing costs.
The state should reject proposed Tier 6 retirement-plan enhancements because these sweeteners are expensive and unnecessary.
The state should defer decisions on the Heat Act until there is a full analysis and proposal about the consumer and economic impact of capping household utility bills.
Key Data
$16+ billion
— The current structural budget gap that needs to be reduced by restraining spending growth.
3.5 percent
— The proposed increase in adjusted State Operating Funds spending for the current year.
32 percent
— The growth in adjusted State Operating Funds from FY 2020 to FY 2025.
$33.8 billion
— The total dollar growth in adjusted State Operating Funds from FY 2020 to FY 2025.
$6.4 billion
— The inflation-adjusted increase in State Operating Funds from FY 2020 to FY 2025.
The proposal to impose a new tax on Medicaid and managed care plans to secure federal funding risks repeating the state's pattern of using speculative, temporary revenue to finance permanent spending increases. This approach is particularly dangerous given the state's existing structural budget gap, which ranges between $16 billion and $20 billion.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
The State should not budget money it does not have, as there is a risk that the State does not receive the revenue from the new tax on Medicaid and other managed care plans.
Federal funds generated by the new tax on Medicaid and other managed care plans should be time-limited and used only to finance one-time programs.
The State should only pursue the new tax on Medicaid and other managed care plans after it has identified and publicized the planned one-time programs.
The State needs to break its bad habit of ratcheting up spending on the back of temporary receipts from the proposed Medicaid and managed care tax.
Key Data
$16 billion to $20 billion
— The state's structural budget gap.
$4 billion
— The amount of federal money the state aims to leverage through the new tax on Medicaid and other managed care plans.
New York State's current budget trajectory relies heavily on temporary tax increases and non-recurring resources to cover unsustainable spending growth, threatening the state's long-term fiscal stability and economic competitiveness. To address these structural imbalances, the state should restrain annual spending growth to 2.0 percent, prioritize building financial reserves, and allow temporary tax increases to expire as planned.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
The State should be using closeout balances each year to build reserves, rather than to support further spending increases.
Spending growth should be slowed significantly—especially in high-cost areas such as Medicaid and school aid—in order to stabilize the State’s fiscal foundation and avoid further damage to New York’s already shaky economic competitiveness.
Restraining spending growth to 2.0 percent annually would close future gaps and eliminate the structural imbalance and allow temporary tax increases to expire.
Key Data
$20.3 billion
— The structural imbalance in the State budget in the one-house budgets.
$16.8 billion
— The amount of non-recurring resources the Executive Budget relies on to achieve budget balance in fiscal year 2025.
$6.3 billion
— The additional non-recurring resources from new temporary taxes relied upon by the Legislature’s one-house budget proposals.
$8 billion
— The additional amount currently required for principal reserves to cover receipts losses and spending growth of a typical recession.
$5.0 billion
— The portion of fiscal year 2028’s $8.5 billion in non-recurring resources comprised of temporary tax increases.
2.0 percent
— The annual rate to which spending growth should be restrained to close future gaps and eliminate the structural imbalance.
New York State's school aid has grown rapidly, necessitating reforms to the Foundation Aid formula to better target resources toward districts with the greatest need. Proposed changes include phasing out the 'hold harmless' provision, shifting expense-based aid, and eliminating the School Tax Relief (STAR) program to ensure more sustainable spending growth.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
The Legislature should enact the phaseout of the hold harmless provision to ensure Foundation Aid better reflects current school district demographics.
The State should shift some of its expense-based aid to Foundation Aid to target funding based on need rather than a district's ability to self-fund.
The State should eliminate the School Tax Relief (STAR) program, a property-tax-relief initiative that disproportionately benefits wealthier districts.
The Legislature should enact a fiscal year 2025 budget that brings State school aid growth to a more sustainable level.
Key Data
$413 million
— Savings from proposed changes to the Foundation Aid formula in school year 2024-25.
$38.1 billion
— Total State school aid projected for the coming school year under the Governor's proposal.
$2.4 billion
— Amount of State aid allocated to 145 districts that can already fully fund a sound basic education with local and regular federal resources.
$15,761
— Projected per-student State aid for the coming school year.
6.8 percent
— Average reduction in Foundation Aid for districts in the highest wealth decile under the proposed changes.
New York's proposed one-house budget plans threaten fiscal stability by increasing spending and proposing tax hikes that undermine the state's competitive position. To achieve structural balance by fiscal year 2028, the state must limit annual spending growth to 2 percent and avoid tax increases while scrutinizing major expenses like school aid and Medicaid.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
The State should avoid tax increases to prevent weakening New York’s already precarious competitive position.
Spending growth should be limited to no more than 2 percent annually to close budget gaps and achieve structural balance by fiscal year 2028.
The State should eliminate the school aid hold harmless provision to help manage the State's two biggest expenses.
The Legislature should identify spending reductions to offset added spending, such as targeting poorly managed school aid, ineffective economic development programs, and runaway Medicaid spending.
The State must ensure that housing incentives and actions are well designed to ensure development is fiscally feasible and promotes housing production for all income levels.
Key Data
$8 billion
— Added to State Operating Funds spending on top of the Governor’s proposal.
8.9 percent
— Year-over-year growth of State Operating Funds spending.
7.9 percent
— Successive years of spending growth.
$10 billion
— Out-year budget gaps facing the State.
$16 billion
— Structural budget gap topping this amount.
2 percent
— Recommended annual limit for spending growth to close gaps.
New York State's fiscal outlook has improved due to stronger-than-expected tax receipts, yet significant structural budget gaps persist, necessitating disciplined spending restraint rather than tax increases. To achieve long-term fiscal stability, the state must prioritize spending controls in major programs like Medicaid and school aid while avoiding policies that risk economic competitiveness.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
The State does not increase taxes, since nation-leading taxes and spending should be sufficient, and higher taxes risk competitiveness for residents and businesses.
The State should restrain spending growth, ideally to 2.0 percent annually, which would close projected gaps, stave off a fiscal reckoning, and achieve structural balance by fiscal year 2028.
The State should reject the NYC sales tax capture, as the State should not foist its costs onto local governments, and the continuation of the sales tax capture unreasonably harms the City’s budget.
Key Data
$16.4 billion
— The State's structural budget imbalance in fiscal year 2028.
$9.9 billion
— The projected out-year budget gap in fiscal year 2028.
$1.6 billion
— Cumulative increases in the tax receipts forecast for fiscal year 2025.
2.0 percent
— The recommended annual limit for State Operating Funds spending growth to close projected gaps.
New York State faces a $9.9 billion budget gap in fiscal year 2028, which masks a larger $16.4 billion structural imbalance driven by rapid spending growth. To achieve fiscal stability, the state must restrain spending and avoid further tax increases that would weaken its economic competitiveness.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
The State should restrain spending to put the State on a path to budget balance.
Policymakers should avoid additional tax increases, as they would weaken the State’s competitiveness.
The State should avoid layering on further tax and spending increases to relieve building budget pressure and stave off a potentially harsh fiscal reckoning.
Key Data
$9.9 billion
— The State currently projects a budget gap in fiscal year 2028.
$16.4 billion
— The structural imbalance of the State budget when accounting for non-recurring resources.
$26 billion
— The amount SOF spending grew from fiscal year 2021 to fiscal year 2024.
7.9 percent
— The average annual growth rate of SOF spending from fiscal year 2021 to fiscal year 2024.
$51 billion
— The amount SOF spending is projected to grow over the 8 years between fiscal years 2021 and 2028.
1.5 percent
— The rate at which SOF spending growth would need to be kept to close the State's structural imbalance.
Blake G. Washington is the Budget Director for the State of New York, appointed by Governor Kathy Hochul. Mr. Washington is responsible for the development and management of the New York State budget and leads a team of public servants to administer the fiscal duties of the state, including economic…
New York State and its localities lead the nation in tax collections and rank second in spending, with per capita expenditures reaching $15,350 in 2021. This high tax burden is reflected across all major categories, including property, personal income, corporate, and sales taxes, which all significantly exceed national averages.
Key Data
$15,350
— Total state and local expenditure per capita in New York in 2021, which is 50% more than the national average.
$10,331
— Total state and local taxes collected per capita in New York in 2021, the highest of all states.
$135
— Total state and local taxes collected per $1,000 of personal income in New York in 2021, the highest in the nation.
50%
— Amount more per capita that New York State and its localities spent compared to the national average in 2021.
63%
— Amount more in taxes per person that New York State and its localities collected compared to the national average.
76%
— Percentage by which New York's local property tax collections per capita exceeded the national average.
New York faces a significant structural budget gap, exacerbated by reliance on non-recurring resources and spending growth that outpaces revenue. To address these fiscal challenges, the state should reform tax-related programs like the 421-a tax credit and the School Tax Relief (STAR) program, while exploring new revenue streams like vehicle miles travelled fees to support infrastructure.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
The State should replace the 421-a tax credit program to help boost housing production and affordability.
The State should pilot a reliable funding stream such as vehicle miles travelled fees to maintain roads and bridges as gas tax revenue erodes.
The State should end the School Tax Relief (STAR) program to better target education aid based on district need.
Key Data
$2.8 billion
— Amount of State education aid sent to the wealthiest school districts that already fund a sound basic education locally.
$9.1 billion
— Amount of expenses supported by non-recurring resources, which contributes to the State's structural imbalance.
3.4 percent
— Projected growth in receipts over the financial plan, which is far exceeded by the 5.3 percent growth in spending.
New York faces a structural budget gap of $17 billion, necessitating spending restraint to maintain fiscal stability. To preserve competitiveness, the state must avoid raising taxes, as current combined top personal income and business tax rates are already the highest in the nation.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
New York must exercise spending restraint to put the state on a path to fiscal stability.
The state should avoid raising taxes, as combined top personal income and business tax rates are already the nation's highest.
Policymakers must address the structural budget gap of $17 billion in the upcoming budget proposal.
Key Data
$17 billion
— The structural budget gap that must be addressed to ensure fiscal stability.
New York State faces significant structural budget gaps, with projections indicating that spending growth will outpace revenue, necessitating a shift toward fiscal restraint. To ensure stability against potential economic downturns, the state must increase its reserves to over $27 billion and secure these funds within statutory lockboxes.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
Closing these gaps will require the State to shift to restraining spending growth, rather than the recent trend of adding new spending.
To deal with two years of recessionary tax receipt losses and fund modest annual SOF spending growth of 1 percent for two years of a recession, the State should have more than $27 billion in reserves.
If receipts exceed projections this year, additional funds should be deposited in the Rainy Day Reserve.
The full balance of the State’s principal savings should be moved immediately into statutory lockboxes.
Key Data
$16.8 billion
— The structural gap between recurring receipts and disbursements.
$27 billion
— The amount the State should have in reserves to weather a recession.
$19.6 billion
— The current level of the State's principal reserves.
$19.5 billion
— The increase in State Operating Funds spending from fiscal year 2021 to fiscal year 2023.
$4.7 billion
— The reduction in the fiscal year 2025 out-year budget gap following the Mid-Year Update.
New York faces a projected $22 billion structural budget deficit driven by unsustainable spending growth and the expiration of temporary revenue sources. To address this, the state must restrain spending growth in major programs like Medicaid and education rather than relying on further tax increases or depleting reserves.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
To close gaps, the state should restrain spending growth, necessarily starting with its largest programs.
State school aid should be better targeted to districts with higher-need students, instead of funneling billions of dollars to wealthy districts with strong local funding.
In Medicaid, understanding and reversing rapid cost growth in long-term care and other areas can reduce costs.
In “economic development,” the state should curtail — not expand — programs with dubious impacts.
Another round of tax increases or drawing down reserves should not be part of the package.
Key Data
$9 billion
— Next year's projected budget gap.
$13 billion
— The projected budget gap thereafter.
$22 billion
— The structural hole the state will face once temporary funds are removed.
9.0%
— Annual rate of state spending growth over the past three years.
5.2%
— Budgeted annual increase in spending going forward.
$1.5 billion
— Budgeted migrant costs over two years.
The proposed legislation S7562/A7757, which retroactively expands the Empire State Film Production Credit, should be vetoed to avoid deepening the interstate "race to the bottom" regarding economic development incentives. Instead of relying on tax credits, the state should prioritize economic growth by leveraging its comparative strengths and improving the overall business climate.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
The Governor should veto S7562/A7757, which expands eligibility for the Empire State Film Production Credit.
New York should focus on expanding its economy based on its comparative strengths, such as human capital and cultural and natural amenities, rather than competing through tax incentives.
The state should enhance its willingness to make it easier to do business in New York instead of relying on tax credit competition.
New York State Budget Fiscal Year 2024 Major Actions and Fiscal Risks As of First Quarter Update New York City Fiscal Year 2024 Adopted Budget and Outlook
New York State and its localities spent $10.7 billion on economic development in 2022, yet there is insufficient evidence that these programs effectively create jobs or provide benefits exceeding alternative uses of funds. State and local leaders should implement rigorous evaluations, adopt performance-based incentives, and create a unified budget to ensure these massive resources are not squandered.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
The State and its localities should rigorously evaluate existing incentives and programs to determine their effectiveness.
The State and its localities should narrow, shrink, or eliminate programs that are not proven effective.
The State and its localities should adopt performance-based incentives whenever possible.
The State and its localities should create a unified economic development budget.
The State and its localities should increase oversight powers of the State Comptroller and Authorities Budget Office.
Key Data
$10.7 billion
— Total State and local economic development spending in New York in 2022.
$4.4 billion
— Total State economic development spending in 2022.
$6.3 billion
— Total local and county government economic development spending in 2022.
$13 billion
— Projected annual economic development spending by 2025.
$9.1 billion
— The State budget gap projected for the next year.
$13.4 billion
— The State budget gap projected for fiscal year 2027.
New York State should strengthen its fiscal resilience by consolidating its reserves into a single, protected fund and mandating automatic deposits during periods of economic growth. Establishing a target reserve level of 22 percent of operating spending would ensure the state can weather future recessions without resorting to harmful service cuts or tax increases.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
The State should combine all principal reserves into the Rainy Day Reserve (RDR) lockbox immediately to ensure appropriate protection for the entirety of the State’s reserves.
The State should deposit up to an additional $2.4 billion to the RDR this year as a priority for any excess mid-year receipts or underspending.
The State should set a target for the RDR of 22 percent of SOF spending, which would be enough to mitigate two years of recession tax receipts shortfalls.
The State should increase the maximum allowed RDR balance to 30 percent of SOF spending to provide capacity for the third year of a recession.
The State should mandate automatic RDR deposits when the economy is growing, with deposits equal to two-thirds of tax receipts growth in excess of 2 percent annually.
Key Data
$27.9 billion
— The recommended rainy day savings target for fiscal year 2024, representing 22 percent of State Operating Funds (SOF) spending.
$2.4 billion
— The additional amount recommended to be deposited into the Rainy Day Reserve this year.
30 percent
— The recommended maximum allowed Rainy Day Reserve balance as a percentage of State Operating Funds (SOF) spending.
$24.2 billion
— The projected two-year shortfall in tax receipts during a recession, based on historical performance.
45 percent
— The portion of New York State's own source revenue that comes from the economically sensitive personal income tax.
$19.5 billion
— The amount currently held in New York State's 'Principal Reserves' as of June 2023.
NYC Budget Director Jacques Jiha briefed CBC Trustees on the New York City Fiscal Year 2024 Executive Budget. Director Jiha was appointed to serve as Budget Director in October 2020. He oversees New York City’s fiscal policy, including the development of the Expense and Capital Budgets, the City’s bond finance…
The New York State Fiscal Year 2024 budget weakens the state's financial footing by extending temporary personal income and business tax surcharges for three years, maintaining the highest combined tax rates in the nation. This approach, combined with increased spending and a structural deficit exceeding $15 billion, threatens the state's economic competitiveness and long-term stability.
Key Data
$15 billion
— The amount to which the long-term structural deficit has increased under the enacted budget.
$5 billion
— The amount of the budget gap projected in the Executive Budget, which the enacted budget widens substantially.
three years
— The duration for which the state extended its 'temporary' personal income and business tax surcharges.
New York State's delayed fiscal year 2024 budget faces a structural gap between $15 billion and $20 billion, necessitating a focus on fiscal stability and the sunsetting of temporary tax increases. This delay threatens to impose nearly $1 billion in additional costs on local governments and school districts that are currently planning their own budgets without state guidance.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
The State should enact a budget that restrains spending growth and paves the path to sunsetting temporary tax increases.
Key Data
$15 billion to $20 billion
— The projected range of the State's structural budget gap.
nearly $1 billion
— The amount of additional City spending that may be required due to State policies.
New York State's budget delay risks destabilizing public finances and potentially increasing taxes, which could exacerbate outmigration as residents and businesses consider relocating. To ensure long-term sustainability, the final budget agreement should prioritize reserve deposits, restrain spending, and avoid tax hikes while improving transparency regarding fiscal impacts.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
The final agreement should not raise taxes.
The final agreement should restrain spending to stave off massive future cuts.
The final agreement should maximize reserve deposits to protect New Yorkers from economic shocks.
The final agreement should eschew wasteful subsidies.
New York State's budget proposals for fiscal year 2024 rely on unsustainable spending growth and temporary tax increases, creating significant structural deficits that could reach nearly $20 billion by 2027. To ensure long-term fiscal stability and economic competitiveness, the state must restrain spending growth, allow temporary tax hikes to expire, and implement comprehensive budget management reforms.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
Allow temporary tax increases to sunset as scheduled or earlier to improve New York's competitiveness and reduce the costs of living and doing business.
Restrain State Operating Funds (SOF) spending growth to 2 percent annually to bring spending trends in line with receipts and close forecast gaps.
Maintain or expand the Governor’s Rainy Day reserves plan by accelerating the plan to make all deposits this year and raising balance and deposit caps.
Publish basic financial plan tables with the enacted budget to ensure New Yorkers understand the fiscal impacts of their leaders' choices.
Reform the State’s budgeting and fiscal management to improve services, stability, and accountability through standardized accounting and better debt management.
Key Data
$20 billion
— The projected structural gap in fiscal year 2027 if the Legislature's budget plans are enacted.
$2 billion
— The amount of new temporary tax increases on businesses and personal income proposed by the Legislature to support new spending.
$15 billion
— The projected structural gap in fiscal year 2027 under the Governor's budget plan.
$23.8 billion
— The growth in State Operating Funds (SOF) from fiscal year 2020 to fiscal year 2023.
$28.2 billion
— The amount by which the Executive Budget proposal would exceed the pre-acceleration spending trend by fiscal year 2027.
$32.1 billion
— The amount by which the Legislative budget proposal would exceed the pre-acceleration spending trend by fiscal year 2027.
New York State's legislative budget proposals for fiscal year 2024 include nearly $5 billion in new recurring spending and approximately $2 billion in additional annual personal and business taxes. These proposals fail to prioritize fiscal stability and competitiveness, prompting calls for a final budget that focuses on core services and reasonably competitive tax structures.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
State leaders should craft a budget that ensures fiscal stability and protects New Yorkers by promoting economic and tax competitiveness.
The final budget should adopt or even improve upon the Governor's version to strengthen the structure of the Rainy Day Fund.
State elected leaders should craft a final budget that paves the path to reasonably competitive taxes that ensure New York’s value proposition is compelling.
Key Data
$2 billion
— Additional annual taxes on personal income and business taxes added by the legislative budget proposals.
$1 billion
— Business tax surcharge extension proposed by the Governor.
$5 billion
— New spending added by the legislative budget proposals, most of which is likely to be recurring.
New York State's fiscal health is threatened by unsustainable spending growth and a reliance on temporary tax increases, which risk long-term competitiveness. The state should prioritize structural budget balance by rejecting tax surcharge extensions and restraining spending growth to 2 percent annually.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
The State should reject the corporate tax surcharge extension and future dependence on the personal income tax surcharge.
The State should commit to sunsetting the personal income tax surcharge on time or ahead of schedule.
The State should shrink rather than expand the film tax credit and reject the extension of New York City economic development incentives absent rigorous evaluation of their effectiveness.
Key Data
$5 billion
— The amount of annual tax revenues raised by the Fiscal Year 2022 Enacted Budget through 'temporarily' increasing business and personal income taxes.
$700 million
— The proposed annual cap for the film production tax credit under the Governor's expansion plan.
60 percent
— The amount by which the Governor proposes to increase the annual cap for the film production tax credit.
The New York State Executive Budget proposes expanding the Empire State Film Tax Credit, increasing the lifetime maximum cost by 55 percent from $9.4 billion to $14.6 billion. This expansion should be rejected and the program should instead be shrunk, as there is no rigorous evidence that the current credit is necessary to attract productions or provides commensurate economic benefits.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
The State should reject the proposed expansion of the Empire State Film Tax Credit.
The State should be shrinking the film tax credit program until a rigorous analysis justifies some form of incentive.
The State should perform a rigorous evaluation to determine what economic activity was induced by the incentive, estimate the benefit of that additional economic activity, and compare it to the cost of the program and the impact of using those resources in another manner.
The State should phase out the film tax credit absent a rigorous evaluation that demonstrates its need and cost-effectiveness.
The forthcoming evaluation of State tax incentive programs should inform the existence and design of the film tax credit programs instead of actions by other state’s legislatures.
Key Data
$9.4 billion
— Current lifetime maximum cost of the film tax credit program.
$14.6 billion
— Proposed lifetime maximum cost of the film tax credit program under the Executive Budget.
55 percent
— The increase in the lifetime maximum cost of the program under the proposed changes.
$420 million
— Current annual credit cap for the film tax credit program.
$700 million
— Proposed annual credit cap starting in 2024.
$6.5 billion
— Total credits provided since the start of the program.
The proposed plan to stabilize the Metropolitan Transportation Authority relies heavily on New York City taxpayers, including a $500 million annual payment and a significant portion of an $800 million Payroll Mobility Tax increase. To achieve fiscal stability, the state should implement productivity improvements to cover half of the plan's costs and include a recurring state contribution rather than disproportionately burdening city residents.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
A recurring State contribution should be included, understanding that City taxpayers are major contributors to State receipts.
The balance of the plan should be appropriately allocated among those in the MTA region, as the current plan places a significant portion of the burden on New York City taxpayers.
Productivity improvements, including changes in MTA operations that require agreement from labor, should be at least half of the plan.
The MTA should proceed with planned 5.5 percent fare and toll increases to maintain price sufficiency and fiscal stability.
Key Data
$800 million
— Annual revenue generated by increasing the Payroll Mobility Tax’s top rate from 0.34 percent to 0.50 percent.
$500 million
— Annual payment required from New York City for certain MTA expenses.
$2.9 billion
— Potential annual savings identified from operational reforms.
$640 million
— Portion of the $800 million Payroll Mobility Tax increase likely to come from City businesses.
$300 million
— One-time appropriation from the State budget.
$400 million
— Increased plan for annual operational efficiencies.
New York faces a structural budget gap exceeding $12 billion annually, necessitating a focus on aligning spending with recurring revenue rather than relying on counter-productive taxes. The state must prioritize fiscal stability by restraining spending growth, which has increased by an average of 7.1 percent annually over the last three years, to avoid future service cuts.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
New York State leaders should ensure that public services are supported by taxes that do not encourage people and business to leave the state.
The State should close its budget gaps and stabilize its finances by restraining spending growth to be in line with its recurring revenue.
New York State should avoid extending the temporary business tax surcharge and the nation-leading combined corporate tax rates.
Key Data
$12 billion
— The amount by which the structural budget gap exceeds annually.
$5.7 billion
— The projected budget gap in fiscal year 2025.
$9.0 billion
— The projected budget gap in fiscal year 2026.
$7.5 billion
— The projected budget gap in fiscal year 2027.
7.1%
— The average annual increase in State Operating Funds spending over the past three years.
12.8%
— The growth in State Operating Funds spending during the current year.
The proposed "Toll Payer Protection Act" would constrain the ability of state authorities to collect tolls and penalties, potentially reducing critical infrastructure maintenance revenues. Instead of limiting enforcement, the state should focus on improving the collection of user fees to support transportation assets.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
The Governor should veto A3801A/S3587C, the “toll payer protection act,” which would limit the ability of State authorities to collect tolls by mail and impose penalties for non-payment.
The State should be working to improve collection of user fees on toll roads and bridges in order to support New York’s critically needed infrastructure.
Tolling authorities should have appropriate flexibility to ensure that tolls, which are needed and legitimately levied, are paid.
The State should avoid granting amnesty for non-payment of legitimate tolls and charges, as it sets a bad precedent and may increase the delinquency rate.
The State should carefully monitor the still nascent cashless tolling program rather than implementing restrictive legislation.
Key Data
$2 billion
— Amount of general State revenue diverted to backfill the Thruway budget and fund capital projects when toll rates were frozen from 2016 to 2020.
83%
— Percentage of trips that automatically pay tolls via E-ZPass on the NYS Thruway.
88%
— Percentage of trips that automatically pay tolls via E-ZPass on the PANYNJ crossings.
95%
— Percentage of trips that automatically pay tolls via E-ZPass on the MTA Bridge and Tunnel crossings.
$5
— Proposed penalty cap for non-payment of tolls after 30 days.
$50
— Current penalty amount for late payment of tolls after 60 days.
New York faces future budget gaps approaching $6 billion, exacerbated by significant spending increases and the expiration of temporary revenue sources. To ensure long-term fiscal stability and maintain economic competitiveness, the state must restrain spending growth, reevaluate aid to wealthy school districts, and prioritize data-driven investments.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
Finally, mind New York’s tax competitiveness to avoid chipping away at the state's revenue and economic foundation.
The state should better target aid to high-need districts and reevaluate assistance to wealthy districts, especially those that receive over $3 billion annually despite already self-funding a sound basic education.
Restrain spending growth, as limiting growth to 2% annually through 2028 would be enough to close that year’s $12 billion projected gap.
Key Data
$6 billion
— Future budget gaps approaching this amount by FY 2027.
$12.7 billion
— Projected budget gap in the year following FY 2027.
$3 billion
— Annual aid provided to wealthy school districts that already self-fund a sound basic education.
32%
— Education aid increase that the state started to phase in during 2021.
50%
— Portion of the state budget comprised of Medicaid and education spending.
New York State's fiscal outlook has weakened, with downward revisions to future tax receipts opening budget gaps that grow from $310 million in fiscal year 2024 to $6.2 billion by fiscal year 2027. To maintain stability, the State must prioritize building reserves to a total of $19.4 billion and curbing recurring spending in high-growth areas like Medicaid and school aid.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
The State must build reserves, vigilantly restrain spending growth, and identify and implement long-run cost savings to address widening budget gaps.
It is imperative that the State continue on the path of depositing $15.4 billion into reserves, at least until there is a recession.
The State should seek to reduce recurring spending, especially in high-growth areas such as Medicaid and school aid, while continuing to build reserves.
Key Data
$6.2 billion
— Projected budget gap by fiscal year 2027.
$15.4 billion
— Amount the State plans to deposit into reserves over four years.
$19.4 billion
— Total reserve balance after planned deposits.
$2.1 billion
— Increase in tax receipts in fiscal year 2023 based on collections to date.
$1.9 billion
— Downward re-estimate of tax receipts in fiscal year 2024.
$893 million
— Estimated State cost for New Yorkers remaining enrolled in Medicaid due to the continued public health emergency.
New York's Unemployment Insurance Trust Fund is currently $8.1 billion in debt to the federal government, forcing employers to face higher tax rates to cover the shortfall. Lawmakers have the option to use state revenues or federal aid to accelerate repayment and provide tax relief, or they can continue with the current path of gradual repayment through elevated employer taxes.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
The State could pay off the debt over time with higher tax rates, which is the standard practice.
The State could partially accelerate repayment of the debt using State revenues.
The State could rapidly pay off the debt using State revenues, which would provide immediate tax relief to employers.
The State could tap higher-than-expected tax receipts and unallocated federal aid to repay the debt more quickly.
Lawmakers should consider reforming the UI system to ensure it is better equipped to meet claims during economic downturns.
Key Data
$8.1 billion
— The amount of debt New York owes to the federal government for its Unemployment Insurance Trust Fund as of June 7, 2022.
$110 million
— The amount of interest New York has accumulated for the federal fiscal year 2022 on its unemployment insurance debt.
$6.5 billion
— The total unemployment insurance benefits paid out in New York in the second quarter of 2020.
27 percent
— New York's share of the total outstanding unemployment insurance debt across all U.S. states.
64 percent
— The increase in the average State unemployment insurance rate on employers from 2019 to 2021.
$530 million
— The total unemployment insurance benefits paid out in New York in the fourth quarter of 2019.
New York State's fiscal plan faces a looming fiscal cliff with annual budget gaps of approximately $8 billion expected by fiscal year 2028 once temporary personal income tax increases expire and one-time resources are exhausted. To maintain stability, the state must exercise fiscal prudence by adhering to spending targets and restraining growth in key areas like Medicaid and education.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
The State should actively develop plans to restrain Medicaid and education spending growth to avoid future tax increases or service cuts.
The State should adhere to spending targets and maximize Rainy Day Fund deposits to maintain fiscal balance and avoid future tax hikes.
The Legislature and Governor should release basic financial plan tables with both the one-house and enacted budget bills to improve governmental transparency.
The State should improve accountability and transparency by implementing performance management to ensure fiscal stability.
Key Data
$8 billion
— Annual budget gaps likely to open beginning in fiscal year 2028 after temporary personal income tax increases sunset.
$15.4 billion
— Total planned deposits to reserves over a four-year period.
$222 billion
— Total All Funds spending in the fiscal year 2023 enacted budget.
$130 billion
— State Operating Funds spending, adjusting for off-budget shifts and payment timing.
$10 billion
— Amount of debt service costs prepaid in fiscal years 2022 and 2023 to achieve budget balance.
$10.8 billion
— Portion of planned reserve deposits allocated to the Rainy Day Fund lockbox.
The Climate Action Council’s Draft Scoping Plan outlines strategies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 85 percent by 2050, with estimated costs reaching $300 billion. To ensure cost-effective implementation, the state should prioritize market-based incentives, such as carbon fees, and provide detailed analyses of the financial impacts on households and businesses.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
The State should utilize market incentives as much as possible, such as a fee system or a cap-and-trade system, to incentivize businesses and residents to choose low energy intensive goods and technologies.
Policymakers should better understand the specifics that might incentivize businesses to adopt low emission technologies, or households to invest in heat pumps and EVs such as tax credits or subsidies or peak-period utility pricing.
The Final Scoping Plan should disaggregate the financial impacts of each strategy on businesses and households to help prioritize strategies to maximize equity and minimize negative economic impacts.
The Final Scoping Plan should calculate and identify the cost effectiveness of each mitigation strategy to provide the necessary basis for prioritization.
The State should retain the low carbon benefits of nuclear energy as a key component of the state’s decarbonization path.
Key Data
$300 billion
— Total costs through 2050 for the climate scenarios on a discounted present value basis.
85 percent
— The goal for reducing statewide GHG emissions from 1990 levels by 2050.
$220 billion is the reported size of the New York State fiscal year 2023 budget that the Governor and Legislature adopted on April 10. The budget includes a property tax rebate and a tax holiday, and increases State spending about $14 billion, with more money for education aid, day care,…
New York State's fiscal year 2023 budget agreement risks future fiscal stress by adding recurring spending without commensurate restraint, potentially necessitating future tax increases or spending cuts. To ensure long-term stability and competitiveness, the state should prioritize depositing reserves into a locked Rainy Day Fund, align spending with long-run receipts, and eliminate ineffective programs like the film tax credit.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
The State should be bringing spending growth in line with long-run receipts to ensure last year’s tax increases expire on time or early.
The extension of the film tax credit continues an expensive program that does not provide commensurate value for New Yorkers and should be phased out and ultimately eliminated.
The reported set aside of reserves equal to 15 percent of State operating funds is important, substantial, and welcome; these funds all should be deposited in a locked Rainy Day Fund.
Key Data
15 percent
— The portion of State operating funds that should be deposited in a locked Rainy Day Fund.
$40 billion
— The average amount by which recent recessions prior to 2020 reduced expected receipts over three years.
$10 billion
— The amount of the Governor's proposed spending increase.
New York State should adhere to the Executive Budget's spending limits, prioritize building fiscal reserves, and implement performance management systems to ensure accountability for state spending. Furthermore, the state should roll back recent tax increases to improve competitiveness and ensure long-term fiscal stability against potential economic downturns.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
The Governor and the Legislature should adopt a budget that keeps to the Executive Budget’s top line on spending.
The state should roll back the tax increases so New York is a competitive location for residents and businesses.
The Governor and Legislature should diligently manage and provide oversight of funded programs by developing plans, identifying goals, measuring activities and results, and ensuring accountability.
The state should put funds in reserves as the Governor proposed to ensure continued fiscal stability.
The state should publish basic financial plan tables that show the receipts and disbursements with the one-house and enacted budgets to improve transparency.
The state should implement statewide performance measurement and management to ensure and assess how successful its spending is in delivering results.
Key Data
$7.7 billion
— Estimated budget gap in fiscal year 2026 if the Legislature's spending proposals are adopted.
$15 to $17 billion
— Estimated annual tax receipts shortfall in the event of a typical recession.
$55 billion
— Total four-year tax receipts surplus compared to pre-pandemic projections.
$15 billion
— Amount the Governor's proposal would add to reserves by fiscal year 2025.
$4.8 billion
— Amount the Legislative proposals would add to reserves.
$16.2 billion
— The Legislature's proposed fiscal year 2023 spending increase.
New York should require rigorous, transparent analysis for any public stadium subsidies to ensure that public benefits exceed costs, as past investments have often failed to yield significant economic returns. Any proposed funding should be contingent upon private investment, include clawback provisions, and be evaluated against the potential benefits of alternative uses for those funds.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
All economic development spending, whether direct, through tax incentives, or through reduced utility or other costs, should be justified by a rigorous analysis that shows that the public benefits that would accrue will exceed the public’s costs.
As part of shaping any policy to publicly subsidize a capital investment, these impacts and their level should be quantified.
The State should transparently provide an analysis that identifies the benefits and full costs for any proposed subsidy.
The analysis should credibly identify the incremental economic and fiscal impacts attributable to a proposed subsidy and use them in conjunction with the length of time the subsidy would provide benefit to calculate a proposed subsidy’s value.
Ideally, the analysis should discount the benefits by a factor that represents the benefit that would be accrued should the State use those funds for another purpose.
Any subsidy should be after private investment and include clawback provisions.
Key Data
$1 billion
— Potential public funding sought by the Buffalo Bills owners for a new stadium.
$862 million
— Calculated cost to renovate the existing Highmark Stadium.
$1.4 billion and $1.7 billion
— Estimated cost range for constructing a new stadium.
$350 million
— Additional cost for a stadium in downtown Buffalo due to site acquisition.
$27 million
— Estimated annual fiscal impacts in tax revenue generated by the presence of the Buffalo Bills.
$385.8 million
— Annual economic output attributed to the Buffalo Bills franchise.
$0 is the size of the New York State budget deficit in each year of New York State’s five-year Executive Budget financial plan, as proposed by Governor Kathy Hochul. The Governor’s budget proposal balances the budget in each of the next five years, an unprecedented level of fiscal stability for…
New York City's reliance on the 421-a property tax exemption is critical for the financial feasibility of new rental housing, as operating costs in the city are significantly higher than the national average. To ensure continued development, the proposed 485-w (ANNY) program should be modified to better reflect diverse market conditions, improve data transparency, and align with existing city housing initiatives.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
State lawmakers should better tailor affordability options to reflect different market conditions by creating new options for mid-rise projects outside the Prime Development Area or offering Option B to all projects outside that area.
The City should track and evaluate program usage to inform successor programs by creating a comprehensive database of project recipients and reporting on overall residential development trends.
State and City officials should work to align the incentive with other housing programs by modifying ANNY and the Mandatory Inclusionary Housing program to be compatible and clarifying rules for projects receiving bond financing.
Key Data
30 percent
— New York City's property taxes as a percentage of rental income, compared to 13 percent elsewhere in the country.
50 percent
— The cost to operate a multifamily building in New York City is higher than the national average.
60 and 65 percent
— The range of gross rental income that fully taxed rental buildings in New York spend on expenses, compared to an average of 38 percent elsewhere in the country.
75 percent
— The amount rents would have to increase to generate a reasonable rate of return without the property tax exemption.
$9,800
— The monthly rent needed to generate a 5 percent yield on cost for a typical Manhattan development without the 421-a exemption, up from $5,600.
New York State should limit new spending to available non-recurring funds and prioritize building financial reserves to prepare for future economic downturns. To maintain a balanced budget, the state should avoid adding new recurring programs without offsetting cuts, such as reallocating funds currently provided to wealthy school districts or the proposed homeowner tax rebate.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
State leaders should hold the top line on spending, and allocate no more than the $5 billion non-recurring funds already available for fiscal year 2023.
State leaders should deposit funds into reserves as proposed to ensure the State can weather the next storm and protect New Yorkers.
State leaders should not add recurring programs without reducing other recurring spending.
Key Data
$5 billion
— Non-recurring funds available for fiscal year 2023 that should be the limit for new allocations.
$10 billion
— Proposed increase in State Operating Funds (SOF) spending for the next year.
$2.2 billion
— Proposed homeowner tax rebate that could be reallocated to help balance the budget.
15 percent
— Target level of State Operating Funds (SOF) spending to be built into reserves.
$4.6 billion
— Average annual projected growth of the State Operating Funds (SOF) budget after fiscal year 2023.
$2 billion
— Amount provided to wealthy school districts that could be a target for reducing recurring spending.
New York State's fiscal plan for 2023 relies on risky economic growth assumptions while maintaining the nation's highest combined top personal income and corporate tax rates. To ensure long-term stability and competitiveness, the state should restrain spending to allow recent tax increases to sunset and reject the continued diversion of $250 million in local sales tax revenue.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
Spending restraint is essential to allow last year’s tax increases to sunset as scheduled or, better still, to be reduced or eliminated earlier.
The Legislature should reject the Executive Budget's proposal to continue allowing the State to take $250 million in local sales tax revenue.
Key Data
$250 million
— Annual amount of local sales tax revenue the State takes from local governments.
$200 million
— Portion of local sales tax revenue taken annually from New York City.
$50 million
— Portion of local sales tax revenue taken annually from counties other than New York City.
New York currently maintains the highest combined top personal income and corporate tax rates in the nation, which threatens the state's economic competitiveness and ability to retain residents and businesses. To stabilize the fiscal foundation and improve long-term competitiveness, the state should allow recent tax increases to sunset and restrain spending.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
The enacted State budget should allow the business tax increase to sunset.
The enacted State budget should restrain spending to allow the personal income tax increase to sunset sooner or at least as scheduled.
Key Data
22%
— New York’s share of the nation’s millionaires declined 22% from 2010 to 2019.
$216 billion is the size of New York State fiscal year 2023 budget proposed by Governor Kathy Hochul. The proposed spending plan is balanced over five years and makes significant deposits to reserves, but also maintains high taxes and accelerates State spending growth. At an event with CBC Trustees, Governor…
NY1 “We have, with the tax increase of last year, the highest top marginal personal income tax in the country, and the highest corporate franchise tax in the country. And we were losing millionaires before the SALT cap. How big a threat are high taxes?” said Andrew Rein of the…
This report analyzes strategies to increase health insurance coverage in New York, including the implementation of a state-level individual mandate and tax-based enrollment mechanisms. It evaluates the fiscal impacts and potential coverage gains of these policies, alongside other options like premium assistance and public option plans.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
New York could replace the federal mandate penalty that was repealed in 2018 with an identical policy at the State level.
New York could follow the lead of Maryland and integrate the processes of filing for taxes and enrolling in health coverage programs.
Key Data
$201.6 Million
— Total amount collected from 280,750 tax returns with a penalty in 2016.
$718
— Average penalty amount from 2016 tax returns with a penalty.
$3.6 Billion
— Total penalty amounts from slightly fewer than 5 million tax returns in 2016.
$728
— Average penalty amount from 5 million tax returns in 2016.
New York State currently imposes the highest top personal income and corporate tax rates in the nation, which creates fiscal risks by incentivizing high-income individuals and businesses to relocate. Given the state's stronger-than-expected tax receipts throughout the pandemic, these recent tax increases should be lowered, reversed, or allowed to sunset to improve economic competitiveness.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
The State should lower, reverse, or at least allow the latest tax increases to sunset to foster economic competitiveness.
Key Data
$15 billion
— Projected annual tax receipts shortfalls due to the pandemic as of last January.
$19.6 billion
— Estimated two-year impact of a typical recession on state revenues.
$3.5 billion
— Recurring program spending supported by federal aid in fiscal year 2025 that will create a fiscal cliff.
New York State's transportation sector is responsible for 47 percent of the state's total annual carbon dioxide emissions, with these emissions rising 31 percent between 1990 and 2018 despite a 17 percent decline in total state emissions. To meet ambitious climate goals, policymakers are encouraged to utilize tools like congestion pricing, carbon fees, and strategic tax and spending decisions to curb emissions from passenger vehicles and aviation.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
Implementing congestion pricing in Manhattan should reduce emissions.
State leaders should consider how transportation emission reductions can be encouraged when making tax policy, state spending, and local aid decisions.
The State should consider carbon fees to build the cost of carbon emissions in the price of fossil fuel heavy transport options like gas cars and aviation with the intent to reduce their use.
Key Data
47 percent
— Transportation sector's share of New York State's total annual carbon dioxide emissions in 2018.
31 percent
— Increase in transportation emissions in New York State between 1990 and 2018.
4.3 metric tons
— Transportation emissions per capita in New York State in 2018.
22 MMT
— Aviation related emissions in 2018, up from 2 MMT in 1990.
44.2 MMT
— Total emissions from motor gasoline in 2018.
21 percent
— Growth in SUV ownership in New York City between 2016 and 2020.
At this time last year, New York State estimated that tax receipts would fall short of pre-pandemic estimates by $15 billion annually on average, totaling $60 billion over four years. Receipts, however, have been much stronger than expected. By April 2021, the State reduced its four-year tax receipt shortfall estimate by 80 percent, to $11.8 billion. Over the four-year period, the State also will receive at least $21.1 billion of targeted and general federal fiscal…
$209 billion is the total spending in New York State's Enacted Budget for Fiscal Year 2022. Six months ago, New York State was staring down a four-year revenue shortfall totaling $60 billion—however, revenues have strengthened and the federal government passed a stimulus bill that includes what may be the largest…
New York State's fiscal year 2022 budget agreement includes unnecessary tax increases on personal income and corporations totaling over $4.3 billion annually, which threatens the state's economic competitiveness. The budget also relies on temporary federal aid to support recurring spending, creating a risk of future budget cuts or further tax hikes once that funding is exhausted.
Key Data
$4.3 billion
— Annual increase in personal income and corporate taxes agreed upon by lawmakers.
$22 billion
— Additional funds available over the next two years compared to the Governor's initial budget proposal.
0.75 percentage points
— Increase in corporate tax rates when combined with NYC and MTA taxes.
$212 billion
— Total amount of planned All Funds spending.
$5 billion
— Increase in school aid, representing the largest increase in recent history.
New York State has sufficient revenue and federal aid to restore previously planned spending reductions and make new investments without needing to implement significant income tax increases. While the state faces significant budget gaps in fiscal years 2024 and 2025, the current influx of federal funding provides an opportunity to restructure spending for long-term sustainability.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
To address the gaps that will exist and grow when federal funds are depleted, the state should use the next two years to restructure spending to be more sustainable.
Given the availability of federal aid and higher revenue, the state should omit the proposed personal income tax increases.
Key Data
$12.6 billion
— Direct federal funding provided to the State under the American Rescue Plan.
$9.6 billion
— Projected surplus over fiscal years 2021 through 2023 if the Executive Budget is enacted.
$5.9 billion
— Amount available to fully reverse spending reductions and make additional investments after omitting proposed tax increases.
$7 billion
— Annual amount of tax increases proposed by the State Legislature in their one-house budget bills.
$9 billion
— Additional federal aid provided for elementary and high schools.
$5.7 billion
— Increase in State Operating Funds spending in fiscal year 2022 under the Governor's Executive Budget.
New York's proposed legislative budget includes unnecessary tax increases on high earners and businesses, despite significant federal aid and revenue projections that already exceed pre-pandemic levels. Instead of raising taxes, the state should focus on restructuring spending, particularly in education and Medicaid, to ensure long-term fiscal stability and maintain a competitive business environment.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
The state should enact a budget that does not raise income and business taxes.
The state should restructure school aid to focus resources on needy districts rather than providing increases to all districts.
The Foundation Aid formula should be modernized to account accurately for support by local resources.
The state should revive the Medicaid Redesign Team (MRT) and expand its charge to identify additional Medicaid efficiencies and program redesign.
The state should curtail unproductive economic development programs to strengthen New York's future.
Key Data
$7 billion
— Annual new revenue generated by proposed tax increases on high income earners and businesses.
$3.7 billion
— Amount by which revenues for the current and next two fiscal years are projected to be higher than before the pandemic.
$9.6 billion
— Projected state surplus over the next 2 years if the Executive Budget is adopted as is.
16.49 percent
— Current combined State, City, and MTA tax rate for New York City businesses.
$1.2 million
— Average amount paid to both the State and City by New Yorkers who earn over $10 million annually.
7.1 percent
— Proposed increase in total school aid for school year 2021-22 using funds from the December federal relief package.
Managing the City’s fiscal crisis well will be a critically important duty of the next Mayor and a primary determinant of how the city survives the current crisis, and ultimately thrives in the future. Managing NYC’s Fiscal Crisis: A CBC Mayoral Candidate Forum featured a 10-minute conversation with each candidate,…
New York State can balance its budget without raising personal income taxes by utilizing updated revenue projections and federal aid, rather than risking the departure of high-income earners. Instead of tax hikes, the state should focus on structural spending reforms like eliminating unproductive economic development programs and better targeting education aid.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
New York State should balance its budget without increasing personal income taxes or delaying the middle class tax cut.
The State should pursue eliminating unproductive economic development spending to balance the budget.
The State should focus on appropriately financing capital investment as an alternative to tax increases.
The State should prioritize targeting education aid to low wealth school districts to improve fiscal footing.
Key Data
$6 billion
— Additional federal aid estimated in the 'worst case' scenario.
$1.6 billion
— Annual increase in tax receipt projections.
20 percent
— Portion of the State Operating Funds budget financed by the top 1 percent of earners.
New York State faces significant budget gaps and has proposed tax increases on high-income earners and delays to middle-class tax cuts to close them. Instead of these tax measures, the state could achieve fiscal balance by shifting capital financing to long-term debt and reducing unproductive economic development spending.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
The State should focus its capital investments on the most critical projects during this period.
If the State reduces its planned capital disbursements by 10 percent and finances up to 50 percent of the remaining paygo capital spending with debt, it would save $1.6 billion in fiscal year 2022.
A 50 percent reduction in proposed economic development capital spending plus financing 50 percent of the remaining paygo spending with debt would yield another $713 million in fiscal year 2022.
The State should smooth the year-to-year fluctuations in aid to avoid a sudden drop-off.
The overall distribution approach should focus on directing aid to high need districts and reducing aid to wealthier districts.
Key Data
$1.6 billion
— Projected savings in fiscal year 2022 from reducing planned capital disbursements by 10 percent and financing 50 percent of remaining paygo capital spending with debt.
$713 million
— Projected yield in fiscal year 2022 from a 50 percent reduction in proposed economic development capital spending combined with financing 50 percent of remaining paygo spending with debt.
$1.5 billion
— Estimated tax revenue generated in fiscal year 2022 by the proposed temporary personal income tax surcharge on high-income earners.
14.7 percent
— The combined top marginal tax rate in New York, which would be the highest in the nation if the proposed surcharge is enacted.
20 percent
— The portion of the State Operating Funds budget financed by the top 1 percent of income taxpayers through income taxes.
$1.2 million
— The average personal income tax liability for taxpayers with taxable income over $10 million.
New York State should avoid using long-term debt to fund operating expenses, instead prioritizing spending restraint and fiscal stability plans to close budget gaps. Implementing enhanced oversight and transitioning to budgets balanced in accordance with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) will ensure long-term fiscal health and prevent the postponement of difficult financial decisions.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
The State should balance this year’s budget without long-term borrowing for operating expenses.
The amount used for borrowing should be limited to what is needed after the State exhausts other gap-closing strategies and uses new federal aid to reduce budget gaps.
Borrowing should not be used to increase state operating spending, inclusive of any federal stimulus aid, more than 2 percent or the inflation rate, whichever is lower.
Borrowing should be part of a comprehensive and feasible multiyear plan that leads to fiscal stability and is presented in accordance with GAAP.
The State Comptroller should assess whether the fiscal stability plan is realistic and feasible, and approve each instance of borrowing for operations only if it comports with a realistic and feasible plan.
The State should adopt, in law and practice, fiscal integrity and transparency measures that include the transition to an annual State operating funds budget that is balanced in proposal, adoption and at year end in accordance with GAAP.
Key Data
$11 billion
— The amount of debt the State is proposed to have the authority to issue for operations.
$1.7 billion
— The amount of Medicaid payments the State shifted by three days to appear to spend less in fiscal year 2019.
2 percent
— The maximum permissible levy increase set by the local property tax cap, which also serves as a limit for borrowing increases.
$8 billion
— The amount of short-term debt the Fiscal Year 2022 Executive Budget proposes re-authorization for.
$3 billion
— The amount of a line of credit for state agencies proposed in the Fiscal Year 2022 Executive Budget.
$7.4 billion is how much NYS personal income tax was paid in 2018 by residents of other states. This revenue stream may be threatened if a lawsuit over taxation of out-of-state telecommuting residents prevails. Today's guest is E.J. McMahon, adjunct fellow of the Manhattan Institute and senior fellow of the…
New York State's fiscal plan relies on federal aid and tax increases on high earners, which could negatively impact the state's competitiveness due to already high tax rates and the cap on state and local tax deductions. Instead of raising personal income taxes, the state should prioritize structural spending reforms, such as reducing aid to wealthy school districts and eliminating wasteful economic development spending.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
The State should adopt other less harmful measures before considering personal income tax increases.
The State should reduce aid to wealthy school districts as an alternative to tax increases.
The State should eliminate wasteful economic development spending instead of raising taxes.
The State should shift cash spending on capital projects to debt to avoid tax hikes.
The State should pursue structural spending reforms to ensure finances are stable rather than relying on tax increases.
Key Data
$6 billion
— Baseline assumption of federal aid included in the Executive Budget.
$15 billion
— Amount of federal aid the State hopes to receive to wipe out near-term deficits.
New York State faces significant budget gaps for the current and upcoming fiscal years, necessitating a combination of spending cuts, federal aid, and potential revenue adjustments. To maintain fiscal stability, the state must avoid relying on one-time gimmicks or cost shifts to local governments and instead focus on targeted spending and realistic revenue projections.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
The Executive Budget should present a plan to close the entire State budget gap if it does not receive federal aid.
Any proposal for recreational marijuana legalization should be realistic about the timing of revenue, and avoid dedicating revenue to uses beyond programs related to the consequences of use.
The Executive Budget should increase use of debt to finance capital expenses and limit capital expenses to investments that are necessary to maintain critical infrastructure, preserve public health and safety, and provide demonstrable economic benefits.
New York State should focus its scarce resources on those districts that lack the local resources to fund a sound basic education.
The State should avoid balancing this year’s budget using cost shifts or revenue intercepts that harm local governments.
The State should not convert the $3.5 billion in short-term debt to long term debt.
Key Data
$8.2 billion
— Budget gap in the current year reported in the October Mid-Year Financial Plan Update.
$16.7 billion
— Budget gap in fiscal year 2022.
$1.6 billion
— Annual school aid going to wealthy districts that already spend enough local revenues to fund a sound basic education.
$200 million
— Sales tax revenues intercepted from New York City in recent years to offset Medicaid expenses.
$3.5 billion
— Short-term debt that the State reportedly plans to repay within this fiscal year.
$7 billion
— Total amount of New York's rainy day funds, Economic Uncertainties Fund, and other reserves.
New York should approach potential recreational marijuana tax revenues with caution, as experience in other states indicates it takes three to four years to realize consistent receipts. Future revenues should be kept on-budget and used for recurring operating purposes rather than being committed to specific, off-budget programs.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
State leaders should be cautious about relying on potential marijuana revenues to help close budget gaps.
Any future revenue should be received and spent on-budget, not through off-budget trusts or other fiscal gimmickry.
The revenue should not be committed to a specific purpose and should be used for recurring operating budget purposes.
New York should be pragmatic in estimating revenues from legalized marijuana.
New York should be transparent on the sources and uses of marijuana tax revenues.
Key Data
$341,691,001
— Colorado recreational marijuana revenue in the most recent year.
$395,523,567
— Washington recreational marijuana revenue in the most recent year.
$225,543,653
— Alaska recreational marijuana revenue in the most recent year.
$142,517,466
— Oregon recreational marijuana revenue in the most recent year.
$764,000,000
— California recreational marijuana revenue in the most recent year.
$68,750,000
— Massachusetts recreational marijuana revenue in the most recent year.
New York State faces significant budget gaps, but reinstating the dormant stock transfer tax would likely drive away financial firms and reduce economic activity rather than providing reliable revenue. Instead of reviving this tax, which would increase costs for individual investors and businesses, policymakers should pursue alternative strategies to address the state's fiscal challenges.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
Policymakers should leave the stock transfer tax dormant and find alternative ways to fill the budget gap.
New York’s leaders should reject proposals to revive the stock transfer tax.
Key Data
$8 billion
— The current budget gap facing New York State.
$17 billion
— The expected budget gap for New York State in the coming year.
$13 billion
— The amount advocates claim the stock transfer tax could yield in annual revenue.
$4 billion
— The amount the stock transfer tax would have yielded in fiscal year 2020.
$27.3 billion
— The pre-tax profits of the securities industry in New York City in 2018.
18 percent
— The share of State tax collections accounted for by the securities industry in fiscal year 2020.
New York State has allocated over $7 billion in tax incentives to the film and television industry, yet research suggests these credits fail to produce meaningful employment gains and often benefit projects that would have filmed in the state regardless. To stabilize state finances, the program should be eliminated or significantly reformed by reducing the credit percentage and phasing out benefits in New York City.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
The State should stop awarding from future year allocations to ensure caps effectively limit state liability.
The State should stop spreading claims over 3 years to reduce the delay between job creation and state financial impact.
The State should decrease the credit substantially to 10 percent of qualified costs and eliminate the annual cap to reduce program costs.
The State should further decrease the share of expenses that can be claimed in New York City to push production to areas with greater economic development needs.
The State should continue to decrease the film tax credit until the program is eliminated to help stabilize state finances.
Key Data
$7.8 billion
— Total tax incentives allocated to the film and television industry since 2004.
9.7 percent
— New York State's unemployment rate during the economic downturn.
$9 billion
— The size of the state's budget gap.
$19 billion
— Projected annual deficits in fiscal year 2023.
25 percent
— The rate of the refundable film tax credit provided by New York.
$420 million
— The annual cap on the film tax credit through 2025.
New York should avoid reinstating the stock transfer tax because it would likely drive financial firms to relocate to other states, resulting in lost jobs and reduced tax revenue. Furthermore, such a tax would increase investment costs for ordinary New Yorkers saving for retirement or college, while failing to generate the projected revenue due to tax avoidance strategies.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
Policymakers should leave the stock transfer tax dormant and find alternative ways to fill the budget gap.
New York’s leaders should reject proposals to revive the stock transfer tax.
Key Data
$17 billion
— The projected budget gap for New York State in the coming year.
$4 billion
— The amount the stock transfer tax would have yielded in fiscal year 2020, which is only a third of advocates' estimates.
18 percent
— The portion of State tax collections accounted for by the securities industry in fiscal year 2020.
$13 billion
— The amount advocates claim the stock transfer tax could yield in annual revenue.
New York State's current fiscal policies, including various tax incentives, often inadvertently subsidize fossil fuel consumption, undermining the state's Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act goals. By reforming these tax exemptions and investment credits to favor renewable energy, the state could potentially save over $800 million annually while accelerating the transition to a clean energy future.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
New York could limit its sales tax exemptions on residential energy, which currently apply to fossil fuels, to zero-emission fuels and renewable energy sources.
The state could tailor existing tax incentives to incorporate renewable energy, such as excluding heating systems that rely on fossil fuels from economic investment tax credits.
The state should align spending decisions and tax policies that work at cross purposes with the CLCPA’s goals to advance all New Yorkers towards a clean energy future.
Key Data
$800 million
— Potential annual savings for the state from adjusting tax policies and fiscal choices.
$200 million
— Amount spent by New York on utilities, such as heating and cooling, in fiscal year 2019.
7,000
— Number of vehicles in the government fleet that could be converted to electric.
New York State faces a $58 billion budget gap over the next four years, exacerbated by the pandemic and a history of using fiscal maneuvers to mask spending growth. To address this, the state must implement a transparent plan that includes measures like reducing school aid to wealthy districts, eliminating unproductive economic development spending, and walking back tax policy expenditures.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
Reducing school aid to wealthy districts can be used to close the $8 billion gap.
Financing capital projects with bond proceeds rather than on a pay-as-you-go basis can be used to close the $8 billion gap.
Eliminating unproductive economic development spending can be used to close the $8 billion gap.
Walking back tax policy expenditures can be used to close the $8 billion gap.
The plan should not rely on fiscal maneuvers and accounting shifts that have obscured spending growth and exacerbated budget pressures.
Key Data
$58 billion
— Projected budget gaps for the New York State budget over the next four years.
$8 billion
— Amount in unidentified budget balancing actions or spending reductions needed annually.
$102.2 billion
— Reported fiscal year 2020 spending following the April update to the financial plan.
$1.7 billion
— Medicaid payments deferred into fiscal year 2020, which the State plans to increase back to this level in fiscal year 2021.
$726 million
— Additional federal Medicaid funding expected as of July 1, 2020.
New York can address its fiscal deficits by curtailing inefficient spending, such as $4.4 billion in ineffective economic development programs and $1.6 billion in aid to wealthy school districts. Rather than implementing a stock transfer tax, the state should utilize its $3.5 billion in rainy day funds, bond $3 billion in capital investments, and adjust existing tax policies like the personal income tax cut and clothing sales tax exemption.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
The state should curtail $4.4 billion in economic development spending that has demonstrated little impact, particularly in upstate communities.
The state should eliminate $1.6 billion in aid to school districts with more than enough local resources to fund a sound, basic education.
The state should utilize $3.5 billion in rainy day funds to help balance the budget.
The state should finance $3 billion in capital investments through bonds instead of cash.
The state should delay the Jan. 1, 2021 personal income tax cut as part of a sustainable, comprehensive, and balanced package.
The state should suspend the sales tax exemption on clothing as part of a sustainable, comprehensive, and balanced package.
Key Data
$1.6 billion
— Aid provided to school districts with more than enough local resources to fund a sound, basic education.
$4.4 billion
— Spending on economic development that has demonstrated little impact, particularly in upstate communities.
$3.5 billion
— Available rainy day funds that can be used to balance the state budget.
$3 billion
— Capital investments that can be financed through bonds instead of cash.
New York faces significant budget gaps, yet increasing taxes risks reducing economic competitiveness as the state already imposes some of the highest corporate and personal income tax rates in the country. The state's reliance on high-income earners is increasingly precarious, as evidenced by a declining share of national millionaires and capital gains compared to lower-tax states.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
Improving the fiscal outlook for both the State and the City primarily requires controlling expenditures and advocating for federal aid.
Any consideration of tax increases should include the impact on State and local economic competitiveness.
As New York’s leaders look to close budget gaps, they must be cognizant that combined State and City PIT rates are the second highest in the nation, while combined CFT rates are the highest.
Key Data
$8 billion
— Potential budget gap for New York State in fiscal year 2021.
$15 billion
— Potential budget gap for New York State in fiscal year 2022.
16.49 percent
— The total effective corporate franchise tax rate for businesses operating in New York City.
12.696 percent
— The combined top personal income tax rate imposed on married couples in New York City.
$1.4 billion
— The amount of additional tax revenue New York could have generated if its share of national millionaire capital gains had remained at 2010 levels.
$6.9 billion
— Potential budget gap for New York City in fiscal year 2022.
New York State should adopt a "bare bones" budget to address the pandemic while avoiding tax increases that could harm the state's competitiveness. The budget must prioritize essential services and pandemic response while planning for future revisions as economic conditions become clearer.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
The Governor and Legislature should quickly enact a “bare bones” budget that supports the estimated pandemic response need.
State leaders should not consider tax increases at this time, as New York’s already high taxes and the federal cap on state and local tax deductions risk the state's competitiveness.
The Governor and Legislature should plan for the eventuality that this budget will have to be revised in the coming months as more information becomes available about the economic and fiscal impacts of the pandemic.
The state should leverage and continue the work of the Medicaid Redesign Team (MRT) to design appropriate responses to the program's unsustainable expenditure growth.
The state should appropriately use emergency federal aid to replace lost tax revenues or support the pandemic response, rather than substituting it for necessary structural Medicaid reforms.
New York's Health Care Reform Act (HCRA) taxes, which generate nearly $6 billion annually, significantly increase health insurance premiums and depress wage growth for many residents. While originally intended for specific public health programs, the vast majority of these funds are now used to offset state Medicaid costs in the general budget.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
HCRA tax increases should be avoided as a strategy for balancing the Medicaid budget because that action increases the cost of health insurance premiums and likely depresses wage growth for a majority of New Yorkers.
Lawmakers should review HCRA’s role in health care funding and its impact upon privately insured New Yorkers.
Key Data
$6 billion
— Annual revenue generated by the Health Care Reform Act (HCRA).
4.3%
— Combined impact of the Surcharge and Covered Lives Assessment on commercial health insurance premiums.
$1,000
— Statewide average annual cost of HCRA taxes for a family health insurance plan.
80%
— Portion of HCRA revenue used in recent years to pay for the State’s share of Medicaid.
$700 million
— Annual amount the State government pays via HCRA taxes.
$557 million
— Annual share of Surcharge revenue paid by the federal government.
New York's Medicaid program faces significant fiscal challenges, with costs growing at an unsustainable rate that threatens the state's financial stability. To address these deficits, the state should avoid raising health care taxes, which increase insurance premiums for families, and instead focus on structural reforms to Medicaid spending and transparency.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
The State should not raise health care taxes, as these are passed on to New Yorkers as higher health insurance premiums.
The State should make the Global Cap global by including all spending, ensuring all Medicaid costs are accounted for and managed within the cap.
The State should make the Global Cap a cap by following accounting principles, specifically using a modified accrual basis to prevent payment deferrals.
The State should choose the right cap by indexing Medicaid spending to the rolling average of medical inflation to provide appropriate discipline.
The State should adhere to and improve the law requiring Medicaid spending transparency by publishing monthly reports and enhancing their content.
The State should target supplemental payments based on need to promote equity and reduce total costs among hospitals.
Key Data
$2.5 billion
— The MRT's goal for State-share Medicaid savings.
$1.7 billion
— Amount of payments deferred for three days into the next fiscal year to adhere to the Cap in fiscal year 2019.
$500 million
— Cost for the health homes care coordination model in the first five years.
$1,000
— Annual increase in health insurance premiums paid by the average commercially insured family in New York due to healthcare taxes.
44.1 percent
— Share of the Global Cap budget comprised by long-term care in fiscal year 2015.
47.6 percent
— Estimated share of the Global Cap budget comprised by long-term care in the last year.
New York State faces significant budget gaps totaling $38.6 billion over five years, necessitating a focus on spending restraint rather than tax increases to maintain economic competitiveness. The state should prioritize building rainy day reserves, reforming education aid to target underfunded districts, and avoiding new tax burdens that could hinder economic growth.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
The State should maintain competitiveness by not increasing taxes.
The State should avoid tax increases, including health care taxes, to keep health insurance affordable.
The State should further reduce the film tax credit by decreasing the share of eligible expenses in 5 percentage point increments until it is completely phased-out.
The State should evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the Excelsior Jobs Tax Credit program before granting a long-term extension.
Key Data
$38.6 billion
— Total budget gaps over five years, of which more than $18.0 billion was due to previously unbudgeted Medicaid spending.
37 percent
— Share of personal income tax revenues paid by the top 1 percent of personal income tax filers.
$7.3 billion
— Total authorized subsidies to the film and television industry since the enactment of the State film tax credit in 2004.
$1.0 billion
— Projected revenue increase to help close the fiscal year 2020 deficit.
$2.1 billion
— Projected revenue increase in fiscal year 2021.
$420 million
— Increase in the total allocation for the film tax credit proposed in the Executive Budget.
New York City taxpayers provide 71 percent of the Metropolitan Transportation Authority's non-fare and non-federal revenue through a combination of local, regional, and state taxes. As the state implements new funding sources like for-hire vehicle surcharges and mansion taxes, city residents and businesses will continue to bear the vast majority of the financial burden for the transit system.
Key Data
71%
— New York City taxpayers provide <b>71 percent</b> of the MTA’s non-fare and toll, nonfederal revenue through a combination of local, regional, and State taxes.
$1.7 billion
— In 2018, City taxpayers contributed nearly <b>$1.7 billion</b> of their own tax revenue to the MTA through the City budget.
93%
— In 2020, City taxpayers will pay <b>93 percent</b> of the new funding sources enacted by the State to support the MTA.
$5.5 billion
— State-authorized taxes allocated to the MTA totaled <b>$5.5 billion</b> in 2018.
New York's fiscal year 2021 budget relies on $2.5 billion in unidentified Medicaid savings to keep spending growth under 2 percent, while utilizing various accounting maneuvers to mask the true scale of expenditures. These shifts, including reclassifying tax benefits and moving costs off-budget, undermine transparency and complicate accurate year-to-year fiscal comparisons.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
As the Legislature considers the budget and its wish list, it should be mindful that spending already is larger than it appears.
The State should avoid shifts and reclassifications that undermine transparency and make year-to-year comparisons challenging.
The State must identify concrete plans to achieve the $2.5 billion in Medicaid savings rather than relying on unspecified cuts to meet the spending growth benchmark.
Key Data
$2.5 billion
— Medicaid savings that have yet to be identified.
4.2 percent
— SOF spending increase absent the $2.5 billion in Medicaid savings.
$6.2 billion
— Amount the fiscal year 2021 budget would be lower if the State had held spending growth to 2 percent annually since fiscal year 2017.
$110.4 billion
— Total proposed SOF spending in fiscal year 2021.
$4.5 billion
— Disbursements being shifted out of fiscal year 2021 SOF spending.
$1.9 billion
— Reduction in reported SOF spending in fiscal year 2021 due to shifting MTA taxes off-budget.
New York faces significant budget gaps, with a cumulative $28.8 billion shortfall projected over four years, necessitating a shift toward transparent budgeting and spending restraint. To maintain economic competitiveness, the state should avoid increasing personal income taxes on the wealthy, as the current tax burden is already 48 percent higher than the national average.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
The State should hold the line on taxes to avoid undermining its competitive position, as increasing personal income taxes on the wealthy would make New York less competitive.
The State should not use gimmicks that inappropriately balance the budget, such as shifting expenses onto local governments, into future fiscal years, or off-budget.
The State should include GAAP-basis financial statements in the Executive Budget, 30-day amendments, Enacted Budget, and Mid-Year Update to provide important insights into the State’s financial position.
The State should reconstitute the Medicaid Redesign Team to identify savings that can be quickly implemented and those that can significantly restrain costs over time.
The State should target increases in State education aid to those districts that lack the funding to provide a Sound Basic Education, rather than providing aid to wealthy districts that already have sufficient local resources.
Key Data
$28.8 billion
— The cumulative budget gap over four years from fiscal year 2020 to fiscal year 2023.
48 percent
— The amount by which New York's combined state and local tax burden is higher than the national average.
37 percent
— The approximate share of all personal income taxes paid by taxpayers with incomes in excess of $1 million.
$1.7 billion
— The amount of the fiscal year 2020 budget gap that must be closed in the next three months.
$1.6 billion
— The amount of state aid provided to wealthy school districts that already have sufficient local resources to deliver a Sound Basic Education.
New York State's Regional Economic Development Councils have distributed billions in funding, yet the program suffers from a lack of strategic alignment, opaque reporting, and dispersed investments that fail to target high-impact industries. To improve effectiveness, the state should mandate standardized performance metrics, prioritize projects tied to clear economic strategies, and increase the weight of regional assessments in funding decisions.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
Only projects tied to an established regional or State strategy should be eligible for economic development-related financial assistance.
The REDC process should utilize quantifiable criteria by which target industries are identified.
REDCs should focus projects in major population centers—the anchor metropolitan areas in a given region—where projects are more likely to contribute to the development of sustainable industry clusters.
The State should establish standardized metrics for regional performance and require project-level reporting on progress, employment, and spending.
The REDCs’ project scores should count as a greater proportion of the total assessment.
Key Data
$6.2 billion
— Total State grants, tax credits, and other funding allocated since the REDCs’ 2011 inception.
$773 million
— Average annual funding allocated by the State through REDCs since 2011.
$4.4 billion
— Total State spending on economic development in 2018, including direct expenditures and forgone tax revenue.
$2.5 billion
— State economic development-related tax expenditures in 2018.
58 percent
— Share of all State economic development costs represented by tax expenditures in 2018.
$1.5 billion
— Amount awarded by the Upstate Revitalization Initiative (URI) in 2015.
New York City Health + Hospitals faces a significant operating deficit, largely driven by insufficient Medicaid payments and the high cost of providing care to uninsured and indigent populations. To address this, the state should shift from relying on local tax subsidies to broader-based state and federal tax sources, while implementing performance benchmarks to improve hospital efficiency and accountability.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
Better target Medicaid supplemental payments to H+H and other facilities with the greatest need, and finance the nonfederal portion of these payments with State revenues rather than local intergovernmental transfers.
Use more equitably the surplus operating revenue earned by large networks from commercial insurers to cross subsidize indigent care on a system wide as well as an intra-institutional basis.
Better align Medicaid hospital payment rates to reasonable unit costs of services, and fund with better use of Medicaid supplemental payments, more equitably allocated high commercial insurance payments and other broad based sources.
Reducing reliance on local tax funds and increasing reliance on the broader based statewide tax base would make these programs more equitably financed and lower the local subsidy.
Financing redistributive activities such as care for the indigent is more appropriately done from state and federal tax bases rather than local sources.
Key Data
$1.1 billion
— The City provides the nonfederal share of most of its supplemental payments; this is about $1.1 billion annually and comprises a major portion of the local subsidy.
$5 billion
— The State provides about $5 billion annually in supplemental Medicaid payments to hospitals (and some ambulatory facilities) with much of the money going to financially distressed hospitals.
$3 billion
— H+H in fiscal years 2015 to 2017 had an average operating deficit—the difference between what is spent on patient services and what H+H is paid for providing those services—of nearly $3 billion.
$490 million
— Benchmarking to Elmhurst’s revenue recovery ratios by service line and by payer would reduce the H+H systemwide deficit by $546 million to $490 million.
New York's state and local tax burden is the highest in the nation, sitting 48 percent above the national average, which threatens the state's economic competitiveness. Consequently, the state should avoid further tax increases and instead focus on restraining spending to stabilize the budget and prepare for potential economic downturns.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
New York should avoid increasing taxes now, as it would make the state more expensive for residents and businesses, decrease competitiveness, and reduce options to weather the next recession.
The State should hold the line on the State’s already high tax burden rather than enacting additional tax increases.
While temporary revenue increases may be appropriate to weather a recession, the retention of the PIT surcharge and other recently enacted taxes narrow options to balance the budget soundly in future recessions.
Key Data
48 percent
— New York's State and local tax burden is higher than the national average.
8.82 percent
— New York State's top marginal personal income tax (PIT) rate.
12.7 percent
— The top personal income tax rate for New York City residents.
8.49 percent
— New York's average combined State and local sales tax rate.
1 of every 5 dollars
— Portion of state operating spending funded by taxpayers earning more than $1 million annually.
New York City's property tax system generates nearly $30 billion annually, funding approximately one-third of the city's budget while maintaining stability through economic cycles. To improve equity and transparency, the system requires comprehensive reform, including moving residential properties into a unified class, basing valuations on actual market values, and implementing income-based tax rebates.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
Move cooperatives and residential condominiums to Class 1 with one-, two-, and three-family homes.
Valuation for tax purposes should reflect actual real estate market value, using sales-based models for one-, two-, and three-family homes, cooperatives, and residential condominiums.
Full market value should be the starting point for assessing the tax base, with differential effective tax rates to favor residential properties.
The existing class share system should be eliminated.
Stability of the property tax should be achieved by phasing-in market value changes over three years for all parcels.
To ease burdensome tax bills, rebates of owner-occupied residential property taxes should be provided based on household income when tax bills exceed a set share of income.
Transition to the new system should occur over a five-year period.
Key Data
$30 billion
— The amount of revenue the property tax will generate in fiscal year 2020.
32 percent
— The portion of all New York City revenues generated by the property tax in fiscal year 2020.
$1 out of every $3
— The amount of city spending funded by property tax revenue.
6.2 percent
— The average annual growth of property tax revenue since fiscal year 1999.
$81.3 billion the amount of tax revenue New York State will collect in fiscal year 2020—46 percent of all resources in the $176 billion New York State budget. Michael Schmidt, Commissioner of the New York State Department of Taxation and Finance, joined the podcast to parse the details on the…
New York's decision to conform to the federal Opportunity Zone program creates significant potential revenue losses for the state and city, estimated at $63 million and $31 million annually, respectively. To mitigate these costs and ensure accountability, the state should implement mandatory reporting requirements for funds or consider decoupling from the federal tax benefits entirely.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
The State can require Opportunity Funds operating in New York State to report on their activity in order to qualify for state tax benefits.
The State could require funds to report annually on the value of gains invested by New York State taxpayers in qualified opportunity funds.
The legislature could limit the types of OZ projects that would qualify for state tax benefits, such as restricting them to residential projects with affordability thresholds.
The State could limit the number of OZs in which taxpayers could claim state benefits to those that meet the most recent poverty and income criteria.
The State could decouple fully from the federal Opportunity Zone program to minimize the direct impact on state and local tax revenue.
Key Data
$63 million
— Estimated annual revenue loss for New York State due to the Opportunity Zone program.
$31 million
— Estimated annual revenue loss for New York City due to the Opportunity Zone program.
$6 trillion
— Total amount of unrealized capital gains held by taxpayers nationally.
$53 billion
— Amount that funds intend to raise to invest in Opportunity Zone projects as of August 2019.
$9.4 billion
— Total cost of the Opportunity Zone program for federal tax years 2018 to 2022.
$866 million
— Estimated annual investment in Qualified Opportunity Funds by New York State taxpayers.
New York State and City rely heavily on personal income tax revenue, which is particularly volatile due to a significant dependence on high-income earners whose earnings are often tied to fluctuating capital gains. This concentration of tax liability among a small group of top earners creates substantial budgetary risks, as seen in years where revenue swings by billions of dollars.
Key Data
$47.1 billion
— New York State's personal income tax revenue raised in fiscal year 2015-2016.
37.0 percent
— Share of total state personal income tax liability accounted for by taxpayers with taxable income of $1 million or more in 2016.
$15.7 billion
— Collective personal income tax liability of New York taxpayers earning $1 million or more in 2016.
$11.4 billion
— New York City's personal income tax revenue in fiscal year 2016.
38.9 percent
— Share of total New York City personal income tax liability accounted for by filers earning $1 million or more.
$5.7 billion
— Decline in New York State personal income tax revenue in fiscal year 2009.
The 2019 Economic Development Sweetener Scorecard tracks 69 legislative proposals, many of which offer tax credits, exemptions, or grants that could significantly impact the state's fiscal health. These proposed measures include substantial tax breaks for specific industries, such as a $275 million expansion of the School Tax Relief program to small businesses and a $140 million corporate franchise tax exemption for manufacturers.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
Governor Cuomo should veto the three economic development bills identified in the scorecard to avoid unnecessary fiscal impacts on the state.
Key Data
$275 Million
— Fiscal impact of making real property owned by small businesses eligible for the STAR property tax exemption.
$140 Million
— Fiscal impact of extending the zero-percent Corporate Franchise Tax rate to qualified pass-through manufacturers.
$100 Million
— Fiscal impact of the new tax credit for music and video game production costs.
$30 Million
— Fiscal impact of increasing the Farm Workforce Retention Credit per eligible farm employee.
$10 Million
— Fiscal impact of establishing the GrowNY pilot program for economic gardening.
$8.25 Million
— Fiscal impact of establishing the Capital Investment Jobs Retention Program.
New York State's reported State Operating Funds spending growth of 2 percent is misleading, as accounting maneuvers like shifting taxes off-budget and reclassifying tax credits actually result in a 4.9 percent growth rate for fiscal year 2020. These practices, including the reclassification of School Tax Relief benefits and the shifting of the Metropolitan Commuter Transportation Mobility Tax, obscure the true scale of state spending and undermine fiscal transparency.
Key Data
4.9 percent
— Projected State Operating Funds spending growth in fiscal year 2020.
$4.7 billion
— Total amount shifted out of fiscal year 2020 State Operating Funds spending through various accounting maneuvers.
$1.4 billion
— Reduction in reported State Operating Funds spending in fiscal year 2019 resulting from shifting the Metropolitan Commuter Transportation Mobility Tax off-budget.
$1.24 billion
— Amount by which State Operating Funds spending appears lower due to the reclassification of School Tax Relief benefits.
The proposed New York Health Act would require an unprecedented tax increase of at least 156 percent, totaling $139 billion in its first year and growing to $210 billion annually within a decade. While the act aims to improve health coverage, the state faces significant fiscal risks, including the potential loss of $33.5 billion in annual tax revenue if high-income earners relocate in response to these tax hikes.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
The State should implement a State mandate requiring individuals to have insurance to increase coverage and lower uncompensated care costs.
The State should introduce a new, low-cost public plan that a defined population of individuals and groups could purchase at their own expense.
The State should pursue increased use of mechanisms that promote competition and transparency, such as reference pricing and value-based provider payments.
The State could explore expanding insurance subsidies to noneligible immigrants and to those earning between 200 percent and 400 percent of the federal poverty level, provided the costs are offset by savings elsewhere in the budget.
The State could pilot a geographic global budget by paying a coalition of providers a lump sum to care for the population in their area.
Key Data
156 percent
— The minimum tax increase required to fund the New York Health Act.
$139 billion
— The total tax increase required in the first year of the New York Health Act.
$210 billion
— The annual tax increase required within 10 years of the New York Health Act.
$33.5 billion
— The annual tax revenue the State would lose if just 0.5 percent of top-bracket filers left New York.
$119 billion
— The projected annual funding required for the New York Health Act in 2022.
$179 billion
— The projected annual funding required for the New York Health Act in 2031.
1.28 cents is the amount New York collects in fuel taxes for every vehicle mile driven. A recent CBC report "Switching Gears" explored the implementation of an innovative approach to finance highway and bridge improvements: a vehicle-miles traveled fee. What’s a VMT, and how does it work? CBC's Patrick Orecki…
The Rockefeller Institute of Government and CBC hosted "Switching Gears: A New Way to Fund Transportation," a presentation and expert panel discussion on the vehicle-miles travel (VMT) fee. The event featured a presentation by CBC Senior Research Associate Patrick Orecki, which accompanied a CBC report released the same day, followed by a discussion…
It’s no secret New York’s roads are in dire need of repair, and now there are numbers to prove it. A new report by the Citizens Budget Commission says New York needs $5.7 billion to keep roads in “good repair.” Watch the original segment here .
New York's reliance on fuel taxes to fund transportation infrastructure is increasingly unsustainable due to rising fuel efficiency and inflation, necessitating a shift toward a vehicle-miles traveled (VMT) fee. Implementing a VMT fee would provide a more reliable, user-pays revenue stream that can be adjusted based on vehicle type, location, and time of day to better address the state's significant infrastructure repair needs.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
New York should phase in implementation to allow the public sector to build expertise in a new area of revenue generation.
The state should maintain flexibility to accommodate new technology rather than committing to a single, proprietary platform.
Policymakers should establish rates that vary by type of vehicle and location to account for differing impacts on infrastructure and the environment.
The state should execute a clear and transparent rate-setting process so that motorists understand how, when, and at what rate a fee is being imposed.
New York should use the VMT fee as an addition to existing sources to help remedy the mismatch between available highway revenues and needed annual expenditures.
Key Data
$5.7 billion
— The amount of annual investment required for the State to achieve a state of good repair on its assets.
37 percent
— The portion of necessary repair work on state assets that is currently deferred.
51 percent
— The reduction in the inflation-adjusted per-mile direct cost to motorists who travel on State roadways since 1993.
$1 billion
— The estimated annual revenue yield from an average per-mile fee of 1 cent based on 2016 travel data.
1.5 cents
— The per-mile fee charged to participants in Oregon's OReGO pilot program.
95 percent
— The E-ZPass market share for weekday transactions on Triborough Bridge and Tunnel Authority entities as of May 2018.
New York's 2019 legislative session featured 69 proposed economic development bills, many of which introduced new tax credits, exemptions, or grant programs aimed at specific industries and small businesses. These legislative proposals, which include significant fiscal impacts like a $275 million property tax exemption for small businesses and a $140 million corporate franchise tax extension, reflect a broad effort to use targeted tax policy to stimulate economic growth.
Key Data
$140 Million
— Fiscal impact of extending the zero-percent Corporate Franchise Tax rate to qualified pass-through manufacturers.
$30 Million
— Fiscal impact of increasing the Farm Workforce Retention Credit per eligible farm employee.
$275 Million
— Fiscal impact of making real property owned by small businesses eligible for the School Tax Relief (STAR) property tax exemption.
$100 Million
— Annual cap on the new tax credit for music and video game production industries.
$10 Million
— Annual grant authorization for the GrowNY pilot program to provide technical assistance to growing businesses.
$8.25 Million
— Fiscal impact of the Capital Investment Jobs Retention Program, a refundable tax credit for eligible businesses.
Implementing a 5-cent fee on paper carryout bags will help reduce single-use waste by providing an economic incentive for consumers to switch to reusable alternatives. This policy, which aligns with the statewide plastic bag ban, directs revenue toward local reusable bag distribution and the State Environmental Protection Fund.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
The City should adopt the paper carryout bag fee to realize the fiscal and environmental benefits of sharply reducing the number of single-use bags from the waste stream.
The City should support legislation to authorize the 5-cent fee on paper carryout bags, which would take effect on March 1, 2020, concurrent with the statewide plastic bag ban.
Key Data
71,000 tons
— Amount of plastic bags in the City’s residential waste stream, representing about 2 percent of the total.
$12.1 million
— Annual cost to landfill plastic bags.
500 years
— Time it takes for plastic bags to decompose.
94 percent
— Reduction in single-use bags achieved in Los Angeles following a similar fee effort.
40 percent
— Portion of revenue collected in New York City that will be returned to the City to buy and distribute reusable bags.
60 percent
— Portion of revenue collected in New York City that will be deposited in the State Environmental Protection Fund.
The New York State Fiscal Year 2020 Budget implements new revenue streams, including a congestion pricing program, increased real estate transfer taxes, and sales tax intercepts, to generate $25 billion for the Metropolitan Transportation Authority's capital plan. These funds are directed into a dedicated "CBD Tolling Capital Lockbox" to ensure they support capital projects rather than operating expenses.
Key Data
$1 billion
— Annual revenue expected from the congestion pricing program.
$15 billion
— Capital investment in the MTA's 2020-2024 Capital Plan supported by congestion pricing.
$365 million
— Annual revenue expected from the two newly enacted real estate transfer tax surcharges.
$5 billion
— MTA capital needs expected to be supported by the new real estate transfer tax surcharges.
$1.685 billion
— Total annual yield estimated from all new revenue resources.
$25 billion
— Total MTA capital plan financing expected to be provided by the new revenues.
The New York State fiscal year 2020 budget agreement increases spending without adequately bolstering reserves for a potential recession, while relying on a five-year extension of a personal income tax surcharge on wealthy earners. Although the budget introduces positive measures like congestion pricing and sales tax base expansion, it continues to fund wasteful programs such as the property tax relief credit and film tax credits.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
The state should phase out the personal income tax surcharge on wealthy taxpayers to soften the impact of the federal cap on state and local tax (SALT) deductions and preserve revenue options for future recessions.
It is critical to limit fee exemptions for the congestion pricing program to preserve projected revenues and traffic reduction.
State leaders should restrain spending growth and increase the State's rainy day funds to prepare for potential fiscal imbalances.
The state should avoid mandating the use of design-build contracting on all projects greater than $25 million, as it may be counterproductive and the waiver process is burdensome.
Key Data
$34 billion
— Three-year potential gap in a recession.
$1.3 billion
— Cost of the property tax relief credit in fiscal year 2020.
$840 million
— Amount added to the film tax credit.
$500 million
— Imbalance threshold for cutting local aid.
Spectrum News NY1 NY1 looked at education, congestion pricing and criminal justice and taxes and the proposal for five year extension of the millionaire's tax, CBC President Andrew Rein joined to help unpack the proposed budget.
New York's transportation infrastructure faces a significant funding shortfall as traditional fuel taxes erode due to increased vehicle efficiency and the rise of electric vehicles. To address this, the state should implement a vehicle-miles traveled (VMT) fee and consider other user fee adjustments to ensure sustainable funding for roads, bridges, and mass transit.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
The Governor and legislature should develop and advance a comprehensive proposal this year, one that raises sufficient revenues to reduce transportation funding shortfalls and to support additional mass transit service to meet the needs of those drivers who choose to switch modes.
Long-term the State should shift away from fuel taxes toward a more sustainable VMT fee.
New York ought to prepare for the continued erosion of revenues, and it should consider user fees that supplement fuel taxes.
The State needs to begin the thoughtful process to develop a VMT fee.
Increasing current motorist user fees can yield significant resources but must be balanced with maintaining the state’s competitiveness.
Key Data
$3.6 billion
— Annual transportation revenues collected by New York State from motorist user fees.
17 percent
— Decrease in the amount of fuel tax per mile driven in New York since 1993.
18.5 percent
— Portion of New York's share of the National Highway System with pavement considered 'Rough' or 'Very rough'.
55 percent
— Amount by which the 1993 fuel tax rate would exceed the current combined rate if it had kept up with inflation.
15 percent
— Decrease in fuel tax raised per vehicle-miles traveled (VMT) between 1993 and 2018.
$1.2 billion
— Potential annual revenue generated by a vehicle-miles traveled (VMT) fee charged at a rate of 1 cent per mile.
New York State's economic development strategy relies heavily on costly and often ineffective tax breaks, with over $1.1 billion in potential savings available by eliminating film and production tax credits and reducing discretionary capital spending. To improve outcomes, the state should reorient its Regional Economic Development Councils to prioritize high-return projects and enhance targeted support for low-income workers through mechanisms like the Earned Income Tax Credit.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
The state should eliminate film and production tax credits to generate savings for reinvestment.
The state should reduce ESD discretionary capital spending by half to improve fiscal efficiency.
The state should consider targeted safety net enhancement for poor and low-income workers, such as an enhancement of the Earned Income Tax Credit.
The state should implement a stricter prioritization of projects based on potential return on investment to allow for sustained investment.
The state should align funding with regional strategies to focus on projects in thriving industries and large cities to foster agglomeration effects.
The state should strengthen SUNY partnerships with REDCs to develop and assess training programs.
The state should provide resources to scale up effective SUNY programs and those geared toward areas of projected job growth.
Key Data
$570 million
— Savings from eliminating film and production tax credits.
$570 million
— Savings from reducing ESD discretionary capital spending by half.
$1.1 Billion
— Total available for reinvestment from eliminating ineffective expenditures.
$175 million
— Allocation in the NYS FY2019 budget for workforce training.
$750 million
— Annual awards to regional projects based on REDC rank and State agency score.
14.3%
— New York's poverty rate, which is now greater than the national rate of 13.9%.
New York faces a $2.3 billion revenue shortfall driven by federal tax changes, stock market volatility, and an economic slowdown. To address this deficit, the state should limit spending growth to 2 percent, repeal the expiring property tax relief credit, and reallocate unused settlement funds to rainy day reserves.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
The State should restrain spending growth, avoid one-shot gap-closing actions, and bolster its rainy day funds.
The State should hold spending growth to 2 percent to help close budget gaps.
The State should increase education aid only to those districts that need additional State resources to fund a sound basic education as defined by the Foundation Aid formula.
The property tax relief credit set to expire after calendar year 2019 should be repealed to reduce the fiscal year 2020 deficit.
The State should decrease State economic development programs that have not been proven effective, including the film tax credit.
The State should resist increasing broad-based taxes which can be counterproductive, especially given the SALT cap.
The State should eliminate the appropriations connected to unused settlement funds and dedicate them to rainy day funds.
Key Data
$2.3 billion
— Shortfall in January personal income tax collections reported by the Governor.
$1.45 billion
— Savings achieved in fiscal year 2020 by holding spending growth to 2 percent.
$500 million
— Potential savings from increasing education aid only to districts that need additional resources.
$1 billion
— Amount by which the fiscal year 2020 deficit would be reduced by repealing the property tax relief credit.
$2.9 billion
— Total of allocated but unused settlement funds that could be dedicated to rainy day reserves.
$2.3 billion
— Total of existing rainy day reserves under the Governor’s budget proposal.
New York State faces a significant infrastructure funding gap, requiring at least $100 billion in new investment to address aging assets and modernization needs. To bridge this gap, the state must explore alternative revenue streams, such as congestion pricing, vehicle miles traveled taxes, and expanded sales tax allocations, while reforming procurement to control rising project costs.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
In order to appropriately fund the State’s infrastructure needs, New York will require more funding from its existing funding sources and should pursue alternate funding sources, such as congestion pricing and value capture.
New York should consider implementing a pilot vehicle-mile-traveled (VMT) program as an alternative to the gas tax.
The Office of Infrastructure should articulate set of criteria to prioritize infrastructure investment, aligned with statewide policy objectives and needs.
The Office of Infrastructure should create a Center of Excellence for state infrastructure investment with the objectives to tackle cost drivers, assess and recommend the most appropriate project delivery, and encourage and facilitate knowledge sharing across entities.
The Office of Infrastructure should be a clearinghouse for project transparency and reporting, providing a single access point for capital infrastructure projects statewide.
Key Data
$100 billion
— Estimated new investment required to meet New York State's infrastructure needs.
$2.5 billion
— Funding provided by the Clean Water Infrastructure Act for drinking water, wastewater, and water protection infrastructure.
$1.58 billion
— Gross revenue generated by London's congestion pricing from 2003 through 2013.
$950 million
— Annual revenue that could be raised by a 2% Infrastructure Resiliency Charge.
$0.45
— The current gas tax rate per gallon in New York.
New York State should approach potential recreational marijuana tax revenue with caution, as implementation delays and market maturation often result in lower-than-expected receipts. Any realized revenue should be integrated into the general operating budget rather than earmarked for specific purposes to avoid fiscal instability.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
Recreational marijuana revenues should not be included in the State financial plan until the very complicated steps of crafting the statute and regulations have been completed; budgeting should not rely upon best guesses or optimistic assumptions.
It is better to under-forecast revenues and have a surplus than be overly optimistic and create a deficit.
Any future revenue should be received and spent on-budget, not through off-budget trusts or other fiscal gimmickry.
The revenue should not be committed to a specific purpose.
If New York does implement such a program, the associated revenue must be cautiously forecast, transparently disbursed, and utilized for general state operating purposes.
Key Data
$430 million
— Washington State marijuana tax revenue collected in fiscal year 2017.
$82 million
— California tax revenue received in the first six months of recreational marijuana sales.
$185 million
— Projected tax revenue for California in the first six months of recreational marijuana sales.
$700 million
— New York State Department of Health estimate of potential annual tax revenue from marijuana legalization.
$110 million to $428 million
— Range of revenue estimates for a hypothetical excise tax in New York.
$33 million
— Estimated reduction in New York State alcohol tax revenues due to legalized marijuana.
The Amazon headquarters deal in Long Island City involves $2.8 billion in combined state and city tax incentives, which could rise to $3.5 billion based on job creation and office space targets. This agreement highlights the need for stricter oversight of economic development programs, including capping wage credits for executives and ensuring capital investments are prioritized through the regular budgetary process.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
The Legislature should closely scrutinize an increase in the Excelsior Jobs Program cap to ensure it does not exceed legislatively set limits.
New York State should implement a cap on the level of wages eligible for the Excelsior credit to avoid paying benefits for the salaries of high-earning executives.
State capital funding should be invested in general infrastructure rather than used for discretionary capital grants that benefit individual companies.
City and state officials should reevaluate tax expenditures to ensure benefits are only spent to induce job creation that would not otherwise occur.
Capital investment should be considered alongside citywide needs through the regular budgetary process rather than diverted to specific neighborhood funds.
Key Data
$1.5 Billion
— Amount in tax breaks and grants offered by New York State to Amazon.
$1.3 Billion
— Amount in benefits offered by New York City to Amazon.
$2.8 Billion
— Total combined state and city incentives offered to Amazon for the headquarters project.
$3.5 Billion
— Potential combined state and city incentives if Amazon creates 40,000 jobs and 8 million square feet of office space.
The Amazon HQ2 incentive package, totaling between $2.8 billion and $3.5 billion, relies on a mix of state tax credits, discretionary capital grants, and city-level property tax abatements. These incentives highlight the need to reform economic development policies by capping wage credits, prioritizing general infrastructure over company-specific grants, and reevaluating outdated as-of-right tax expenditure programs.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
Excelsior should not be expanded to accommodate the needs of a single company, as doing so sets a concerning precedent that programs will be broadened to be too generous and insufficiently targeted.
Caps to the level of wages eligible for reimbursement under the Excelsior jobs program would minimize the State’s financial exposure.
State capital funding is best invested in general infrastructure, not for the direct benefit of an individual company.
Amazon should pay the full value of the PILOT directly to the City rather than diverting some funds to the surrounding neighborhood.
New York City’s as-of-right tax incentives should be reconsidered, evaluated, and potentially narrowed or eliminated to ensure benefits are only spent to induce job creation that would not otherwise occur.
Key Data
$2.8 billion
— Total benefits available to Amazon from New York State and City if 25,000 jobs are created.
$3.5 billion
— Total benefits available to Amazon from New York State and City if 40,000 jobs are created.
$1.2 billion
— Maximum Excelsior tax credits Amazon can receive over a ten-year period.
$386 million
— Estimated total of the ICAP property tax abatement.
$505 million
— Total capital grant amount available to Amazon from Empire State Development.
$900 million
— Potential total REAP credit by 2039 assuming the creation of 25,000 jobs.
New York's total tax collections have increased by 30.5% since fiscal year 2011, even as the state implemented reductions in personal income and corporate tax rates. Despite these changes, the state's tax burden remains competitive, with New York ranking 20th for state taxes per $100 of income as of 2015.
Key Data
30.5%
— Total tax collections increase since fiscal year 2011.
8.82%
— Top personal income tax rate in 2017.
20th
— New York's rank for state taxes per $100 of income as of 2015.
6.5%
— Corporate franchise tax rate following reforms.
$2 Million
— Threshold for the top personal income tax rate for married filing jointly in 2017.
New York State's unique requirement for local governments to fund a portion of Medicaid costs is an inequitable, regressive mandate that places a significant financial burden on local districts. To address this, the state should implement a comprehensive takeover of these costs, potentially by combining strategies like eliminating the School Tax Assessment Relief (STAR) program, utilizing state efficiencies, or adjusting sales tax collections.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
It is time for New York to adopt measures that will completely eliminate the required local share of Medicaid.
The State should design a way to eliminate the mandated local share in a reasonable time period.
A requirement could be placed on counties to reduce their property tax levies in concert with the local takeover.
Takeover proposals need to include provisions for the continued exclusion of these additional payments from the takeover.
The State will likely have to exempt local takeover costs from the Medicaid Global Cap or exempt them in a way similar to other episodic costs.
Key Data
$7.6 billion
— The frozen annual local share of Medicaid statewide.
$15 billion
— The amount saved by local districts from fiscal year 2005 through fiscal year 2018 due to the cap and freeze of Medicaid local share growth.
8.6 percent
— The average portion of local districts' gross expenditures consumed by the Medicaid local share in 2016.
$3.3 billion
— The annual cost of the School Tax Assessment Relief (STAR) program, which could be eliminated to help fund a state takeover.
$675 million
— The amount of enhanced federal Medicaid funding from the Affordable Care Act passed down by the State to local districts.
$7 billion
— The amount local districts currently pay for Medicaid services annually after accounting for ACA funding.
New York's potential legalization of sports betting offers a new revenue stream, but policymakers must account for market saturation, the regressive nature of gambling taxes, and the potential cannibalization of existing gambling revenues. Prudent revenue forecasting and competitive tax structuring are essential to ensure long-term economic stability while mitigating the social costs associated with increased problem gambling.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
The State should estimate conservatively revenue benefits from sports betting because it is difficult to predict how much illicit activity will transition to the legal market.
Legislators should ensure taxes are designed thoughtfully in a competitive marketplace to avoid discouraging operators from entering the local market.
Policymakers must ensure sports betting’s potential impact on other gambling revenues is considered to avoid cannibalizing existing revenue streams like state lotteries.
Legislation should take into account that gambling taxes are regressive and that increased gambling prevalence will impose social costs like crime and bankruptcy.
Key Data
$150 billion
— Estimated annual illegal sports betting market in the United States.
$2.8 billion to $8.7 billion
— Estimated portion of the illegal sports betting market comprised by New York.
$155 million to $475 million
— Forecasted Gross Gaming Revenue for New York.
8.5 percent
— Proposed state tax rate on gross sport wagering revenue in New York legislation.
$3 billion
— Annual revenue generated by state run lotteries for education aid in New York.
$3.5 million
— Amount allocated in the Fiscal Year 2019 Enacted Budget for problem gambling services.
New York should implement an Unincorporated Business Tax to help residents and businesses mitigate the impact of the federal $10,000 state and local tax deduction cap. This proposed tax should be optional, include S-corporations and sole proprietors, and utilize a 5% rate paired with a 93% personal income tax credit to ensure revenue neutrality.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
Expanding the proposed UBT to include S-corporations and sole proprietors, and conforming the UBT income apportionment formula as closely as feasible to each business organizational form’s existing formula for sourcing revenues under the personal income tax.
Making the UBT optional by an election at the entity level to reduce risk to the taxpayer by providing choice.
Preserving the proposed 5% rate, which combined with the 93% credit would provide significant benefit.
Preserving the proposed 93% personal income tax credit, which combined with the 5% rate will provide significant benefit.
Expressly reflecting in law that the UBT is not added back for taxable State income purposes to ensure it is not treated as an addition to an individual partner’s or member’s federal adjusted gross income.
Making the UBT credit non-refundable to reduce the risk of a legal challenge to the tax.
Modifying statutory language to strengthen the case for deductibility by expressly stating that the UBT is a tax imposed on the net business operations of the unincorporated business itself.
Working with other states to align tax provisions, including credits and apportionment rules, to maximize the UBT’s benefits and minimize cases where taxpayers are disadvantaged.
Key Data
$10,000
— The federal cap on a taxpayer’s deduction of state and local taxes (SALT cap).
$500,000
— The suggested threshold for State taxable net income at which to impose the tax for unincorporated businesses.
5%
— The proposed tax rate for the Unincorporated Business Tax.
93%
— The proposed personal income tax credit rate to be combined with the 5% business tax rate.
New York's economic development landscape is cluttered with numerous proposed bills that offer targeted tax credits and exemptions, often with significant fiscal impacts reaching into the hundreds of millions of dollars. These initiatives, ranging from industry-specific tax breaks to small business grants, frequently lack rigorous evaluation and contribute to a complex, fragmented tax code that prioritizes specific sectors over broad-based economic policy.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
The Governor should reject the ten economic development bills that create or expand targeted tax incentives, as these measures often lack sufficient economic justification.
State policymakers should avoid enacting new, narrow tax credits that complicate the tax code and reduce overall revenue without proven broad-based economic benefits.
Legislators should prioritize broad-based tax reform over the proliferation of industry-specific tax expenditures that favor select businesses.
The state should subject all proposed economic development tax incentives to rigorous cost-benefit analysis before approval to ensure they provide a tangible return on investment.
Policymakers should consolidate existing economic development programs rather than creating new, overlapping initiatives that increase administrative complexity.
Key Data
$140 million
— Fiscal impact of the proposed zero-percent Corporate Franchise Tax rate for manufacturers.
$100 million
— Annual fiscal impact of the proposed tax credit for music and video game production industries.
$25 million
— Annual fiscal impact of the proposed tax credit for the video game production industry.
$20 million
— Fiscal impact of the HIRE NY act providing loans for microbusiness hiring.
$10 million
— Fiscal impact of the GrowNY pilot program for economic gardening.
$7 million
— Annual fiscal impact of the Empire State Commercial Production Tax Credit.
New York State legislators introduced numerous bills in 2018 aimed at economic development through various tax credits, exemptions, and grant programs targeting specific industries and small businesses. These legislative efforts reflect a broad strategy to incentivize growth, though many proposals faced vetoes or remained pending by the end of the year.
Key Data
$140 Million
— Fiscal impact of extending the zero-percent Corporate Franchise Tax rate to qualified pass-through manufacturers.
$100 Million
— Annual cap for the new tax credit for music and video game production costs.
$65 Million
— Increase in funding for the Excelsior Linked Deposit Program.
$25 Million
— Annual cap for the new tax credit for video game production.
$7 Million
— Annual cap for the Empire State Commercial Production Tax Credit.
$2.5 Million
— Appropriation for the I Love NY Outdoor program to promote outdoor recreation.
New York State has repeatedly circumvented its self-imposed 2 percent spending growth cap by utilizing accounting shifts and reclassifications, including changes to the administration of the Metropolitan Commuter Transportation Mobility Tax and the School Tax Relief (STAR) program. These budgetary maneuvers obscure the true growth of state spending, which has exceeded the cap for two consecutive years.
Key Data
$1.5 billion
— The Metropolitan Commuter Transportation Mobility Tax was shifted to go directly to the MTA, decreasing State Operating Funds spending by $1.5 billion.
$862 million
— New School Tax Relief (STAR) recipients will receive their benefits as a personal income tax benefit instead of a property tax exemption, reducing State Operating Funds spending by $862 million in fiscal year 2019.
$84 million
— The reduction in State Operating Funds spending from the STAR program change is $84 million more than the prior year.
$3.107 billion
— Taken together, shifts and reclassifications will decrease fiscal year 2019 State Operating Funds spending by $3.107 billion.
New York State is considering numerous legislative proposals to expand economic development through various tax incentives, credits, and exemptions for businesses ranging from small startups to large manufacturers. These initiatives aim to stimulate growth by reducing tax burdens and providing financial assistance, representing a significant array of fiscal policy adjustments.
Key Data
$440 Million
— Total funding increase for the Excelsior Linked Deposit Program.
$140 Million
— Fiscal impact of extending the zero-percent Corporate Franchise Tax rate to qualified pass-through manufacturers.
$20 Million
— Fiscal impact of the HIRE NY act, which provides loans for microbusiness hiring.
$1.5 Million
— Fiscal impact of creating the Microenterprise Development Fund.
$0.3 Million
— Fiscal impact of establishing grants to open and operate bicycle kiosks to promote tourism.
$0.21 Million
— Fiscal impact of creating a pilot program to train and counsel small retail business owners.
New York State legislators have introduced numerous bills aimed at economic development, many of which utilize tax credits, exemptions, and deductions to incentivize specific industries and small businesses. These proposals range from expanding existing programs like the Excelsior Linked Deposit Program to creating new targeted initiatives for sectors such as manufacturing, agriculture, and technology.
Key Data
$440 Million
— Increase in total funding for the Excelsior Linked Deposit Program.
$200 Million
— Amount dedicated to business startups within the Excelsior Linked Deposit Program.
$140 Million
— Fiscal impact of extending the zero-percent Corporate Franchise Tax rate to qualified pass-through manufacturers.
$20 Million
— Fiscal impact of the HIRE NY act providing loans for microbusiness hiring.
$10 Million
— Fiscal impact of the GrowNY pilot program.
$1.5 Million
— Fiscal impact of the Microenterprise Development Fund.
The New York State FY2019 budget addresses federal tax law changes by decoupling from the federal code to prevent a $1 billion unplanned tax increase and implementing new measures like the Employer Compensation Expense Tax. While these adjustments help mitigate the impact of the federal SALT cap, the state must continue to monitor these changes and consider adopting an Unincorporated Business Tax for pass-through entities.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
State officials must vigilantly monitor and assess the effects of these changes on taxpayers and the economy.
State officials should work to design and adopt an Unincorporated Business Tax for pass-through entities during the Legislative Session.
Key Data
$1 billion
— Unplanned tax increase eliminated by the State’s decoupling from the federal tax code.
$1.3 billion
— Annual cost of wasteful property tax relief credits that will be extended.
New York faces a $1 billion unplanned tax increase due to the federal Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, necessitating immediate legislative action to decouple state tax definitions from federal changes. State leaders should implement specific tax reforms, including new charitable funds and business tax adjustments, to maintain economic competitiveness and protect taxpayers from these federally driven increases.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
Create charitable public education and health funds for the State and authorize localities to do the same, provided that a mechanism is included to ensure those funds are treated in a transparent and accountable manner.
Decouple the personal exemption, enhanced child tax credit, and the state and local tax deduction cap from the federal definitions to mitigate $740 million of the $1 billion unplanned tax increase.
Adopt the Governor's proposed technical business tax change clarifying that corporations may not reflect partial federal deduction on foreign income deemed repatriated on State tax returns.
Adopt an optional Employer Compensation Expense Tax (ECET) covering wages of high-salary employees.
Adopt an Unincorporated Business Tax (UBT) to preserve deductibility for pass-through entities.
Identify and adopt reforms for 2019 that allow continued conformity to the federal definitions for the standard deduction, miscellaneous deductions, medical expense deduction, and alimony changes that eliminate the unplanned tax increases.
Consider broader reforms to improve competitiveness and streamline the tax system.
Key Data
$740 million
— Amount of the $1 billion unplanned tax increase that can be mitigated by decoupling personal exemptions and tax credits from federal definitions.
$1 billion
— Total amount of the unplanned tax increase resulting from the federal Tax Cuts and Jobs Act.
$200,000
— Threshold for wages of high-salary employees to be covered under the proposed optional Employer Compensation Expense Tax.
6.65 percent
— Proposed rate for the optional Employer Compensation Expense Tax.
The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act creates significant challenges for New York by capping state and local tax deductions, which threatens to reduce competitiveness and drive unplanned tax increases. To protect the local economy, the City and State must implement practical solutions that avoid allowing federal policy to dictate unsound local tax strategies.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
The City and the State should respond with practical solutions to send a clear signal that New York will defend its economy by protecting its taxpayers and businesses.
New York should not allow counterproductive federal tax policy to drive unsound City and State tax policy.
While the City and State should move quickly with solutions to address immediate problems, both must also allow time for deeper analysis and experience for complex issues.
The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act creates significant challenges for New York State by capping state and local tax deductions, which threatens to reduce competitiveness and drive residents and businesses away. This federal policy change could result in $1 billion in unplanned personal income tax increases and $109 million in business tax increases for the state.
Key Data
$1 billion
— unplanned State personal income tax increases resulting from the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act
$109 million
— State business tax increases resulting from the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act
$9.5 billion is CBC’s estimate of the extra taxes New Yorkers will pay due to the cap on the state and local tax deduction, known as the SALT cap, enacted in the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017. Andrew Rein, director of CBC's Special Committee on Federal Tax Changes,…
The proposed New York State Executive Budget for fiscal year 2019 includes controversial tax measures, such as a business tax credit deferral and a new tax on health insurance companies, while failing to address the inefficiencies of the School Tax Relief (STAR) program. Policymakers are urged to repeal the STAR program to save $3.4 billion annually and to ensure online retailers are taxed equally to brick-and-mortar businesses.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
The State should repeal the School Tax Relief (STAR) program entirely, as it is a poorly designed program that drives excessive benefits to wealthy taxpayers.
Online sales should be subject to the same taxes as brick and mortar retailers, regardless of the intricacies of how those sales are arranged.
If the business tax credits are unnecessary, they should be repealed; otherwise, the business tax credits should be paid as scheduled.
The State should reject the proposed Health Insurance Windfall Tax because there is no legitimate justification for targeting this specific industry when other sectors will receive the same tax benefits.
Key Data
$2 million
— The threshold for taxpayers claiming business tax credits subject to the proposed three-year deferral.
$3.4 billion
— The amount the State would save annually if the School Tax Relief (STAR) program were repealed entirely.
$1.2 billion
— The annual cost of the property tax rebate based on a property owner's STAR savings.
$750 million
— The revenues included in the Fiscal Year 2019 Financial Plan attributable to the conversion of nonprofit health insurance companies to for-profit status.
Gov. Andrew Cuomo this week gave Republican lawmakers in the state Senate a choice: Back his proposed tax and fee increases or face potential cuts to schools and health care. Watch the original segment here .
New York State Budget Director Robert Mujica reviewed the New York State Executive Budget for Fiscal Year 2019, as well as the Governor's proposals to respond to recently enacted federal tax law changes.
New York faces a potential $1 billion net state tax increase due to federal tax law changes, necessitating state-level adjustments to maintain competitiveness and prevent resident flight. Proposed solutions include targeted uncoupling from federal tax definitions, implementing charitable deductions for education or health care, and introducing a voluntary Employer Compensation Expense Tax.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
New York should uncouple from specific federal tax changes that would have the most undesired effects, such as personal exemptions and child tax credits, while allowing conformity with others.
Proposed legislation regarding charitable deductions must assure the funds are governed by the same transparency, accountability, and legislative oversight requirements as apply to other governmental spending.
The proposed voluntary Employer Compensation Expense Tax will need to be fully analyzed and informed by the continued input of experts and stakeholders before implementation.
Because the Employer Compensation Expense Tax proposal would not go into effect until 2019, it is appropriate to continue refining it beyond and outside the budget adoption process.
Key Data
$1 Billion
— The amount of the unplanned net state tax increase on New Yorkers that would occur without state-level action in response to federal tax law.
New York taxpayers could lose as much as $14.3 billion in federal tax deductions because of the capping of the state and local tax deduction in the new federal tax law. NYS Budget Director Robert Mujica and NYC First Deputy Mayor Dean Fuleihan discuss the potential impact and possible responses…
The federal tax overhaul passed last month may have enormous impacts in New York and could upend the relationship between the federal government and the states. CBC and the CUNY Graduate School of Journalism gathered experts to assess the impact and potential city and state responses in a special half-day…
$168.2 billion is the NYS Executive Budget for Fiscal Year 2018-2019. Dave Friedfel joins WT[D]P to discuss budget growth, school aid, medicaid, economic development, and proposals to deal with the impact of federal tax law changes.
The New York State Executive Budget for Fiscal Year 2019 relies on short-term fixes and speculative revenues, such as $3 billion from health insurance conversions, rather than addressing the structural issue of spending outpacing revenue. While the budget includes some positive steps like extending sales tax to internet purchases, it fails to implement fundamental reforms to economic development spending and education aid formulas.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
The state should extend the sales tax to all internet purchases to broaden the tax base.
The Governor and Legislature need to adopt significant reforms to the State's economic development program to ensure tangible success.
The state should be conservative in its budget forecasts and include spending constraints to address the long-term structural problem of spending outpacing revenues.
Key Data
$300 Million
— Proposed spending for the High Technology Innovation and Economic Development Infrastructure Program.
$600 Million
— Proposed spending for a life sciences laboratory in the Capital District.
$3 Billion
— Revenue attributed to non-profit health insurers converting to for-profit status.
$2 Billion
— Potential operating budget shortfall if health insurance conversion revenue assumptions are not met.
$1 Billion
— Amount that would not be available to offset the loss of federal healthcare subsidies if conversion assumptions are not met.
72%
— Estimated portion of MTA dedicated taxes and subsidies already paid by New York City residents and businesses.
The federal "Tax Cuts and Jobs Act" necessitates an evaluation of its substantial impacts on the economy, property values, and tax revenues of New York City and New York State. A special committee of experts has been formed to identify these effects and develop strategies to mitigate potential harm to the region.
New York faces a significant budget gap of up to $6.3 billion, necessitating a careful review of existing tax expenditures and potential new revenue sources. Policymakers should evaluate the efficacy of current property tax relief rebates and middle-income tax cuts while considering structural reforms to economic development spending and transportation funding.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
The Governor should evaluate whether to end the Property Tax Relief rebates to stop this poor use of state funds.
The State should consider whether to delay the Middle Income Tax Cuts to help close the projected budget gap.
The Governor should propose economic development reforms, including an end to project-specific appropriations and the creation of a 'database of deals'.
The Legislature should add a hearing to inquire about the state budget overall, including out-year deficits and economic assumptions.
Key Data
$6.3 billion
— The high end of the reported budget gap before accounting for potential federal policy changes.
$1.2 billion
— The projected cost of Property Tax Relief rebates in state fiscal year 2019.
$1.1 billion
— The projected reduction in State revenues from Middle Income Tax Cuts in fiscal year 2019.
$236 million
— The projected reduction in State revenues from Middle Income Tax Cuts in fiscal year 2018.
New York's film tax credit program is a wasteful expenditure that should be repealed, though the state will not see immediate savings due to existing rollover provisions and multi-year claim requirements. Because credits are often allocated years in advance and paid out over time, the budget will not realize the full financial benefits of repealing the program for at least four years.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
The state should repeal the New York state Film Tax Credit program.
The state should enact a timely repeal of the wasteful film tax credit because the budget won’t realize full financial benefits for at least four years.
Key Data
$420 million
— The annual cap for the film tax credit program, which is effectively rendered superfluous by rollover provisions.
$5 million
— The threshold for companies claiming credits that requires them to spread the claim over three years.
$6 million
— An example of a credit awarded in 2017 from the 2019 allocation, which would result in subsidies being paid out as late as 2022.
four years
— The minimum amount of time it will take for the state budget to realize full financial benefits from repealing the film tax credit.
New York State currently spends $5 billion annually on economic development programs, yet new initiatives should be halted until existing spending is properly evaluated and reforms are implemented. The proposed expansion of these programs, including a new $5 million tax credit, risks repeating the trajectory of the Film Tax Credit Program, which grew from a $25 million cap to a $420 million annual cost.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
The Governor should veto the three bills that would expand the State’s economic development programs.
No new economic development programs should be approved until reforms are put in place to improve evaluation, procurement, and disclosure requirements and existing spending is effectively evaluated.
Narrowly focused economic development incentives should be curtailed because they do not provide a return on investment.
Key Data
$5 billion
— The amount the State already spends annually on economic development programs.
$420 million
— The current annual cost of the Film Tax Credit Program, which has grown significantly from its original cap.
$5 million
— The annual cap for the proposed new refundable tax credit for companies that hire female and minority writers and directors.
$100,000
— The maximum grant amount authorized for small businesses supporting the commercialization of innovative energy and environmental technology.
$25 million
— The original annual cap for the Film Tax Credit Program when it was first adopted.
Read original article here . Governor Andrew Cuomo is back in New York after a rare, overnight trip to California, fundraising with Hollywood executives whose industry has benefited from New York's $420 million film tax credit program. "It's a glamorous form of coporate welfare," said Ken Girardin, Empire Center analyst.…
Vice President Maria Doulis discusses issues such as New York State and local tax deductions, New York City’s $85 billion fiscal plan for 2018, and the inequity of New York City’s real estate property tax system. Original video can be found here .
New York's Health Care Reform Act (HCRA) taxes, which generate over $4.3 billion annually, rely on regressive levies on health insurance premiums that disproportionately burden lower-wage workers. The state should replace these inequitable revenue streams with broader-based taxes and reform the irrational, regional funding structure currently used to support graduate medical education.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
The Legislature should think creatively about how to replace the HCRA taxes in future budgets instead of continuing to renew them.
New York should shift the financing of health care programs to broader-based taxes, such as the income tax or sales tax, to lower premiums and ease the burden on lower-wage workers.
Policymakers should explore alternative waivers or special provisions to retain federal Medicaid funding while transitioning to a more progressive revenue stream.
Any state funds allocated to graduate medical education should be raised from a tax levied uniformly across the state rather than through inequitable regional rates.
The Governor and the Legislature should develop a new strategy for raising equivalent revenue that is less burdensome for those who pay for health insurance.
Key Data
$4.3 billion
— Annual yield from the two major taxes authorized under the Health Care Reform Act.
$3.2 billion
— Total annual yield from the hospital revenue surcharge.
$1 billion
— New York State's annual commitment to funding graduate medical education.
$500 million
— Amount of federal funding generated annually through the Medicaid revenue surcharge.
$1.1 billion
— Annual statewide yield from the Covered Lives Assessment tax on commercial health insurance.
9.63 percent
— Surcharge rate levied on hospital revenue from private insurance.
New York’s economic development tax incentive programs are the most expensive in the nation, costing $8.25 billion in 2015, yet there is little evidence that these subsidies effectively drive economic growth or job creation. To address this, the state should implement a comprehensive reform plan that includes establishing a unified budget, standardizing performance metrics, and increasing transparency regarding incentive recipients.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
The state should establish a unified economic development budget that captures state and local costs.
Policymakers should use standardized metrics across all economic development initiatives.
The state should publish a database of deals to shine a light on recipients of incentives.
The state should improve program design to follow best practices and to reward actual performance.
The state should make administrative reforms to procurement and oversight rules.
Key Data
$45 billion
— Estimated cost of state and local economic development tax incentives to taxpayers in 2015.
$8.25 billion
— Total amount of incentives awarded by New York in 2015.
2.5 times
— The rate at which New York's incentive use exceeds the national average.
New York's requirement for local governments to fund a portion of Medicaid costs creates an inequitable tax burden that varies significantly by county and disproportionately affects taxpayers in less affluent areas. To address this, the state should eliminate the local funding requirement and assume full financial responsibility for the program to ensure more equitable tax treatment and better cost control.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
The state should take steps to fix a long-standing problem with how it pays for the program: its unusual requirement for substantial local government financing.
The State should assume responsibility for the local share liability over a period of four or five years.
New, statewide revenues will be required to replace the current local share in a way that relieves the disproportionate burden placed on taxpayers in low income counties.
Full state financing is the best way to achieve continued cost control in a program fully controlled by the State.
Key Data
$7.1 billion
— New York’s counties will pay more than $7.1 billion for Medicaid in state fiscal year 2012.
$6.5 billion
— In fiscal year 2008, New York’s counties paid $6.5 billion for Medicaid.
$555
— New York City ranks first in local Medicaid payments at $555 per capita.
$1,292
— An individual with $200,000 in annual income pays $1,292 toward Medicaid if living in Chemung County.
$1,361
— A homeowner in Chemung County with a property valued at $250,000 pays on average $1,361 towards Medicaid costs.
13 percent
— Between 2005 and 2010, local Medicaid administrative employees increased 13 percent.
The proposed fiscal year 2018 budget includes extensions of the Millionaires’ Tax and the Empire State Film Tax Credit, despite the latter costing taxpayers $420 million annually. Recommendations include freezing the poorly targeted School Tax Relief program, imposing a moratorium on new economic development spending, and ensuring tax policies are revisited if federal changes occur.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
While STAR should be repealed, freezing the benefit will stem the growth of this poorly targeted program and is a step in the right direction.
Before extending the current rate of the Personal Income Tax surcharge, serious consideration should be given to the financial feasibility of imposing a top rate below 8.82 percent.
The extension of the Millionaires’ Tax surcharge should include a requirement to revisit the tax if substantial federal changes are adopted.
The Empire State Film Tax Credit should be repealed or substantially decreased, as many other states have repealed or substantially decreased their film tax credits.
A moratorium on new economic development programs should be imposed until more transparency and results are achieved, including the creation of a consolidated economic development budget and universal reporting requirements.
Key Data
$1.8 billion
— The amount of one-time financial settlements in the current year that should be used for long-term benefits rather than operating expenses.
$420 million
— The annual cost to state taxpayers of the Empire State Film Tax Credit.
$319 million
— The amount by which the Executive Budget would increase spending by Empire State Development.
$650 million
— The total amount of non-ESD economic development capital spending proposed in the Executive Budget.
New York State faces a projected $3.5 Billion budget gap for fiscal year 2018, raising questions about how the state will address this shortfall and whether expiring personal income tax surcharges will be renewed. The executive budget proposals include $15.5 Billion in new spending across various capital and operating initiatives, necessitating clarity on funding sources and cost-containment measures.
Key Data
$3.5 Billion
— Projected budget gap for fiscal year 2018 as of November.
$15.5 Billion
— Total cost of items with fiscal impact included in the Governor's proposals.
New York should reject proposed legislation creating new tax credits for music and digital gaming production, as these narrowly focused subsidies lack a proven return on investment. Instead, tax policy with significant budget implications should be addressed within the context of comprehensive budget negotiations and financial planning.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
Governor Cuomo should veto A.10083-b/S.7485-b, which would create new tax credits for music and digital gaming media production.
The state should curtail narrowly focused tax credits rather than expanding them, as they do not provide a return on investment.
Industries that would not withstand the scrutiny of criteria applied under the Excelsior program should not receive State subsidies.
Matters of tax policy that have significant budget implications should be dealt with in the midst of budget negotiations and an overall financial plan.
Key Data
$25 million
— Annual cost of the proposed music and digital gaming media production tax credits.
$150 million
— Total estimated cost of the proposed tax credits over the next three years.
$25 million
— Original annual cap of the Film Tax Credit Program when it was first adopted.
$420 million
— Current annual size of the Film Tax Credit Program.
New York State provides a wide array of tax expenditures and credits, ranging from manufacturing incentives and agricultural exemptions to energy-related tax breaks. Data regarding the START-UP New York program indicates that participating companies reported receiving $56,561 in tax benefits in 2014 and $1.2 million in 2015.
Key Data
$56,561
— Companies reported receiving $56,561 in tax benefits under the START-UP New York program in 2014.
$1.2 million
— Companies reported receiving $1.2 million in tax benefits under the START-UP New York program in 2015.
New York State's economic development programs, including START-UP NY and the Excelsior Jobs Program, often lack sufficient oversight and accountability, leading to inefficient use of public funds. The state should shift toward a pay-for-performance model and halt ad hoc project-specific appropriations until clear eligibility and evaluation criteria are established.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
The personal income tax benefit in START-UP NY should be converted into a business tax credit based on wages paid to clarify the intended beneficiary.
Recently added industries, notably music and entertainment, should be excluded from the Excelsior program as they do not require state assistance to be economically viable.
All economic development programs should follow the Excelsior model of pay-for-performance to ensure subsidies are provided only for investments and wages that have actually been expended.
The state should implement a cessation to project-specific appropriations for economic development until eligibility criteria are established and accountability mechanisms are enhanced.
The jobs credit in the Excelsior program should be capped, as the current rate of 6.85 percent of wages subsidizes salaries that are vastly in excess of the State Median Household Income.
Key Data
$560,000
— Tax incentives received by the Muller Quaker factory through the Excelsior Jobs program.
$200 million
— Amount invested by the Muller Quaker factory before closing.
$2,000
— Cost to the State per job per year for the Muller Quaker factory.
$1 billion
— Amount the State is paying to build a factory in Buffalo for SolarCity.
5,000
— Number of jobs promised by SolarCity at the end of 10 years.
$20,000
— Cost per job per year for the SolarCity project in a best-case scenario.
New York State's heavy reliance on volatile personal income taxes makes its budget highly susceptible to economic downturns, with potential revenue losses reaching up to $59 billion over four years during a recession. To mitigate these risks, the state must prioritize building financial reserves now to avoid necessary tax increases or spending cuts when the next recession occurs.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
In order to counter the potential impacts of an economic downturn, the State should build its reserves now.
To address the volatility of state revenues, the State should prepare for future revenue declines by acknowledging that the current economic expansion will not continue indefinitely.
If reserves are insufficient to cover revenue shortfalls, the State should plan for necessary tax increases or spending cuts to maintain fiscal stability.
Key Data
$59 billion
— The potential cumulative revenue loss for New York State over four years during a recession.
18.2 percent
— The potential percentage of tax revenues lost over four years during a recession.
63 percent
— The share of New York State tax revenues derived from personal income taxes in 2016.
41.5 percent
— The contribution of the top 1 percent of taxpayers to personal income tax revenues in 2015.
$3 billion
— The annual revenue provided by the personal income tax surcharge on high-income earners.
$74.7 billion
— The total amount of tax revenues collected by New York State in 2016.
The 2016-17 state budget includes significant personal income tax cuts for married couples earning between $24,000 and $300,000, which are projected to save taxpayers $4.2 billion annually by 2025. However, the budget relies on optimistic economic growth projections and fails to implement structural reforms like capping STAR benefits or rationalizing retiree health insurance shares to secure long-term financial stability.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
The state should prioritize rationalizing retiree health insurance shares to help secure the state's financial future.
The state should implement capping STAR benefits to improve the long-term financial plan.
The state should focus on extending rational funding plans for SUNY and CUNY to ensure fiscal stability.
The state should reject tax credits for donations to private schools as they are less-than-desirable proposals.
The state should reject tax credits for driving on the Thruway as they are less-than-desirable proposals.
Key Data
$4.2 billion
— Annual savings for taxpayers by 2025 resulting from personal income tax decreases for married couples.
$54 billion
— Total value of the five-year transportation capital plan approved by the state.
$24.8 billion
— Total state education spending, which grew by 6.5 percent.
$1.2 billion
— Projected state budget deficit for fiscal year 2018.
$3 billion
— Projected state budget deficit for fiscal year 2019.
$3.4 billion
— Projected state budget deficit for fiscal year 2020.
The fiscal year 2017 budget increases school aid by 6.5 percent and Medicaid spending by 3.4 percent while relying on a growing capital budget for ad-hoc initiatives like $1.3 billion in nanotechnology subsidies. Future budget gaps are expected to widen due to planned tax cuts, even as necessary reforms to the School Tax Relief program and retiree health benefits remain unaddressed.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
The state should reauthorize a rational tuition policy for SUNY and CUNY.
The state should freeze the poorly targeted School Tax Relief (STAR) program.
The state should reform retiree health benefits in a responsible and sustainable manner.
Key Data
6.5%
— Growth rate of school aid in the fiscal year 2017 budget.
3.4%
— Growth rate of Medicaid spending in the fiscal year 2017 budget.
$1.3 billion
— Subsidies allocated for nanotechnology and high-tech manufacturing initiatives.
$1 billion
— Funding allocated for the Jacob Javits Center expansion.
$300 million
— Funding allocated for a research corridor on Long Island.
New York's plan to use $2.3 billion in bank settlement funds to subsidize the Thruway Authority deviates from the principle that roads should be funded by user fees, effectively using general state funds to underwrite motor vehicle use. Instead of relying on these subsidies, the state should maintain the Authority's self-supporting model through tolls, which remain historically low compared to other regional infrastructure.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
The Governor and the Legislature should return to a sounder approach to funding the Thruway Authority by relying on user fees rather than state subsidies.
The Legislature should concur with the proposal to remove the Canal Corporation's financial burden from the Thruway Authority.
The Legislature should reject the proposal to require the Thruway Authority to pay for its own policing, which costs approximately $35 million annually.
The State should avoid allocating additional bank settlement funds in the 2016-2017 budget to subsidize the Thruway Authority.
Key Data
$2.3 billion
— Proposed subsidy for the Thruway Authority from bank settlements.
$4.6 billion
— Total bank settlement funds appropriated in the fiscal year 2015-2016 budget.
$1.3 billion
— Amount appropriated to the Authority for its capital program in the fiscal year 2015-2016 budget.
$1.4 billion
— Amount spent by the Thruway for canal operations and capital from 1993 to 2015.
$50 million
— Estimated annual operating losses saved by removing the Canal Corporation from the Thruway.
$35 million
— Annual cost of policing the Thruway that the Executive Budget proposes shifting to the Authority.
The state should convert the School Tax Relief (STAR) program into a personal income tax credit to improve transparency and prevent abuse, while rejecting new tax credits like the Education Scholarship and Program Tax Credit and the Thruway Toll Tax Credit. Additionally, a moratorium should be placed on expansions in economic development spending, including tax-free initiatives, until existing programs are evaluated for effectiveness.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
Convert the STAR exemption into a personal income tax (PIT) credit to allow property taxpayers to see changes in their school district’s tax levy more clearly and prevent taxpayers from receiving the benefit on multiple homes.
Reject the Education Scholarship and Program Tax Credit (ESPTC) as it is an inappropriate and unnecessary subsidy to private and parochial schools.
Reject the $340 million Thruway Toll Tax Credit (TTTC) because it would encourage additional driving and put further stress on the Thruway’s infrastructure.
Declare a moratorium on expansions in economic development spending, including tax-free initiatives, until the benefits of existing programs can be examined carefully and unsuccessful programs terminated.
Reject the extension of the Excelsior Jobs Tax Credits.
Key Data
$3.4 billion
— Annual cost of the STAR (School Tax Relief) program to state taxpayers.
$1 million
— Maximum amount per taxpayer provided by the Education Scholarship and Program Tax Credit (ESPTC).
$70 million
— Cap for the Education Scholarship and Program Tax Credit (ESPTC) program.
$340 million
— Cost of the Thruway Toll Tax Credit (TTTC).
$600 million
— Amount of sales tax revenue shifted from New York City to the State over three years through the Sales Tax Asset Receivable Corporation (STARC).
New York City's property tax system is riddled with inequities, including disparate effective tax rates across different property classes and neighborhoods caused by assessment caps and phase-ins. To address these issues while raising $2 billion in revenue, the city should consider reforms such as consolidating homeowners into a single tax category or eliminating assessment caps and phase-ins to create a more transparent and equitable system.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
The city should consolidate all homeowners into a single category to reduce the effective tax rate gap between homeowners and other property owners.
Policymakers should eliminate the caps on assessment increases for Class 1 properties to ensure more equitable taxation.
The city should value condos and co-ops based on market values using sales prices rather than income-producing methodologies to reduce undervaluation.
To protect vulnerable residents, the city should provide special exemptions or property tax 'circuit breakers' to elderly or low-income homeowners instead of using broad assessment caps.
The city should eliminate the caps and phase-in provisions for all properties to address inequities among appreciating and depreciating properties.
Key Data
$2 billion
— The target amount of additional annual property tax revenue the proposed reforms aim to raise.
$4.5 billion
— The estimated revenue foregone in fiscal year 2015 due to existing property tax cap and phase-in rules.
$1.6 billion
— The amount of revenue lost in fiscal year 2015 specifically due to assessment caps applied to smaller rental properties.
$846 million
— The revenue raised in fiscal year 2015 from the revaluation of condos and co-ops and the application of a 6 percent assessment ratio.
$936 million
— The revenue raised in fiscal year 2015 from the elimination of assessment growth caps on 1-3 family homes.
$21.1 billion
— The estimated baseline property tax levy for New York City in fiscal year 2015.
The FY2016-2017 New York State Executive Budget maintains spending restraint and avoids tax increases, though it relies on $1.7 billion in unspecified savings and problematic tax credits for toll payers and school donations. Furthermore, the budget fails to reform school aid formulas that disproportionately benefit wealthier districts and introduces over $1 billion in questionable economic development subsidies.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
The State should cap benefits for the School Tax Relief (STAR) program to improve the program.
The State should avoid using one-time revenue to subsidize tolls through tax credits, as these funds are necessary for infrastructure maintenance.
The State should improve school aid formulas to prevent the allocation of new aid in ways that favor wealthier districts.
The State should reject the proposed new education tax credits for donations to public and private schools.
Key Data
$1.7 billion
— savings in fiscal year 2018
$4.6 billion
— savings in fiscal year 2020
$90 million
— subsidy to the Thruway Authority for state police and other operations
$2.3 billion
— total one-time legal settlement funds
$900 million
— settlement funds for transportation
$700 million
— settlement funds for the Thruway Authority
New York's Excelsior Jobs Program has proven to be a more efficient and targeted economic development initiative than its predecessor, the Empire Zones program, by utilizing stricter performance-based tax credit allocations. However, recent legislative modifications that expand eligibility and program length threaten to increase costs and weaken the program's fiscal discipline.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
The state should avoid the temptation to loosen restrictions and performance requirements to entice more entrants to the Excelsior Jobs Program.
Empire State Development should remain cautious and vigilant in administering and monitoring the Excelsior program.
Legislators should avoid additional modification to expand the Excelsior program.
Key Data
$470 million
— Allocated in tax credits over the lifetime of the benefit period for the Excelsior Jobs Program.
$2 billion
— Allocated in tax credits over the lifetime of the benefit period for the Empire Zones program.
$250 million
— Annual program cap for the Excelsior Jobs Program peaking in 2015.
$478 million
— Unused credits accumulated by Empire State Development during the first four years of the Excelsior program.
$1.8 billion
— Potential cost of the Excelsior program by 2019 including the allowance for rollover credits.
New York City's Metropolitan Transportation Authority faces a $2.6 billion capital funding gap, which could be addressed by expanding and increasing taxes on for-hire vehicle services like taxis and ride-sharing apps. Implementing these tax reforms, such as applying a per-ride tax to all black cars or restructuring the transportation sales tax, could generate significant revenue to support the transit system's capital needs.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
The state should expand the 50-cent per-ride taxicab tax to include all black car and DSP trips to help offset the negative externalities of automobile use.
Policymakers should update the per-ride tax to a percentage-based charge of 3.95 percent of the fare for all black car and DSP trips to better align the tax burden with higher average fares.
The state should reform the transportation sales tax by lowering the burden on black cars and dedicating the entire revenue stream to the MTA, potentially at a rate of 5.75 percent or 7.75 percent to close the funding gap.
Key Data
$2.6 billion
— The remaining MTA capital funding gap that needs to be filled.
$250 million
— The estimated amount the two existing taxes on TLC services will raise in 2015.
74%
— The increase in tax collections from the TLC industry from 2011 to 2015.
$33 million
— The additional revenue that would have been raised in 2015 by applying the 50-cent per-ride tax to all black car and DSP trips.
$225 million
— The potential increase in MTA revenues in 2019 from a reformed transportation sales tax.
Funding for the Metropolitan Transportation Authority relies on a mix of fares, tax subsidies, and motor vehicle cross-subsidies, with the latter currently providing only 12 percent of revenue. To address capital plan funding gaps, policy should shift toward increased reliance on motor vehicle fees, congestion pricing, and a long-term vehicle-miles-traveled tax.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
The state should implement a vehicle-miles-traveled (VMT) tax to fund transportation infrastructure over the long term.
Policymakers should pursue enhanced tolling policies, such as East River bridge tolls and congestion pricing, to generate immediate funding.
The state should increase vehicle registration fees to provide immediate funding for the MTA.
Drivers should be required to cover more than twice their current proportion of mass transit costs through motor vehicle cross-subsidies.
Key Data
$4.2 billion
— Estimated amount NYC taxpayers contribute to the nearly $6 billion allocated to the MTA from state-authorized regional and statewide taxes.
73 percent
— Share of the $1.3 billion regional payroll tax paid by New York City employers.
12 percent
— Current portion of MTA transit services funding derived from motor vehicle cross-subsidies.
$29.8 billion
— Total cost of the MTA's five-year capital plan.
$9.8 billion
— Reduced funding gap for the MTA capital plan.
$1.3 billion
— Total amount of the regional payroll tax.
The MTA's 2015-2019 capital plan faces a $9.8 billion funding gap, with debates over City versus State contributions obscuring the fact that both rely on the same regional tax base. Leaders should move beyond this framing and implement new revenue streams, such as congestion pricing, bridge tolls, or a vehicle-miles traveled fee, to supplement existing tax subsidies and fares.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
The Citizens Budget Commission supports more funding for the MTA from motor vehicle cross-subsidies.
In the longer term, funding should be a vehicle-miles traveled fee system which could also fund transportation infrastructure state-wide.
More immediate funding should come from East River bridge tolls and other congestion pricing mechanisms or higher vehicle registration fees.
City, State, and MTA leaders should drop the 'City/State' frame of reference and develop a concrete plan to put the necessary funding in place.
Key Data
$9.8 billion
— The funding gap for the MTA's 2015-2019 capital plan.
$580 million
— The amount New York City taxpayers fund annually in operating and capital support to the MTA.
$4.2 billion
— The estimated amount New York City taxpayers contribute to the nearly $6 billion allocated to the MTA from state-authorized regional and statewide taxes.
73%
— The portion of the MTA’s $1.3 billion regional payroll tax paid by New York City firms.
$2.2 billion
— The estimated savings from efficiencies in the MTA capital plan.
48%, 40%, and 12%
— The current funding breakdown for MTA transit services from fares, tax subsidies, and motor vehicle cross-subsidies, respectively.
New York State's recent legislative package includes $1.5 billion in new annual obligations, including a $1.3 billion property tax relief rebate program that is predicated on future budget surpluses that are not guaranteed. These new expenditures exacerbate existing fiscal challenges, as the state faces out-year budget gaps projected to reach $4.2 billion by fiscal year 2018-2019.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
Lawmakers must now be prepared to enact cost-saving measures to produce the “surpluses” they just spent.
Key Data
$1.5 billion
— New state obligations annually resulting from the legislative package.
$1.3 billion
— Annual cost of the new property tax relief rebate program when fully implemented.
$4.2 billion
— Projected out-year budget gap in fiscal year 2018-2019.
$250 million
— Increase in aid to nonpublic schools.
$783 million
— Annual cost of the Property Tax Freeze Rebate.
$410 million
— Annual cost of the Family Tax Relief Rebate.
The Metropolitan Transportation Authority requires a more stable financing model, which should be achieved through a "25-50-25" formula that balances costs between bridge and tunnel tolls, transit fares, and state and local tax subsidies. This approach would reduce reliance on borrowing and debt while ensuring the system is adequately funded to maintain a state of good repair.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
The cost of bridge and tunnel facilities should be funded entirely through user fees paid by motorists.
Motorists’ tolls and fees should also generate a surplus large enough to cover approximately one-quarter of the cost of providing mass transit services.
Mass transit users should pay fares sufficient to cover approximately one-half the operating cost of those services.
State and local tax subsidies to mass transit should cover at least one-quarter of the operating cost of those services and fund “catch-up” capital investments needed to bring the system to a state of good repair.
New York should adapt and implement new policies imposing fees for vehicle access to the central business district.
Key Data
$3.6 billion
— Projected deficit in 2016.
$17.8 billion
— Cumulative unfunded OPEB liability as of the end of 2011.
$39 billion
— Projected debt outstanding in 2015.
$2.6 billion
— Additional annual revenue provided by the 25-50-25 policy by 2016.
New York's Brownfield Cleanup Program issued $1.1 billion in tax breaks between 2008 and 2013, with 85 percent of benefits going toward redevelopment rather than environmental remediation. Reforming the program to limit eligibility for tangible property tax credits is necessary to ensure benefits are focused on actual cleanup costs rather than real estate development.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
The State should implement further tightening of eligibility for the Brownfield Cleanup Program because it has functioned more as a real estate development program rather than an environmental cleanup program.
Policymakers should better focus benefits on the cost of cleanup and environmental remediation rather than on redevelopment credits.
Key Data
$1.1 Billion
— Total tax breaks issued to clean up and redevelop 115 sites from 2008 to 2013.
85 percent
— Share of total benefits accounted for by the tangible property tax credit.
58 percent
— Amount by which the tangible property credit cost more than developers’ cost of site cleanup and groundwater remediation.
$963 million
— Cost of the tangible property credit.
$609 million
— Cost of site cleanup and groundwater remediation.
64 percent
— Share of total tax breaks accounted for by the top 10 projects.
New York's economic development programs have grown significantly, with annual investments reaching $8.1 billion in 2014, yet these programs often lack sufficient accountability and evidence-based targeting. To improve cost-effectiveness, the state should standardize performance metrics, implement comprehensive disclosure requirements, and reevaluate existing programs before expanding them or creating new ones.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
The State should utilize the framework for designing and evaluating economic development programs to improve the cost-effectiveness of the State’s large investment in this area.
All investments should be coordinated and aligned to regional strategies, performance metrics should be standardized for all programs and across all regions, and more comprehensive disclosure requirements should be put in place so that the costs and benefits of each project can be weighed.
All programs should be reevaluated for effectiveness before existing programs are increased or new ones are added.
The qualifications for Excelsior tax credits, already weakened once, should be strengthened.
The State should limit the Investment Tax Credit to manufacturers, eliminate the credit for used property, and end the financial services Investment Tax Credit altogether.
Key Data
$8.1 billion
— Annual economic development investments in 2014.
$7.0 billion
— Annual economic development investments in 2010.
$2.8 billion
— Expected spending on economic development tax expenditures in fiscal year 2014.
$427 million
— Estimated cost of the film production tax credit in 2014.
$1.2 billion
— State’s unused Investment Tax Credit liability as of 2013.
$150 million
— Projected annual cost of START-UP NY by fiscal year 2017.
The FY2016 New York State budget faces critical decisions regarding the allocation of $4.5 billion in windfall settlement funds and the potential extension of expiring middle-bracket personal income tax rates. Policymakers must also address the sustainability of Medicaid spending under a 3.6% cap and determine the future of various tax credit programs, including those for Brownfields and economic development.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
The Governor should propose an extension for the lower personal income tax rates for middle brackets that are set to expire in 2017 and identify how to pay for it.
The state should implement sensible reforms to Brownfields tax credits following the Governor's veto.
The state should evaluate whether to continue the expansion of economic development tax credit programs without clear, documented benefits.
Key Data
$4.5B
— Proposed one-time spending from the windfall settlement.
3.6%
— The spending cap for Medicaid.
2%
— The growth assumption for the budget.
5th
— The number of years agency spending has been frozen.
The Port Authority Trans-Hudson (PATH) transit system faces growing annual deficits, projected to reach $487 million by 2018, which are currently covered by bridge and tunnel toll revenues. To address this, a new financing model is proposed that would introduce state or local tax subsidies and higher fares to create a more equitable distribution of costs among passengers, motorists, and the general population.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
Auto user fees should pay for the facilities available to drivers; therefore, the cost of bridge and tunnel facilities should be funded entirely through tolls and fees paid by the motorists who use them.
Motorists’ tolls and fees should also generate a surplus large enough to cover a share of the cost of providing mass transit services.
Mass transit users should pay fares sufficient to cover a share of the cost of those services.
State and local tax subsidies to mass transit should cover a share of the cost of those services.
PATH should adopt a consistent funding structure that shares the cost of operating the transit system among all who benefit.
Key Data
$487 million
— Projected annual deficit for PATH in 2018.
$383 million
— PATH's annual deficit in 2013.
23%
— Share of operating expenses and capital-related expenses covered by fares in 2013.
$1.96
— Average fare revenue per ride in 2013.
$8.45
— Actual full cost of a ride in 2013.
69%
— Projected deficit as a percent of total expenses in 2018.
Governor Cuomo’s $142.1 billion fiscal year 2015 Executive Budget aims for a $2 billion annual surplus by limiting state operating fund spending growth to 2%. Achieving this goal requires significant unspecified spending reductions to offset projected budget gaps and the fiscal impact of proposed tax cuts.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
The legislature should work with the Governor to adopt budgets that keep state operating fund growth at 2% or less to ensure the projected surplus becomes a reality.
Policymakers must address budget gaps beginning in fiscal year 2015-16 if the proposed tax cuts are adopted or if the Legislature adds equivalent spending commitments.
Key Data
$142.1 billion
— The total value of the fiscal year 2015 Executive Budget presented by Governor Andrew Cuomo.
$2 billion
— The projected annual surplus beginning in fiscal year 2016-17 that relies on strict spending limits.
$1.7 billion
— The amount of unspecified spending reductions inserted into the financial plan for fiscal year 2015-16.
$3.6 billion
— The amount of unspecified spending reductions inserted into the financial plan for fiscal year 2017-18.
$1.5 billion
— The projected budget gap for fiscal year 2015-16 if the unspecified spending reduction placeholders are excluded.
$3.5 billion
— The projected budget gap for fiscal year 2017-18 if the unspecified spending reduction placeholders are excluded.
Governor Cuomo's proposed $2 billion in tax cuts requires limiting annual state spending growth to 2% to generate the necessary surplus, a goal that is difficult to achieve given statutory spending caps on Medicaid and school aid. Achieving this target necessitates significant reductions in other areas of state operations, which have already faced years of cost containment and workforce reductions.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
The state must limit State Operating Funds disbursements to an annual growth rate of no more than 2 percent to pay for the proposed tax cuts.
Policymakers should curtail expectations for growth in other local government assistance to meet the spending growth goal.
The state must pursue continued discipline and serious efforts at agency reform and redesign to keep spending growth under 2 percent.
The state should resist the pressure from legislators and interest groups to increase state spending.
Key Data
$2 billion
— Proposed tax cuts in the State of the State address.
2 percent
— Target annual growth rate for State Operating Funds disbursements.
$93.8 billion
— State Operating Funds spending projected for fiscal year 2014-15.
$101.5 billion
— Projected State Operating Funds spending for fiscal year 2016-17.
200,742
— Total state workforce size.
$13.1 billion
— Cost of debt service and fringe benefits in fiscal year 2013-14.
New York City should prioritize structural property tax reform and broadening the sales tax base to generate revenue rather than relying on tax rate increases or a millionaire's tax. These measures could address systemic inequities and provide sustainable funding for municipal initiatives without harming the local economy.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
The city should end wasteful corporate tax subsidies that fail to deliver on promised jobs.
The administration should prioritize structural property tax reform to redress inequities without raising tax rates across the board.
The city should take the lead in fixing the broken, inequitable, and often inscrutable property tax system through state legislation.
The city should pursue broadening the base of the sales tax as a source of new revenue.
The city should subject more non-essential items to the sales tax to generate additional revenue.
Key Data
$930 million
— Cost of business property tax expenditures in the last fiscal year.
$30 million
— Estimated annual savings from cutting corporate tax breaks.
$4 billion
— Annual revenue sacrificed by the current property tax system.
$3.1 billion
— Annual value of the fiscal year 2004 property tax hike.
$440 million
— Annual revenue generated by raising the sales tax 0.5 percent in 2009.
$1 billion
— Potential annual revenue from broadening the sales tax base.
New York City's tax burden is significantly higher than other large U.S. cities, with personal income and commercial property taxes being particularly elevated. Policymakers should be cautious about further tax increases, as the city's already high rates and the ease of intraregional migration create significant uncertainty regarding the potential for negative economic impacts.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
Policymakers considering raising the personal income tax or the commercial property tax need to be aware that both taxes are already significantly higher than in other large cities.
Policymakers would be well advised to examine options where New York City is not as far out of line with other cities.
The policy implication is that these conditions should be considered in any initiatives to raise more revenue from the property tax.
The implications of these studies for New York City tax policy must be considered carefully because of the limited parallels between state and local circumstances.
Key Data
46%
— New York City's state and local taxes were 46% higher than the average for the other cities.
90%
— Local taxes in New York City were 90% higher than the average for other cities.
51%
— New York City's commercial property tax was 51% higher than the average for the other 14 of the 15 largest cities.
$327,000
— The annual difference in commercial property tax for a $25 million property in New York City compared to the average of the 15 largest cities is $327,000.
162%
— The commercial property tax rate in New York City was 162% higher than in Hoboken.
$596,000
— The annual difference in property tax for a $25 million commercial property in New York City compared to Hoboken is $596,000.
New York State's current tax relief programs, such as the School Tax Relief (STAR) program and the Family Tax Relief Rebate, are poorly targeted and often benefit wealthier households rather than those with the greatest financial burden. To address this, the state should reform these existing programs to better support low- and moderate-income residents while focusing on cost containment and reducing the tax burden on middle-income families.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
The Commission should be focused on repurposing and improving the significant sums already directed to local tax relief, not on spending for new programs.
The Commission should re-examine and reform the local tax relief programs on which the State already spends $4 billion annually.
The Commission could achieve its objective by better targeting STAR aid and the Family Tax Relief rebate and by expanding the Real Property Tax Credit so that all three of these programs provide deeper relief for low and moderate income households with the greatest burden.
The State should pursue further reductions in the personal income tax rates for middle income households.
The State should expand recent efforts to take over more of the local funding mandate for the Medicaid program to help reduce the combined tax burden.
Key Data
$4 billion
— Annual state spending on local tax relief programs.
$3.4 billion
— Cost of the School Tax Relief (STAR) program in fiscal year 2014.
$1,533
— STAR aid provided per pupil for the wealthiest/least-needy 10 percent of districts.
$991
— Average STAR aid provided per pupil for the least-wealthy/neediest 10 percent of districts.
$410 million
— Amount allocated for Family Tax Relief rebates scheduled to be mailed in October 2014.
$20.2 million
— Total circuit breaker credit provided to taxpayers in 2010.
The enacted fiscal year 2014 budget added $1.8 billion in annual commitments by 2017, relying on tax increases, one-time resources, and optimistic revenue forecasts to cover the costs. These measures include poorly targeted personal income tax rebates and new business tax breaks, which contribute to a projected budget gap that would have reached $6.0 billion without these revenue-raising actions.
Key Data
$1.8 billion
— Annual commitments added by the final year of the financial plan.
$6.0 billion
— Projected budget gap for fiscal year 2017 without new ways to pay for added spending and tax breaks.
$677 million
— New business tax breaks committed over three years.
$410 million
— Annual cost of personal income tax rebates for families earning between $40,000 and $300,000.
$2.6 billion
— Existing preferential state tax provisions for businesses.
$1.75 billion
— Cash infusion provided by a shift in the accounting method for financing workers’ compensation.
New York's decision to extend a temporary personal income tax surcharge for 3 years to fund business tax credits and rebates ignores the need for comprehensive reform of the state's regressive tax structure. This policy choice fails to address persistent out-year budget gaps, which are projected to reach nearly $2 Billion in fiscal year 2015-16 even with the surcharge extension.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
State leaders should reconsider the hastily crafted plan to extend the temporary personal income tax surcharge and repurpose the revenue for rebates.
The state should allow the tax commission to do its work to examine New York’s tax structure before the surcharge expires.
Key Data
12.7%
— State and local income tax rate for high earners in New York City.
$2 Billion
— Projected budget gap in fiscal year 2015-16 even if the current tax surcharge is extended.
3 years
— Duration of the extension for the temporary personal income tax surcharge.
2%
— Limit on state-funded spending growth for the 3rd consecutive year.
New York faces a projected budget gap of $982 million for fiscal year 2013-14, necessitating reforms to school aid formulas, an extension of the Medicaid growth cap, and mandate relief for local governments. Additionally, economic development spending should be frozen until a thorough review of the $7 billion annual expenditure, including $2.6 billion in tax credits and exemptions, is completed to ensure accountability.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
Instead of putting more money in the hands of school districts through the same seriously flawed methods, state leaders should redesign the school aid formulas.
To help assure realization of the waiver application's savings projections, and improve the state's prospects of bending the Medicaid cost curve over the long run, the Legislature and the governor should extend the Medicaid growth cap for at least five years.
Mandate relief needs to be given renewed priority by Governor Cuomo who should press for adoption of the pending proposals in the fiscal year 2013-14 budget.
No additional funds should be authorized for economic development programs until a thorough review of all of them has been conducted to assess whether they are working and until the results of the new performance metrics put in place by the Regional Councils can be evaluated.
Key Data
$982 million
— Projected budget gap in fiscal year 2013-14.
$20.1 billion
— Education aid in the current state budget.
$1.5 billion
— Amount education aid will grow over the next two years.
$15.9 billion
— Medicaid spending in the current state budget.
$10 billion
— Amount New York applied for a federal waiver to reinvest from the estimated $17 billion in federal savings.
$245 million
— Estimated annual savings from mandate relief proposals left on the table.
New York State and its local governments spend nearly $7 billion annually on economic development programs, many of which lack sufficient transparency and accountability. To improve the effectiveness of these investments, the state should standardize performance metrics, eliminate ineffective programs, ensure consistent project scoring, and consolidate funding into a unified budget.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
ESD should facilitate the development and reporting of meaningful and consistent metrics across all Councils and programs to evaluate economic development programs and make them public.
New York’s leaders should consider using the cap mechanism more widely to foster a more disciplined approach to economic development spending.
ESD should facilitate the convergence and standardization of the multiple criteria and scoring methods to improve the consistency of project scoring.
The CFA should be expanded and should serve as the platform for a unified economic development budget.
ESD should choose approximately 10 regional indicators and 10 project indicators that all Regional Councils must report to provide the public information with which to compare the impact of each Council’s investments.
Key Data
$7 billion
— New York State and its local governments will spend close to $7 billion this fiscal year in the name of economic development through dozens of programs.
$762 million
— This year New York will allocate $762 million in economic development funds through the recently created Regional Economic Development Councils.
$6.9 billion
— New York entities cumulatively spent $6.9 billion on economic development two years after 2010.
$100 million
— The new Excelsior program will cost $100 million in tax year 2012.
$359 million
— The state film tax credit grew to $359 million in 2012.
$4.5 billion
— The Missouri Accountability Portal covers $4.5 billion in tax incentives approved since 2000 through several dozen programs.
The Metropolitan Transportation Authority requires a more stable financing model, which should be achieved by balancing costs between riders, motorists, and taxpayers through a 25-50-25 formula. This approach would require increasing transit fares, raising tolls, and implementing congestion pricing to ensure the system remains in a state of good repair without relying on excessive borrowing.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
The cost of bridge and tunnel facilities should be funded entirely through user fees paid by motorists.
Motorists’ tolls and fees should also generate a surplus large enough to cover approximately one-quarter of the cost of providing mass transit services.
Mass transit users should pay fares sufficient to cover approximately one-half the operating cost of those services.
State and local tax subsidies to mass transit should cover at least one-quarter of the operating cost of those services and fund 'catch-up' capital investments needed to bring the system to a state of good repair.
New York should adapt and implement new policies imposing fees for vehicle access to the central business district.
Key Data
$2.6 billion
— Additional annual revenue the 25-50-25 policy would provide by 2016 without new taxes.
$17.8 billion
— Cumulative unfunded Other Post-Employment Benefits (OPEB) liability as of the end of 2011.
$3.6 billion
— Total cost overruns for five major MTA capital projects.
$32 billion
— MTA debt outstanding in 2011.
$1.3 billion to $2.2 billion
— Shortfall in revenue from auto users for 2016 under current policies.
$17.1 billion
— Annual operating and financing expenditures of the MTA's agencies budgeted for 2012.
Local governments in New York face significant fiscal pressure due to state-imposed mandates and rising costs, which are exacerbated by a property-tax cap that limits revenue growth. To achieve fiscal health, the state must repeal burdensome mandates and reform laws like the Triborough Amendment that drive up public employee costs.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
The Legislature should pass a bill to repeal unnecessary mandates on school districts (A10290/S6688) to curb the high cost of special education and enact reforms in contracting.
The state should repeal the Triborough Amendment, which discourages collective bargaining by awarding public employees automatic step increases for more years on the job even after contracts expire.
State leaders should provide relief from state-imposed mandates that burden local governments with unnecessary expenses rather than approving borrowing schemes.
Key Data
7.5 percent
— Instructional spending for special ed in New York has grown over the past decade at an average rate of 7.5 percent a year.
20 percent
— Instructional spending for special ed in New York has grown 20 percent faster than for general education.
200
— Growth in special education spending is in part driven by the more than 200 state-imposed special-ed mandates that exceed those required by federal law.
75 percent
— A pension sweetener creates a presumption that a type of staph infection is job-related, entitling eligible police and firefighters to a 75 percent disability benefit.
New York State faces a significant budget gap and must implement structural reforms to control spending, including pension adjustments, school aid reallocation, and Medicaid cost containment. The state should also eliminate reliance on fiscal gimmicks, such as one-shot revenues and business-tax credit deferrals, to achieve long-term fiscal sustainability.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
The state should enact a new pension tier for new hires that raises the retirement age and vesting period while reducing pension spiking from overtime.
New York should rejigger school-aid programs to address disparities in local districts' wealth and capacities to fund their schools rather than sending aid to wealthy districts.
The state must continue curbing growth in Medicaid spending and phase out the inequitable local financing scheme that requires poorer counties to shoulder an unfair share of costs.
Albany should resist the temptation for more economic-development spending and ensure that existing funds are used with transparency and accountability.
The state should reduce reliance on fiscal gimmicks like the deferral of business-tax credits and the amortization of pension payments, which mask the structural deficit.
New York should forgo one-shot revenues that provide temporary cash injections but fail to address long-term spending commitments.
Key Data
$1.7 billion
— The budget gap remaining after the tax hike on high earners that the state must close.
$120 billion
— The estimated savings over 30 years from the proposed new pension tier for new hires.
$970 million
— The amount of business-tax credits deferred as a fiscal gimmick to mask the structural deficit.
$782 million
— The amount of pension system payments amortized as a fiscal gimmick to mask the structural deficit.
$800 million
— The total amount of one-shot revenues used by the state in the previous year to close budget gaps.
$1.5 billion
— The amount of new revenue expected from the tax hike on high earners.
New York State's fiscal policies result in a regional imbalance where New York City and the Downstate Suburbs contribute significantly more in tax revenue than they receive in state-funded expenditures. This report analyzes the geographic distribution of these revenues and spending, highlighting how different regions' economic contributions and needs shape the state budget.
Key Data
$80 billion
— The amount of money New York State residents, workers, and businesses send to the state government each year.
$26.1 billion
— The amount of own-source revenues the state disbursed to school districts, community colleges, and other recipients for education purposes in fiscal year 2010.
$29.4 billion
— The total personal income tax revenue to be distributed regionally when allocated by county of residence.
$34.8 billion
— The total personal income tax revenue to be distributed regionally when allocated by place of work.
$5 billion
— The amount of tax revenues New York State receives from residents of other states.
45 percent
— New York City’s share of state revenue payments based on the analysis of income-tax payments allocated to the region in which taxpayers reside.
New York's recent tax code overhaul provided $1.9 billion in revenue to address a $3.2 billion budget gap, but the state must now focus on structural reforms rather than further tax increases to manage future spending. Sustainable fiscal health requires curbing growth in pension, school aid, and Medicaid costs while eliminating reliance on temporary fiscal gimmicks and excessive economic development spending.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
The Governor should avoid more new taxes as the way to close the rest of the budget gap.
State leaders should close the remaining budget gap with structural reform measures that slow down the fastest cost drivers—pensions, school aid, and Medicaid.
The basic formulas by which school aid is distributed should be reopened to address better the great disparities in local districts’ wealth and capacities to fund their schools.
New York’s inequitable local financing scheme for Medicaid should be phased out to ensure poorer counties do not shoulder an unfairly large share of program costs.
The State should resist the temptation for more economic development spending and instead focus on repurposing existing funding and improving transparency.
The State should end the deferral of business tax credits and the amortization of pension payments while addressing the underlying cost drivers.
The State should take a hiatus from one-shot revenues such as sweeps from dedicated revenue funds and mandatory contributions from public authorities.
Key Data
$3.2 billion
— Estimated budget gap in New York State’s fiscal year 2012-13.
$1.9 billion
— Additional annual revenues provided by the recent overhaul of New York’s tax code.
$15 billion
— Total spending increase in fiscal year 2012 compared to fiscal year 2008.
$120 billion
— Potential savings over 30 years from the proposed pension tier for new hires.
$970 million
— Amount of business tax credits deferred by the state.
$782 million
— Amount of pension system payment amortized by the state.
The temporary personal income tax hike in New York is acceptable only if paired with long-term structural reforms, such as pension system changes and expenditure controls, to ensure fiscal responsibility. The state must address its regressive tax structure and high reliance on volatile financial sector earnings while implementing measures like design-build procurement to improve infrastructure efficiency.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
Next year’s budget should not be allowed to grow more than 2%.
The state should implement reform of the state and local pension system along the lines of the Governor’s “Tier 6” proposal.
The new tax brackets should be accompanied by long-term measures to curb expenditures.
New York should create a Commission to re-examine New York’s tax structure.
New York should authorize design-build procurement practices for infrastructure projects.
Key Data
$1.9 billion
— Net gain in annual revenue from the new personal income tax brackets compared to letting the “millionaire tax” expire.
12.7%
— State and local income tax rate for high earners in New York City, which is higher than anywhere else in the nation.
$120 billion
— Projected savings over the next 30 years from pension system modifications like the Governor’s “Tier 6” proposal.
2%
— Recommended limit for the growth of next year's budget.
The state-wide property tax cap, which limits local revenue growth to 2%, and a $1.3 billion cut in state aid for the 2011-12 school year, have created significant financial pressures for school districts. These fiscal constraints underscore the need for mandate relief in special education to help districts manage rising costs.
Key Data
2%
— The growth limit imposed on local school district revenue from property taxes by the state-wide property tax cap.
$1.3 billion
— The amount by which state aid for school year 2011-12 was cut from the previous year's level.
New York State's economic development programs, which cost billions annually in tax breaks and subsidies, require a unified governance structure to ensure accountability and effectiveness. To improve outcomes, the state should consolidate these disparate programs, implement standardized performance metrics, and adopt a unified economic development budget that subjects tax expenditures to the same scrutiny as direct appropriations.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
To be fully effective, the councils should have responsibility and authority over all state economic development resources, not just a subset of selected programs.
Performance should be gauged only by new activity created in addition to baseline payroll and/or property value.
Benefits should be paid retroactively based on firm performance.
The ultimate goal should be the creation of a Unified Economic Development Budget.
Funds for the expansion of regional council investments should be generated by reducing or eliminating current programs that are deemed unsuccessful after a thorough review.
Key Data
$6.6 billion
— Annual cost to the State and local governments in tax breaks, power subsidies, and direct spending for economic development.
$2.5 billion
— Annual reduction in state tax receipts caused by more than a dozen separate state tax credit programs.
$554 million
— Cost to the State in lost tax receipts from the Empire Zone program in 2010.
$1.0 billion
— Amount of Empire Zone credits businesses reported carrying forward in 2007 that were yet to be claimed.
$586 million
— Total amount invested by the State in the Centers of Excellence program from 1997 to 2006.
$371 million
— Total amount spent in grants by NYSTAR on ten funding programs over the 2001 to 2009 period.
New York State should avoid using temporary, unpredictable revenue increases to fund new spending or tax cuts, as the likelihood of a genuine surplus is low and economic indicators remain negative. Instead, any unexpected funds should be prioritized to address existing fiscal gimmicks and the projected $2.4 billion budget gap for the upcoming year.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
Talk of a surplus and using it for new initiatives should end immediately.
New York should reduce reliance on existing fiscal gimmicks, particularly ones that add to long-term costs.
Any surprise surplus should be used in ways that help lower the budget gap, such as paying down debt or reversing deferrals, rather than funding tax cuts or spending restorations.
The Governor and the Legislature should view any unexpected revenues as a temporary blessing and keep the lid on the piggy bank sealed shut.
Key Data
$799 million
— Amount by which tax collections for the first quarter of the fiscal year exceeded original projections.
$1.2 billion
— Amount by which disbursements came in below projections for the first quarter of the fiscal year.
$351 million
— Amount by which receipts fell short during the month of July.
$377 million
— Remaining savings from labor that the Governor and unions still need to finalize.
$2 billion
— Total value of undesirable fiscal gimmicks included in the current-year budget.
$2.4 billion
— Minimum budget gap projected for the start of the next fiscal year.
New York State's rainy day funds have proven ineffective during economic downturns due to structural flaws, including restrictive repayment rules and inadequate deposit mandates. To better manage tax volatility, the state should implement uniform withdrawal and repayment conditions while raising fund caps to ensure sufficient reserves are available during recessions.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
New York State should mandate prudent uses of surplus funds, including rainy day fund deposits.
The state should raise the cap on the size of the rainy day funds to reflect likely needs in times of recession.
New York should set uniform conditions for withdrawal from both funds, with those conditions based on declining economic indicators.
The state should set uniform repayment rules for both funds, with those rules allowing adequate time for economic and fiscal recovery before payments must begin.
Key Data
20.3 percent
— The decline in New York State’s total tax collections from the first quarter of fiscal year 2008-09 to the first quarter of fiscal year 2010-11.
$10 billion
— The budget gap for the fiscal year beginning April 1, 2011.
60 percent
— The portion of New York State tax collections comprised of personal income tax in fiscal year 2009-10.
$473.3 million
— The total amount of the 11 loans taken from the Tax Stabilization Reserve Fund for the General Fund.
$37 million
— The general fund cash balance at the end of May 2009.
$1.2 billion
— The negative month-end balance that would have occurred in May 2009 without the use of the Tax Stabilization Reserve Fund and the Rainy Day Reserve Fund.
New York's recent budget agreement reduces spending by $7.6 billion, though it relies on $2 billion in uncertain savings that could lead to midyear deficits if not realized. To ensure long-term stability, the state must address unfunded mandates that force local tax increases and carefully design property tax caps to protect communities lacking sufficient state aid.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
Unfunded mandates imposed by the state on localities and school districts, particularly unnecessary special education requirements, should be removed so they are not forced to raise local taxes.
A property tax cap will need to be designed carefully to avoid hardship for needy communities that do not receive sufficient state aid to adequately fund services.
Key Data
$132.5 billion
— Total approved spending in the state budget.
$7.6 billion
— Total amount of cuts from a mushrooming set of baseline commitments.
$2 billion
— Total budget balance risk if anticipated savings do not materialize as planned.
New York State faces a structural budget imbalance where spending growth has outpaced the tax base, necessitating a shift away from temporary revenue measures and one-time fixes. To achieve long-term fiscal sustainability, the state must align spending growth with revenue growth rather than relying on perpetual tax increases.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
It is now time to allow temporary revenue measures to phase out and to begin to restructure spending commitments.
In order to avoid a perpetual reliance on one-shot revenues and tax increases, spending growth must be more closely aligned with long-term revenue growth.
Key Data
$11.7 billion
— Revenues attributable to actions taken since the start of fiscal year 2008-09.
$8.5 billion
— Reduction in base tax collections in the current fiscal year due to the national recession.
$8.4 billion
— Amount state-funded spending in the current fiscal year is higher than in fiscal year 2007-08.
$19.4 billion
— Total revenue enhancements and temporary revenues New York currently benefits from.
$5.0 billion
— Projected revenue from the temporary income tax surcharge on individuals earning more than $200,000.
$21.2 billion
— Projected budget gap for the next year without the inclusion of revenue measures.
Implementing a state spending cap requires careful consideration of growth benchmarks and potential unintended consequences, as evidenced by the mixed results in other states. Instead of rigid caps, alternative fiscal reforms like comprehensive balanced budget requirements and enhanced rainy day funds may better align spending with economic growth.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
Establish a more rigorous and comprehensive balanced budget requirement.
Move the executive and legislative budgets from a cash basis to an accrual system in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles.
Enhance the allowable size of the state’s rainy day fund and require that funds are dispersed only in an emergency.
Impose a new constitutional debt limit to rein in state borrowing.
Provide more timely and meaningful fiscal information to legislators and to the public.
Key Data
5.4 percent
— Average annual rate of increase for the New York state operating budget over the past 25 years.
$17 billion
— Amount the Governor argues his spending cap would have curbed state spending by in fiscal year 2007-08 had it been in place starting in 2002-03.
$1.1 billion
— Predicted surplus in fiscal year 2011-2012 from the proposed spending cap based on a projected three-year rolling average inflation rate of 2.0 percent.
$3.2 billion
— Total amount of rebate checks sent to Colorado taxpayers between fiscal year 1996-97 and fiscal year 2000-01 due to the state's revenue limit.
$348
— Amount by which Colorado's per capita spending was lower than it would have been without the state's spending cap.
$1.1 billion
— Amount Connecticut borrowed at the end of the year for an unexpected deficit.
The 2010-11 New York State budget includes $4.0 Billion in spending reductions, including a $1.5 Billion cut to school aid, but fails to implement structural reforms like the sugary beverage tax or address long-term pension fund liabilities. While the plan addresses immediate deficits, it relies on risky elements and leaves major spending areas like Medicaid and employee compensation largely unchecked.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
School aid comprises nearly one-third of the State's own-source spending, and it must be addressed if spending is to be contained in future years.
School district and State leaders must figure out how to improve the impact of the State's added investments in education to manage with reduced aid and constrained local funds.
The state should have enacted the tax on sugary beverages, which would have provided recurring revenues from a consumption tax with public health benefits.
Key Data
$4.0 Billion
— Total spending reductions included in the fiscal year 2010-11 budget.
$1.5 Billion
— School aid cut resulting from the Governor's vetoes.
$47 Billion
— Total Medicaid costs expected to grow 10% annually.
$190 Million
— Savings achieved by canceling member items for the year.
$7 Billion
— Projected increase in school aid over the next four years.
$775 Million
— Medicaid cost containment package passed earlier in the year.
New York's legislative efforts to expand public employee pension and health benefits are driving up government costs, which directly contributes to the relentless rise of property taxes across the state. These proposed benefit expansions threaten to exacerbate existing fiscal challenges by locking in long-term liabilities that are constitutionally protected and difficult to reduce.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
The Legislature should refrain from passing the proposed "pension sweetener" bills that increase the pension burden on taxpayers.
The state should maintain the integrity of the recently created Tier V pension system rather than undoing reforms by eliminating the minimum retirement age for state employees.
Policymakers should avoid extending the automatic assumption that certain ailments are work-related, which would allow employees to collect a lifetime disability pension for common illnesses.
The state should reject legislation that would saddle the MTA with new health-insurance costs by accelerating the vesting of lifetime insurance benefits.
The Legislature should avoid expanding eligibility for Variable Supplement Funds to those who have retired under disability and to the survivors of retirees.
Key Data
$1.7 Billion
— Cost of state government pension contributions in fiscal year 2010-11.
85 percent
— Projected growth of state pension costs by 2014.
$3.2 Billion
— Projected cost of state pension contributions by 2014.
50
— Number of bills introduced in the Assembly and Senate to sweeten pension and health-insurance benefits.
$7.7 Million
— Annual cost to the state for eliminating the minimum retirement age for state employees.
$9.1 Million
— Annual cost to local governments for eliminating the minimum retirement age for state employees.
New York's economic development programs, specifically the Empire Zone Program and Power for Jobs, have become opaque and costly, with the former's expenses ballooning from $30 million in 2000 to $600 million in 2009. These initiatives should be replaced by more transparent, performance-based programs that are integrated into a broader economic strategy with clear metrics for success.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
The Empire Zone Program and the Power for Jobs program should be replaced without further delay.
The state should replace the Empire Zone Program with the Excelsior program.
The Excelsior program should award tax credits based on a standard application and retroactively, based on the prior year's performance.
The new Power for Jobs program should include greater provisions for environmental audits to help firms identify areas where they can conserve energy.
Both replacement programs should be fit into a larger economic development strategy that identifies overarching goals and includes metrics for assessing the performance of new programs.
Key Data
$30 million
— The cost of the Empire Zone Program in 2000.
$600 million
— The cost of the Empire Zone Program in 2009.
$479 million to $640 million
— The estimated annual cost of the Power for Jobs economic development programs.
$100 million
— The amount of direct aid provided to residential rate-payers to replace discount power contracts.
The Empire Zones program has proven to be an ineffective and costly economic development strategy that should be allowed to sunset as scheduled. Replacing it with the proposed Excelsior program would better align state economic development efforts with criteria that prioritize targeted, temporary, and performance-based investment.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
The State Legislature should allow the Empire Zones program to sunset as of June 30, 2010, as established by law.
The State Legislature should enact the Excelsior program as proposed by the Governor.
The State Legislature should reject provisions that would extend local Empire Zone administration boards and wage credits, as policies that have proven ineffective should not be continued.
New York State's 2010 budget negotiations highlight a critical reliance on speculative revenue and deficit financing rather than necessary spending cuts. State leaders are urged to utilize executive powers to enforce austerity, achieve specific spending reductions, and reject unrealistic revenue projections to avoid future fiscal crises.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
State leaders must achieve the full $5.1 billion worth of spending reductions proposed in the Executive Budget.
The legislature should drop overly optimistic claims regarding high fraud recoveries and tax collection on Indian Reservations.
The state must get the borrowing total for the year down well under the Ravitch Plan's $2 billion maximum.
The Governor should ensure that reforms in the Ravitch Plan, including a balanced budget requirement and better accounting, accompany any agreed-upon borrowing.
Key Data
$5.1 billion
— Spending reductions in the Executive Budget that should be achieved.
$3.3 billion
— Expected jump in employee compensation over the four-year term of the financial plan.
$2 billion
— Deficit financing proposed in the Lt. Governor's five-year fiscal plan.
4%
— Raises for employee unions scheduled for April 1.
2%
— Reduction in per-pupil spending proposed in the Executive Budget.
10%
— Increase in all funds spending during the previous year.
Originally designed to stimulate economic growth in distressed areas, the Empire Zone program has devolved into an ineffective, loophole-ridden system that provides lucrative tax breaks to corporations without achieving its job creation goals. Given the program's persistent failure to meet performance targets and the state's fiscal constraints, it should be abolished to prevent the continued waste of public resources.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
The time has come to end the program.
Increasingly scarce public resources should no longer be spent in this unproductive way.
The Empire Zone program should be a prime target for elimination.
Key Data
$582 million
— The cost of the Empire Zone program in 2008, representing a twenty-fold increase from $30 million in 2000.
$900 million
— The amount of unused tax credits firms have accumulated that can be used in future years.
$514 million
— The total cost of the Empire Zone program in 2006.
$391 million
— The amount of tax credits claimed by just 500 firms in 2006, representing 76 percent of the total program cost.
$127 million
— The amount of tax credits that went to Fortune 1000 firms in 2006, accounting for about 25 percent of total annual claims.
$30 million
— The amount of tax credits received by 11 retail chains among the Fortune 1000.
New York State's long-term debt burden, including bonded debt and unfunded pension and post-employment benefit liabilities, places it in a 'danger zone' compared to other states. To improve fiscal health and move below this threshold, the state would need to reduce its 2008 long-term liabilities of $120.0 billion by $20.4 billion.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
New York State would have to lower its long-term liabilities from the 2008 level of $120.0 billion by $20.4 billion to fall below the danger zone threshold.
If the reduction were achieved through long-term bonds, the state would have to lower its long-term bond debt from $71.9 billion to $51.5 billion.
Key Data
$5.6 billion
— Annual debt service currently paid by New York.
$7.1 billion
— Projected state credit card obligation, representing one of every ten dollars paid in taxes.
1.099
— New York's debt-to-resources ratio, which ranks fourth highest among all states.
$120.0 billion
— New York's total long-term liabilities in 2008.
$20.4 billion
— The amount by which New York would need to lower its long-term liabilities to fall below the danger zone threshold.
New York's tax system is relatively progressive for the lowest and highest earners, but middle-income families face a disproportionately high tax burden compared to the national average. To improve the system's overall fairness, policy efforts should prioritize reducing the tax load on moderate-income households.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
To complete the model of progressivity, New York needs to focus on lowering the tax burden on households with moderate incomes.
Key Data
11.6 percent
— The middle quintile of New York families pay this share of their income to state and local taxes, which is well above the national average of 9.4 percent.
9.6 percent
— The poorest fifth of New Yorkers pay this share of their income for state and local taxes, ranking 29th among the states.
7.2 percent
— The top 1 percent of earners in New York, whose incomes exceed $633,000 annually, pay this share of their income for state and local taxes.
5.3 percent
— On average, New Yorkers in the poorest fifth pay this share of their income to property taxes, compared to 3.6 percent nationally.
6th
— New York has the most progressive tax system in the nation according to the ITEP index.
New York State's reliance on the General Fund for budget reporting is an outdated practice that obscures the true scope of government spending, which totaled $121.6 billion in All Funds compared to just $54.6 billion in the General Fund. To improve fiscal transparency and accountability, the state should adopt broader reporting measures, including GAAP-based accounting and a unified "State Operating Funds" budget that separates capital projects from annual operating expenses.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
The basis for reporting and budget reform should be broadened to encompass all of the activities of state government.
The State’s capital budget should be separated from its annual operating budget plan, and it should cover the activities of public authorities as well as State agencies.
More detailed GAAP reporting requirements should be adopted.
A simpler, more transparent budget format that tracks cash disbursements should be developed.
Metrics that are well developed, regularly reported to the public, and discussed with agency heads in public hearings help improve accountability.
Key Data
$121.6 billion
— All Funds cash total for the previous year.
$54.6 billion
— General Funds portion of the total state spending.
45 percent
— Portion of the total state spending represented by the General Fund.
$3 billion
— Amount of personal income tax revenues transferred out of the General Fund every year to support the School Tax Relief program (STAR).
$13.5 billion
— Deficit the State ran on a GAAP basis last year.
$1.9 billion
— Positive year-end balance shown on the State’s cash report last year.
The Empire Zone program, intended to spur economic activity, has become an ineffective and costly system of tax breaks that fails to meet performance targets and lacks accountability. This program should be phased out and replaced with a strategy that aligns economic development subsidies with clear goals, performance metrics, and retrospective accountability.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
Reporting and disclosure of cost-benefit calculations for all economic development subsidies should be improved.
Newly focused efforts should be targeted toward growth industries (such as the development and manufacturing of new technologies).
Subsidies aimed at retention in manufacturing and other sectors should be clearly delineated and paired with appropriate measurements of their success or failure.
The best way to ensure outcomes is to base program payments on performance post-facto rather than on projections made upon approval.
Program management should be consolidated under a statewide or regional board structure.
Key Data
$580 million
— The cost of the Empire Zone program in 2008.
45 percent
— The average annual growth rate of the program's cost from 2000 to 2008.
$2,200
— The median benefits per job for program participants.
$690,000
— The amount Manhattan Nursing Home Realty received in 2006 for adding a single job.
58 percent
— The percentage of firms in the program that fell short of either their job targets or investment targets by more than 60 percent.
79 percent
— The percentage of the 570 Empire Zone beneficiaries in New York City that failed to meet their targets.
New York State faces a growing budget gap projected to reach $18.2 billion by 2012-13, driven by unsustainable spending growth in Medicaid, personnel costs, and education aid. To address this fiscal crisis, the state must prioritize aggressive spending reductions rather than relying on tax increases, borrowing, or shifting costs to local governments.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
The state must implement aggressive spending reductions to address the growing budget gap and avoid more painful future cuts.
New York should reject increasing taxes as a solution, given the state's poor tax climate for economic growth.
The state should avoid borrowing to cover deficits, as it jeopardizes credit ratings and limits capital investment capacity.
New York must refrain from passing costs on to local governments, as the local tax burden is already the highest in the nation.
Key Data
22%
— Decline in personal income tax revenue from the previous year.
36%
— Expected growth in Medicaid spending over the next three years.
$4.6 billion
— Projected budget gap for the upcoming year.
$18.2 billion
— Projected budget gap by 2012-13.
$26 billion
— Current outlay for education aid to local school districts.
$58 billion
— Planned outstanding state-supported debt by 2013-14.
New York's 2009-10 budget relies heavily on $8.1 billion in new revenue-raising measures, including a $3.9 billion increase in personal income tax rates for higher earners and the $1.5 billion cancellation of the School Tax Relief (STAR) rebate. This approach exacerbates the state's reliance on a small group of high-income earners and increases the volatility of the tax system, while failing to address long-term spending sustainability.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
The $7.4 billion in federal stabilization aid should have been used primarily as a substitute for tax and fee increases, rather than as a substitute for the kinds of spending changes that will be needed when the funds run out.
State leaders should lower spending in General and State Operating funds to respond to the crisis, rather than relying on unsustainable spending levels.
Budget actions that represent real cost increases for New Yorkers, such as tuition increases, should be counted as revenue raisers rather than being officially reported as reductions in general fund spending.
Key Data
$8.1 billion
— Total revenue raising measures enacted in the 2009-10 budget.
$3.9 billion
— Estimated revenue from the increase in personal income tax rates for higher income brackets.
$1.5 billion
— Revenue generated from the cancellation of the Middle Class School Tax Relief (STAR) rebate.
$857 million
— Revenue generated from new health insurance company assessments.
$547 million
— Revenue generated from the utility tax.
$17.9 billion
— The size of the budget gap created by existing budget gaps and severe revenue losses.
New York faces a structural budget gap projected to reach $18.7 billion, necessitating a balanced approach that combines temporary revenue measures with significant, sustained spending reductions. Rather than relying solely on personal income tax hikes, the state should pursue comprehensive tax reform through a bipartisan commission to ensure long-term equity and economic competitiveness.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
Any tax increase should be temporarily imposed with a fixed set of dates for phase out or expiration to address cyclical revenue loss.
Tax increases must run in tandem with significant measures to lower expenditures in ineffective and low priority programs and contractual changes with public employee unions.
Policymakers should consider a rearrangement of the state and local tax systems, including property tax reform, to balance equity and stability.
The state should form a bipartisan commission to examine tax reform from the dual perspective of fairness and competitiveness.
Any income tax increase must be accompanied by serious, sustained reductions in government spending.
Key Data
56.5 percent
— The portion of total State tax collections comprised by the personal income tax in 2006.
$18.7 billion
— The projected budget gap in year three of the financial plan.
35 percent
— The amount by which New York's overall tax burden per $1,000 of personal income exceeds the national average.
28 percent
— The share of total private sector wages in the State comprised by the financial services sector.
10.2 percent
— The share of total jobs in the State comprised by the financial services sector.
New York State's high tax burden is driven by significant local government costs, particularly from state-mandated Medicaid programs and inequitable school aid distribution. To address these fiscal challenges, the state must reform its pension and Medicaid policies, improve debt management, and increase budget transparency to ensure long-term financial stability.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
Reduce State-mandated local government Medicaid costs more than authorized by the 3 percent cap on local growth enacted in 2005.
Redesign State school aid programs including STAR to better serve poorer districts and thereby lower their local school tax burden.
Redesign the State-mandated pension benefits for future state and local government workers through changes such as raising the minimum retirement ages, increasing the required employee contributions, eliminating inclusion of overtime in benefit calculations, and eliminating variable supplements for uniformed workers.
Lower Medicaid expenditures by eliminating long-term care eligibility loopholes that extend benefits to middle-class residents.
Discontinue issuance of State-funded debt to cover operating deficits.
Integrate public authorities’ proposed borrowing for capital investments with the State’s capital plan in order to prevent inefficient use of borrowing capacity.
Subject public authority borrowing to more rigorous financial review by an enhanced Public Authorities Control Board or by the Division of Budget.
Reduce the State’s future debt by lowering capital spending and/or increasing pay-as-you-go financing.
Prepare more extensive multi-year financial plans.
Require that lump-sum appropriations meet specific program criteria and be subject to sunshine provisions.
Key Data
$1.1 billion
— Estimated savings to local governments in the current fiscal year from Medicaid measures.
158 percent
— The local government portion of the tax burden in New York relative to the national average.
$7,912
— New York's average Medicaid spending per beneficiary, which is 176 percent of the national average.
$5.8 billion
— Estimated annual savings from changing Medicaid policies.
$105.8 billion
— Total debt outstanding for the State and its authorities at the end of fiscal year 2004–05.
$4.2 billion
— Projected budget gap for the next fiscal year based on the current enacted budget.
New York faces a significant budget gap and should utilize federal stimulus funds to avoid harmful tax increases while pursuing structural reforms to its tax and spending systems. Rather than relying on temporary fixes or tax hikes that threaten economic competitiveness, the state should prioritize long-term sustainability through comprehensive tax structure reform and targeted spending reductions.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
Don’t adopt harmful tax increases – In particular, increases in the personal income tax and the gross receipts tax on utilities should be avoided.
Do form a commission to examine the question of how to reform New York’s tax structure – Issues of fairness, stability, and the division of responsibilities among State and local governments should be thoroughly aired.
Do end middle class STAR – The program is poorly crafted and difficult to administer.
Key Data
$14.0 billion
— Revised budget gap for fiscal year 2009-10.
$18.7 billion
— Budget gap in year three of the financial plan.
$1.1 billion
— Additional revenue losses.
$4.4 billion
— Harmful actions that should be avoided.
$1.7 billion
— Economically harmful tax hikes that should be avoided and replaced in the financial plan.
$1.5 billion
— Fiscal gimmicks and one-shots in the plan that should be eliminated.
New York's Empire Zone Program, which costs nearly $600 million annually, has been criticized for lacking accountability and failing to meet job creation targets, with many participating firms falling significantly short of their goals. The state should phase out this ineffective program and replace it with a more targeted economic development strategy that prioritizes quality jobs and measurable outcomes in distressed areas.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
New York should phase out the Empire Zone Program, which is a largely wasteful use of limited state resources.
The state should pursue the decertification of businesses in substantial noncompliance and cease any new commitments that fail to meet well-defined, strategic objectives.
New York should develop a more effective approach to economic development that focuses on strategic growth industries and offers deeper benefits for the most distressed areas of the state.
Future state support should be based on quality of jobs, commitment to meet fair labor standards, and contribution to targeted industry clusters.
The Legislature should work with the Governor and economic development groups to develop a new program that results in significant and measurable outcomes.
Key Data
$600 million
— The approximate annual cost of the Empire Zone Program.
58%
— The percentage of participating firms in 2006 that fell short of their job creation and investment targets by 60% or more.
69 to 79%
— The range of the failure rate for participating firms in several regions.
400%
— The extent to which Empire Zone awards vary in value.
New York faces a massive fiscal challenge with budget gaps reaching $18.6 billion by fiscal year 2011-12, necessitating significant spending reforms rather than tax increases. The state should prioritize reducing expenditures in areas like Medicaid, school aid, and public employee benefits to avoid harmful tax hikes that discourage economic investment.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
The budget adopted by the Legislature should reduce the Governor’s proposed $5 billion in new revenue measures to no more than $2 billion.
Savings from spending reforms should first be used to eliminate tax increase proposals that curtail economic activity and add to the already high cost of doing business in New York.
The State should use temporary federal funds as flexibly as possible to obviate the need for tax increases that would hinder New York’s recovery.
The Legislature should require a greater share of health insurance premiums to be paid by current and retired employees to reduce the need for tax-funded expenditures.
The State should eliminate high tax aid and hold harmless provisions in school aid formulas to promote equity and produce further savings that reduce the need for tax revenue.
Key Data
$18.6 billion
— The projected budget gap for fiscal year 2011-12.
$5 billion
— The amount of new revenue measures proposed in the Governor’s Executive Budget.
$2 billion
— The recommended maximum amount for new revenue measures in the adopted budget.
$1.9 billion
— The amount of revenue increases mis-categorized as spending reductions in the Governor’s budget.
$404.0 million
— The projected revenue from a non-dietetic soft drink tax.
$1,864.2 million
— The total value of mis-categorized revenues in the gap closing plan.
The Metropolitan Transportation Authority requires a revised financing strategy that prioritizes a more stable payroll tax as a substitute for volatile real estate-related taxes, while increasing reliance on auto user fees and fares. Additionally, the authority must implement stricter transparency standards for all capital projects and demonstrate greater fiscal restraint to justify new revenue sources.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
The size of any new payroll tax should be based on a revised assessment of need that extends and enhances the work of the Commission.
The payroll tax could be a more reliable and stable future source and should be considered as a substitute for these dedicated taxes which could be reallocated to the State’s General Fund.
More revenue should be raised from auto users by increasing and dedicating to the MTA other fees such as those for drivers’ licenses and vehicle registration.
The proposed tolls on East River Bridges and Harlem River Bridges should be higher than the Commission recommends.
The Metropolitan Transportation Authority faces a growing fiscal shortfall, requiring a funding strategy that balances costs among riders, drivers, and general tax subsidies. To achieve a sustainable 50/25/25 funding split, fares would need to rise by 15 percent in 2009, while drivers would need to contribute an additional $1.3 billion to cover their share of transit costs.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
Fares should cover half of mass-transit operating costs.
The MTA must link fares to costs to create an incentive for efficiency.
Drivers should pay a quarter of the cost of mass transit, in addition to the full cost of MTA bridge and tunnel operations.
A general tax subsidy should cover the remaining 25 percent of mass-transit operating costs.
The Ravitch Commission does not need to propose major new taxes dedicated to the MTA, such as a payroll tax or increased sales tax.
Key Data
$1.3 billion
— Additional revenue needed from drivers in 2009 to meet the 25 percent funding target.
$1.9 billion
— Additional revenue needed from drivers in 2012 to meet the 25 percent funding target.
$97
— Projected cost of a monthly Metrocard following a cumulative 20 percent fare increase by 2012.
15 percent
— Required fare increase in 2009 to ensure fares cover 50 percent of operating costs.
20 percent
— Cumulative fare increase required by 2012 to reach the 50 percent cost-coverage target.
13 percent
— Current portion of mass-transit costs covered by driver revenues, falling short of the 25 percent target.
New York's Empire Zone program, originally intended to spur economic development in distressed areas, has become an ineffective and costly vehicle for corporate tax breaks that fails to meet job creation targets. The program's systemic flaws and inability to be reformed necessitate its complete elimination to preserve scarce public resources.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
The Empire Zone program should be abolished because its problems are extensive and longstanding.
The Empire Zone program should be a prime target for elimination given the current stress on the State budget.
Increasingly scarce public resources should no longer be spent on the unproductive Empire Zone program.
Key Data
$582 million
— The cost of the Empire Zone program in 2008.
$514 million
— The total amount of Empire Zone tax credits claimed in 2006.
$900 million
— The amount of unused tax credits firms hold that can be used in future years.
$391 million
— The amount of credits claimed by just 500 firms in 2006, representing 76 percent of the total.
$127 million
— The amount of credits claimed by Fortune 1000 firms in 2006, representing about 25 percent of total annual claims.
$30 million
— The cost of the Empire Zone program in 2000.
New York's existing circuit breaker program is outdated, with income and property value ceilings that have not been adjusted since 1985, rendering it ineffective for most residents. Replacing the problematic School Tax Relief (STAR) program with an expanded circuit breaker model could more effectively target property tax relief to lower-income households.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
New York should replace the problematic STAR homestead exemption program with an improved circuit breaker program that would work more effectively.
The state should expand the existing circuit breaker program to provide targeted relief to the neediest taxpayers whose property taxes are burdensome relative to current income.
Policymakers should adopt a model that refunds property taxes above 5 percent of income for homeowners earning less than $20,000 and above 7 percent for all others.
The state should implement a circuit breaker program for renters that refunds property taxes in excess of 6 percent of income.
New York must update the income and wealth criteria for its circuit breaker program, which have not been modified since 1985, to ensure it provides meaningful relief to residents.
Key Data
$18,000
— Income ceiling for New York's current circuit breaker program.
$85,000
— Maximum home value ceiling for New York's current circuit breaker program.
$450
— Maximum rent value ceiling for New York's current circuit breaker program.
$2.6 billion
— Cost of a proposed circuit breaker program for homeowners.
$2.7 billion
— Cost of a proposed circuit breaker program for renters.
5.1 million
— Number of owners and renters that would be reached by the dollars planned for the STAR program.
New York faces significant budget gaps that threaten to necessitate tax increases, but the state could avoid this by implementing $5 billion in annual savings through reforms to Medicaid, fringe benefits, and economic development programs. By restructuring these areas and improving fiscal discipline, the state can maintain services without placing additional tax burdens on residents.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
The state should restructure its health insurance to bring it in line with other public-sector employers to avoid tax increases.
The state should change the pension benefits for future employees by creating a new tier for them to reduce state spending.
Empire Zones should be cut from the budget and the money set aside for Centers of Excellence should be reduced to avoid tax increases.
New York could save money by reducing non-competitive institutional rates like those paid to nursing homes.
The state could also close eligibility loopholes for individuals with significant personal assets to reduce Medicaid spending.
Limiting how many hours of 'personal care services' the state’s Medicaid program will cover would generate significant savings.
Key Data
$5 billion
— Annual savings that can be generated without reducing state services.
$2 billion
— Annual savings that could be achieved through Medicaid reforms.
$1.1 billion
— Annual savings that could be achieved through fringe benefit reforms.
$800 million
— Annual savings that could be achieved through economic development program reforms.
$7,910
— New York's Medicaid spending per beneficiary.
69 percent
— Amount by which New York's Medicaid spending per beneficiary exceeds the national average.
In order to promote fiscal reform, the Citizens Budget Commission (CBC) convened three separate agenda-setting conferences for key stakeholders in the state budget process in 2007. Each session focused on one aspect of fiscal reform with a goal of identifying specific changes for the coming budget cycle. The expectation is…
New York maintains one of the highest tax burdens in the nation, driven largely by heavy reliance on local property taxes and significant Medicaid mandates on county governments. To address these issues, the state should consider structural reforms such as converting to defined contribution pension systems, implementing circuit breaker tax relief, and assuming full responsibility for local Medicaid costs.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
The State should pursue structural changes to the Medicaid program to reduce ineffective services.
The State should convert to a defined contribution rather than a defined benefit system for public employee pensions.
State law could require arbitrators to award wage increases that will not necessitate tax increases or require that any wage increase be funded in part by productivity gains.
The State should base a household’s rebate on property taxes as a share of income to improve upon the STAR rebate program.
A complete state takeover of local Medicaid expenses would ameliorate the fiscal burden on counties.
Key Data
$111 billion
— Annual amount New Yorkers pay in state and local taxes.
$150
— New York's combined state and local taxes per $1,000 of personal income in fiscal year 2005.
$2.2 billion
— Medicaid mandates required from counties (excluding New York City) in fiscal year 2005.
$4.7 billion
— School property tax relief spending in fiscal year 2007-08.
New York City imposes the highest or second-highest state and local business taxes among the locations studied, with combined federal, state, and local taxes reducing the rate of return on new business investment by 36 to 50 percent. While recent state budget changes are projected to lower the average combined effective tax rate in the city from 42.1 percent to 40.9 percent, the city remains the highest-tax location for most industries examined.
Key Data
36-50 percent
— The range of the effective tax rate reduction on new business investment caused by combined federal, state, and local taxes in 2006.
34-36 percentage points
— The portion of the effective tax rate reduction typically attributed to federal taxes.
42.1 percent
— The average combined federal-state-local effective tax rate for representative firms in New York City in 2006.
40.9 percent
— The projected average combined federal-state-local effective tax rate for representative firms in New York City following 2007-08 state budget changes.
New York's state budget process remains opaque and fiscally irresponsible, characterized by excessive spending growth and a debt load that exceeds affordable standards by $10 billion. To improve fiscal health, the state must implement structural reforms to its budget process, debt management, Medicaid eligibility, and education funding, while restructuring programs like STAR to ensure relief reaches those who need it most.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
The state should close the loopholes in this year's new budget-reform law to prevent a breakdown in the budget process.
The state should move the start of its fiscal year from April 1 to July 1 to allow for more accurate revenue estimates and more time for budget negotiations.
To curb spending, the state should reduce the size of its workforce through productivity gains.
The state should fix the state's broken debt limit as the current debt load is unsustainable.
The state should tighten the eligibility rules for long-term care and take measures to stimulate the market for private long-term-care insurance among the middle class.
The state should reduce hospital and nursing-home rates to more competitive levels.
The new education funding formula should operate only on the basis of need, not be distorted by last-minute political deal-making.
New York needs tighter accountability standards to hold school officials responsible for student performance.
The STAR program should be restructured to deliver property-tax relief where it's needed most.
Key Data
$121 billion
— The size of the budget that legislators had less than two hours to review.
9 percent
— The rate at which this year's budget inflated spending, which is more than three times the rate of inflation.
$5 billion
— The budget gap the state must close in just 18 months.
$60 billion
— The amount New York's debt load will soon exceed.
$10 billion
— The amount by which New York's debt load exceeds what is affordable under reasonable standards.
New York State faces significant fiscal challenges, including an enormous debt burden that has exceeded $50 billion and recurring budget deficits projected to reach $5.1 billion by fiscal year 2009. To address these issues without raising taxes, the state must implement constitutional debt reform and reduce expenditures, particularly within the costly Medicaid program.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
The only enduring solution is an amendment to the state Constitution, limiting the amount of debt based on criteria for affordability and restricting its uses to long-term capital improvements.
Spitzer and the Legislature should agree on a budget for the coming year that closes these projected fiscal gaps.
The state's Medicaid program can be cut without reducing services to poor New Yorkers by limiting support for long-term care of wealthier residents and curbing generous payments to nursing homes and hospitals.
Key Data
$50 billion
— The amount state debt exceeded this fiscal year.
$60 billion
— The amount state debt is expected to hit in the next two years.
$11 billion
— The amount of outstanding debt taken on to support operating expenses rather than capital investments.
$4.2 billion
— The projected budget gap in fiscal year 2008.
$5.1 billion
— The projected budget gap in fiscal year 2009.
New York faces the challenge of financing mandated education reforms while maintaining its status as the most heavily-taxed state in the nation. To address this, strategies include eliminating system inefficiencies, expanding gambling, and broadening the tax base through sales and corporate tax adjustments rather than relying on local property taxes.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
Eliminating inefficiencies in the system could generate at least $1.2 billion annually.
Expanding gambling activities could generate an additional $2 billion as an alternative to tax increases.
Broadening the tax base through increased enforcement of sales tax on remote purchases, extending the sales tax to professional services, and revising the corporate income tax could raise up to $2.6 billion a year.
A statewide solution would also require a small increase in the personal income tax.
The State, rather than local school districts, should be the source of new funding to alleviate inequities in spending.
Key Data
$1.2 billion
— Potential annual savings from eliminating inefficiencies in the education system.
$2 billion
— Potential revenue generated by expanding gambling activities.
$2.6 billion
— Potential annual revenue from broadening the tax base through sales tax enforcement and corporate income tax revision.
$4.7 billion
— Minimum operating aid ordered by the New York State Appellate Division of the State Supreme Court.
$9.2 billion
— Capital improvements ordered by the New York State Appellate Division of the State Supreme Court.
$4.5 billion
— Estimated cost for New York City to pay about 65 percent of the statewide local share of Medicaid in fiscal year 2006.
New York State's fiscal health is hindered by high local tax burdens driven by state-mandated Medicaid costs, inequitable school aid programs, and generous pension benefits. To address these issues and improve transparency, the state must reform its debt management practices, reduce reliance on borrowing for operating expenses, and implement more rigorous multi-year financial planning.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
Reduce State-mandated local government Medicaid costs more than authorized by the 3 percent cap on local growth enacted in 2005.
Redesign State school aid programs including STAR to better serve poorer districts and thereby lower their local school tax burden.
Redesign the State-mandated pension benefits for future state and local government workers through changes such as raising the minimum retirement ages and increasing required employee contributions.
Lower Medicaid expenditures by eliminating long-term care eligibility loopholes that extend benefits to middle-class residents.
Discontinue issuance of State-funded debt to cover operating deficits.
Integrate public authorities’ proposed borrowing for capital investments with the State’s capital plan in order to prevent inefficient use of borrowing capacity.
Subject public authority borrowing to more rigorous financial review by an enhanced Public Authorities Control Board or by the Division of Budget.
Reduce the State’s future debt by lowering capital spending and/or increasing pay-as-you-go financing.
Prepare more extensive multi-year financial plans to improve budget accountability.
Require that lump-sum appropriations meet specific program criteria and be subject to sunshine provisions.
Key Data
$1.1 billion
— Estimated savings to local governments from Medicaid measures in the current fiscal year.
$5.8 billion
— Estimated annual savings from changing Medicaid policies, including reducing non-competitive rates and rationalizing utilization.
$105.8 billion
— Total debt outstanding for the State and its authorities at the end of fiscal year 2004–05.
$11.5 billion
— Amount of outstanding State-supported debt used to pay for operating expenses.
$4.2 billion
— Projected budget gap for the next fiscal year.
$3.4 billion
— Annual appropriations for the School Tax Relief (STAR) program in the current fiscal year.
New York State faces a significant challenge in funding public schools to meet constitutional requirements, with options including restructuring existing taxes, implementing luxury taxes on wealthy districts, or utilizing non-tax revenue sources like gambling. These approaches aim to address the inequities in the current system where wealthy districts can spend more at lower tax rates while poorer districts struggle to meet basic educational needs.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
The State should fully fund education at the state level to spread the burden for raising revenues across a wide population group and eliminate disparities among districts.
New York should adopt school aid formulas that more effectively equalize variations in local wealth by applying a uniform local tax rate across districts.
The State should free up existing resources to fund schools by cutting spending on other services, such as Medicaid and the prison system.
The State should restructure existing taxes to increase revenue and improve tax policy, such as collecting sales tax on remote and internet sales or broadening the sales tax base.
The State should impose a luxury tax on wealthy districts by adding a tax surcharge onto local effort above a spending threshold to share revenue with less fortunate districts.
Key Data
$8.4 billion
— Estimated cost of a statewide solution to the CFE-generated mandate.
$3.2 billion
— Amount committed to financing education in the form of the School Tax Relief (STAR) program.
$158,319
— Average actual valuation of property per pupil among the lowest spending 10 percent of districts in 2002-03.
$1,200,109
— Average actual valuation of property per pupil among the highest spending 10 percent of districts in 2002-03.
48.6 percent
— State share of non-federal revenues used for public primary and secondary education in New York.
$920 million
— Estimated cost of the new local property tax relief program in 2006-07.
New York's public authorities have accumulated $166 billion in debt, contributing to a total of $227 billion in state and local obligations that often bypass voter approval through 'back door' borrowing. To address this, the state should implement a constitutional limit on all state-supported debt, restrict borrowing to true capital purposes, and require comprehensive, multi-year capital planning to ensure transparency and fiscal responsibility.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
The state should adopt a new constitutional limit that would apply to all state-supported debt, including any issued by authorities.
The state should limit debt to true capital purposes to prevent borrowing for operating deficits.
The governor and the budget director should be given responsibility for preparing a comprehensive, multi-year capital plan that includes state agencies and authorities.
Each local industrial-development authority should select among private parties based on criteria established in advance and in response to competitive proposals.
Key Data
$166 billion
— Outstanding debt of public authorities.
$227 billion
— Total outstanding debt issued by New York state and local governments and their authorities.
$10 billion
— Amount New York's elected leaders borrow too much according to the analysis.
$4 billion
— Amount of 'back door' debt, representing 9% of the $45 billion in current state-supported debt.
New York's public employee retirement benefits have become a significant fiscal burden, with costs for pension contributions and retiree health insurance rising rapidly and exceeding those of most private and public employers. To alleviate this pressure on taxpayers, the state and city should implement structural reforms, including shifting to defined contribution plans, increasing employee contributions, and adjusting eligibility requirements.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
Require retirees to pay 50 percent of the premium for health insurance for themselves and their dependents.
Stop reimbursing retirees for Medicare Part B premiums, as this practice is out-of-line with benefits provided by other large employers.
The long-run goal of pension reform should be to convert from defined benefit to defined contribution plans for all new workers.
The New York systems should increase required employee contributions to pension plans and not limit them to ten years.
The New York system should raise the minimum age requirement for retirement to adopt thresholds similar to the federal Social Security system.
Pension benefits should be based on a more standard definition of final average salary that excludes overtime and other supplements subject to manipulation.
The current system should define work-related disabilities more rigorously to set more standard requirements.
The state should eliminate the variable supplements, or 'Christmas bonuses,' available to some retired New York City uniformed workers.
Key Data
$4.7 billion
— Projected City pension fund contributions for fiscal year 2008.
$1.5 billion
— Combined 2004 cost to the City and State for retiree health insurance.
$12,000
— The amount of the variable supplement or 'Christmas bonus' for certain retired New York City uniformed workers.
43 percent
— Percentage of retired firefighters classified as having a job-related disability as of 2002.
28 percent
— Percentage of retired police officers classified as having a job-related disability as of 2002.
$2.3 billion
— Required City contributions to pension funds in fiscal year 2004.
New York State should assume primary responsibility for funding school finance reform by leveraging educational efficiencies, expanded gambling, and tax restructuring rather than relying on local property taxes. To ensure these funds improve student outcomes, the state must also implement stronger accountability systems, year-round school schedules, and performance-based teacher compensation.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
The State, rather than local school districts, should be responsible for raising the additional funds needed for a sound basic education.
The State should also establish a longer-run goal of significantly increasing the share of all public school funds raised from statewide revenues and decreasing the mandated share raised by local school districts.
A significant portion of the resources needed for a sound basic education should be raised through the elimination of inefficiencies in the education system.
Expanded gambling activities should be used to generate about $2 billion annually for improved education, but these activities should be restricted to 'destination' type casinos and should be promoted by the State in a responsible manner.
Improved enforcement of the existing sales tax on remote (including internet) transactions should be used to generate significant new revenues in future years.
Broaden the base of the sales tax to include items currently exempt without a sound basis for the exemption.
Revise the corporate income tax to include certain revenues now excluded and to set a higher alternative minimum tax.
Extend the sales tax to include consumer (not business-to-business) purchases of professional services like law and accounting.
A new statewide system of accountability for schools should be established.
Teachers should be given financial incentives for better performance.
Key Data
$1.2 billion
— Annual savings generated by making more efficient use of teacher time, consolidating small school districts, and reallocating State aid.
$2 billion
— Annual revenue generated by authorizing new sites for housing video lottery terminals and taxing spending at the terminals.
$950 million
— Estimated annual yield from broadening the sales tax base to include items currently exempt.
$320 million
— Lower end of the estimated annual yield from redefining the corporate income tax base.
$435 million
— Upper end of the estimated annual yield from redefining the corporate income tax base.
$175 million
— Lower end of the estimated annual yield from extending the sales tax to include professional services.
States facing court-mandated school finance reform have frequently adjusted their tax structures, including sales, income, and property taxes, to generate the necessary revenue for education. While these reforms often increased state-level funding, the effectiveness of these tax-funded initiatives in improving student outcomes has been inconsistent and varies significantly by state.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
Additional spending is more likely to result in gains in student achievement when the money is well targeted.
The forms of spending most likely to have positive results are expansion of pre-kindergarten opportunities and small class sizes in the early elementary school grades.
Successful reform requires decentralization of financial management through a school-based accounting structure.
Successful reform requires new funds for staff development.
Successful reform requires shifting from seniority-based pay for teachers to performance-based structures.
Key Data
$1.2 Billion
— Additional state aid raised in Kentucky over two years following education reform.
$825 Million
— Amount committed by New Hampshire for education in the fiscal year 2000-01 biennium.
$922 Million
— Estimated revenue for the Vermont Education Fund in the 2000-01 school year.
$2.8 Billion
— Amount raised by the New Jersey tax package to address a budget gap and fund education reform.
$1.4 Billion
— Increase in state funding for education enacted in Ohio in Spring 2001.
New York's proposal to fund education through expanded gambling, specifically video lottery terminals, faces challenges regarding long-term revenue sustainability and the regressive nature of gambling taxes. Furthermore, the expansion of gambling opportunities is expected to increase social costs, which already total $1.1 billion annually in the state.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
Implement age restrictions for participation to mitigate the negative social problems of gambling.
Enforce the exclusion of individuals from gambling venues to address the risk factors associated with problem gambling.
Impose a limitation on the dollar amount of bills that machines will accept to help manage gambling behavior.
Require that winnings over a certain amount be paid by check to reduce the immediate availability of cash for further gambling.
Establish limitations on the number, location, and maximum withdrawals of ATMs to curb excessive gambling.
Key Data
$1.1 billion
— The estimated annual social cost of problem and pathological gambling in New York State.
$2,945
— The estimated annual cost to society imposed by a single problem gambler.
$10,330
— The estimated annual cost to society imposed by a single pathological gambler.
$9 billion
— The estimated annual spending on legal gambling in New York State, including lottery, pari-mutuel betting, and casinos.
$2 billion
— The projected annual revenue from video lottery terminals in five years.
New York State faces the challenge of funding court-ordered education reforms, which requires evaluating options like broadening the tax base for sales and corporate income or increasing existing tax rates. These revenue strategies must be balanced against principles of public finance, including adequacy, economic competitiveness, and the equitable distribution of the tax burden across different income levels and communities.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
The State should embrace the national Streamlined Sales Tax Project to ensure that taxes on internet and remote sales can be collected in the future.
The State should broaden the base of the sales tax to include many retail services that are not currently subject to tax.
The State should apply the sales tax to professional services when they are sold to consumers rather than businesses.
The State should reform its corporate income tax laws to capture income on which corporations are currently able to avoid paying taxes.
Key Data
$40 million to $590 million
— Estimated annual increase in state sales tax collections if the state embraces the Streamlined Sales Tax Project.
$950 million
— Potential annual revenue from broadening the sales tax base to include currently untaxed retail services.
$175 million to $595 million
— Estimated annual revenue from applying the sales tax to professional services sold to consumers.
$320 million to $435 million
— Estimated annual revenue from reforming corporate income tax laws to close loopholes.
$2.3 billion
— Total corporate income tax revenues collected by New York State in 2003.
$24.1 billion
— Total revenue raised by the personal income tax in state fiscal year 2003-2004.
New York State should fund the additional costs required to provide a sound basic education for New York City students through statewide revenues rather than local mandates, as the state currently relies too heavily on local taxes. This approach would alleviate the disproportionately high local tax burden faced by New York City residents and ensure more equitable funding across school districts.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
All additional resources necessary to ensure that New York's students receive a sound basic education should be provided through statewide revenues.
Restructure the pay schedule to make a larger share of compensation conditioned on job performance and to de-emphasize longevity and graduate educational credits.
Use financial incentives to overcome shortages of teachers in specific titles.
Increase teacher time spent on classroom instruction by reducing preparation periods and eliminating non-instructional assignments.
Enhance principals' managerial discretion regarding staff assignments and transfers.
Meet classroom space requirements through a combination of redistricting of existing schools and operating existing schools on a year-round schedule.
Key Data
49.4%
— The state share of non-federal primary and secondary education funding in 2001-02.
$73
— The amount New York State residents pay their local governments for every $1,000 of personal income.
171%
— The percentage of the national average that New York State residents pay in local taxes.
$68
— The amount New York State residents pay in state-level taxes for every $1,000 in personal income in fiscal year 2000.
$14,660.9 Million
— The grand total of the CFE estimate of New York City public school capital needs in 2003 dollars.
New York faces a structural fiscal imbalance characterized by the highest state and local tax burden in the nation, significant debt, and recurring budget gaps. To address these issues, the state must implement reforms such as adopting balanced budgets based on generally accepted accounting principles, establishing multi-year financial planning, and creating an independent legislative budget office.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
The state should require that the adopted budget be balanced in accord with generally accepted accounting principles.
The state should require a four-year financial plan with quarterly modifications.
The state should replace the constitutional requirement for voter approval of general obligation debt with a constitutional limit on the amount of all state debt.
The state should create a professional, non-partisan Legislative Budget Office to provide fiscal information to both houses of the Legislature and to the public.
The state should require that independently prepared revenue projections be used in the adopted budget if the Governor and Legislature do not agree on projections in a timely way.
The state should require a “rainy day” fund larger than the current Tax Stabilization Reserve Fund.
The state should eliminate the use of “off-budget” accounts.
The state should change the budget calendar to allow more time for deliberation on the Executive Budget by the Legislature.
The state should strengthen the committee process of the State Legislature to allow more participation by members in budgetary decisions.
Key Data
$141
— New York's combined state and local tax burden per $1,000 of personal income.
$38 billion
— New York's long-term debt in fiscal year 1999-00.
$9.3 billion
— New York's budget gap in fiscal year 2003-04.
$5.7 billion
— Amount the state relied upon in one-time actions and disappearing revenues to close the 2003-04 budget gap.
$170 million
— Amount appropriated for 'member items' in 2003.
$26 million
— Amount appropriated for 'member items' in 1984.
New York State faces a severe fiscal crisis with a projected $9.3 billion budget gap for fiscal year 2003-04, necessitating a multi-year plan to align expenditures with recurring revenues. To address this, the state should implement a temporary, phased-out tax surcharge while simultaneously reforming budget processes and restructuring the high combined state and local tax burden.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
New York State should levy a temporary tax surcharge that would be phased out over three years to avoid long-term borrowing.
The State should be required to balance its budget based on Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) in order to prevent the accumulation of a deficit.
The State should pursue a long-run effort to both lower total Medicaid costs and finance them more from statewide sources to reduce the local tax burden.
The Division of Budget should be required to prepare a four-year financial plan with quarterly updates to improve transparency.
All off-budget accounts should be brought on budget to ensure a unified statement of all planned revenues and expenditures.
The State’s long-run agenda should include school finance reform that helps narrow gaps in per-pupil spending between rich and poor school districts.
Key Data
$9.3 billion
— The gap to be closed in the fiscal year 2003-04 budget.
$11 billion
— The projected budget gap in fiscal year 2005-06 due to baseline spending increases.
127%
— New York's state and local combined tax burden as a percent of the U.S. average in fiscal year 1999.
$4.4 billion
— The deficit incurred by the State in fiscal year 2001-02.
New York City's budget gap cannot be solved by relying on economic recovery or state and federal aid, as the state faces its own fiscal crisis and has historically reduced aid during downturns. To achieve long-term stability, the city must implement structural reforms, such as increasing civilian work hours, streamlining procurement, and restructuring special education, rather than relying on borrowing or one-time gimmicks.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
The State should assist the City by lifting legal mandates that do not cost the State money.
The State should assist the City by re-authorizing a commuter tax to help close the budget gap.
The State should assist the City by pursuing Medicaid cost controls that benefit both the State and City.
Key Data
$278 million
— Anticipated aid increase for New York City in fiscal year 1991-92.
$76 million
— Actual aid cut for New York City in fiscal year 1991-92.
$198 million
— Anticipated aid cut for New York City in fiscal year 1995-96.
$351 million
— Actual aid cut for New York City in fiscal year 1995-96.
$250 million
— Anticipated increase in State aid for New York City in fiscal year 2003-04.
$62 billion
— New York State budget excluding federal aid.
New York State has made progress in reducing taxes to competitive levels, though recent proposals were deemed low-priority or counterproductive. Leaders are urged to address high local taxes by replacing poorly designed programs like STAR with more targeted alternatives.
Recommendations related to State Tax Policy
State leaders should address the State’s high local taxes, but they should do so with better programs than STAR, which is poorly designed because it does not target reductions in local tax burdens where they are most needed.
The proposed Co-STAR program suffers from similar flaws.
No results for your current filters. Manually edit your filters, or
clear the filters.
Share Feedback
Give a star rating, write a comment of at least 10 words, or both.