Question 5: State Revenue Limit & Rebate
Statewide — all of Massachusetts
General election · Tuesday, November 3, 2026
- Placed on the ballot by initiative petition: the Information for Voters labels it a law proposed by initiative petition on which no vote was taken by the Senate or the House of Representatives before May 6, 2026. The Legislature's Special Joint Committee on Initiative Petitions issued the legislative reports reproduced in the same booklet.[1]
- Not on this ballot: on June 18, 2026 the Supreme Judicial Court ruled that the Attorney General's summary of a separate proposal to lower the state income tax from 5% to 4% was misleading and blocked it from the November ballot.[2]
The question on the ballot
Do you approve of a law summarized below, on which no vote was taken by the Senate or the House of Representatives before May 6, 2026? State Revenue Limit & Rebate: This proposed law would change the limit on how much revenue the state can collect in a given year. The proposal would limit state revenue in a given year to the net amount of state revenue from the year before, increased by a rate equal to the average growth of wages and salaries in Massachusetts over the most recent three years. If revenue collected by the state in a given year exceeds the limit, the excess amount would be refunded to taxpayers the following year. The proposed law would include all revenue from the surtax on incomes over $1 million when calculating the revenue limit and when determining whether state revenue exceeds the limit. The provisions of the proposed law would all be effective as of July 1, 2027. The proposed law states that, if any of its parts were declared invalid, the other parts would stay in effect.[1]
The measure would limit state revenue in a given year to the prior year's net revenue increased by the average growth of Massachusetts wages and salaries over the most recent three years, refund any excess to taxpayers the following year, and count all revenue from the surtax on incomes over $1 million in that calculation. It would take effect July 1, 2027. Statement of fiscal consequences (Executive Office for Administration and Finance): The proposed law would put stricter limits on allowable annual revenue growth available for budgeting. As a result, the proposal would reduce the amount of money available to support the state budget, which includes local aid for schools and municipal budgets. The proposal would also reduce the amounts available to build the state’s Stabilization, or “rainy day,” Fund – a reserve of money set aside to help Massachusetts manage economic downturns or emergencies without raising taxes or making major spending cuts. Depending on future conditions, the proposal could change the frequency of statutorily-required refunds to taxpayers.[1]
A YES vote means
A YES VOTE would change the limit on state revenue collection, tying it to prior year collections plus average wage and salary growth, and provide for a rebate of revenue exceeding that limit.
A NO vote means
A NO VOTE would make no change in the law relative to state revenue collection.
The law today
Per the Legislature's committee majority report on the related petitions: "The law requires the Department of Revenue to issue a credit to taxpayers if total tax revenues in a given fiscal year exceed an annual cap tied to wage and salary growth in the Commonwealth." The report states the existing chapter 62F revenue limit has been triggered twice since enacted in 1986 (in 1987 and 2022) and that the petition would change the calculation to include Fair Share surtax revenue and to base the limit on the prior year's actual revenue collected rather than the prior year's limit.[1]
Official fiscal estimate
Executive Office for Administration and Finance: the proposed law "would put stricter limits on allowable annual revenue growth available for budgeting," would reduce the amount available to support the state budget (including local aid for schools and municipal budgets) and the amounts available to build the Stabilization (rainy day) Fund, and "could change the frequency of statutorily-required refunds to taxpayers." No dollar estimate is given.[1]
Arguments made for
- In the 150-word argument in favor signed by Taxpayers for an Affordable Massachusetts, as printed in the Information for Voters: "This proposal modernizes the state’s existing laws to create stronger fiscal guardrails, promote accountability, guard against future tax increases, and ensure government growth reflects what taxpayers can afford. It will not cut state spending for important services like education, transportation, or healthcare."[1]
Arguments made against
- In the 150-word argument against signed by Colette Berard, history teacher, of Protect Massachusetts’ Future, as printed in the Information for Voters: "Question 5 would reduce the state’s ‘Rainy Day’ fund, forcing massive budget cuts to schools, healthcare, affordable housing, and public safety during recessions, when spending to create jobs and support residents is needed most."[1]
On record in support
On record in opposition
- Protect Massachusetts' Future (Colette Berard), signer of the con argument; registered with OCPF as Protect Massachusetts Future[1][3]
- Raise Up Massachusetts 2026, registered with OCPF as opposing[3]
- Democratic Socialists Against Austerity, registered with OCPF as opposing[3]
- A majority of the Legislature's Special Joint Committee on Initiative Petitions voted May 4, 2026 to recommend that the General Court take no action on the petition (majority report; the same report and vote also covered a separate income-tax petition that is not on this ballot)[1]
Campaign money
Receipts reported to the Massachusetts Office of Campaign and Political Finance (OCPF) by committees registered for this question, calendar years 2025 and 2026 combined, as published in OCPF's ballot question reports and retrieved Oct 19, 2026 (through each committee's most recent filing). Supporting ($566,658 total): Taxpayers for an Affordable Massachusetts $566,658 | Opposing ($715,822 total): Protect Massachusetts Future $669,000; Raise Up Massachusetts 2026 $45,892; Democratic Socialists Against Austerity $880; Democratic Socialists Against Reactionary Rollbacks $50. Committees registered on more than one question report one total for all of them, so these figures overlap across questions.[3]
Research notes & limits
Ballot text, official yes/no statements and fiscal statements are taken from the Secretary of the Commonwealth's 2026 Information for Voters booklet (PDF text extracted and checked by script). Arguments are quoted from the signed 150-word pro/con statements, which the Commonwealth states reflect the authors' opinions and are not certified as accurate. Both a signed pro and a signed con argument are printed. The booklet's own summary is the Attorney General's; the Secretary's page and Ballotpedia could not be fetched (bot protection), so the ballot list was confirmed from the booklet itself, which covers nine questions. Added Oct 19, 2026: supporters/opponents are the signers of the Information for Voters arguments, committees registered with OCPF for each question (OCPF lists each committee as supporting or opposing), and the Legislature's committee reports printed in the booklet; no endorsement lists from other organizations were verified. Campaign-finance figures are from the OCPF reports API, which publishes year-to-date totals by committee and does not state a single as-of date.
Sources · 3
Researched 2026-10-19. Green citations are official government records.
- 1.2026 Massachusetts Information for Voters (State Election, November 3, 2026) · Secretary of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts Official record
- 2.Mass. high court blocks state income tax question from November ballot · WBUR News report
- 3.OCPF ballot question committee reports, 2026 (committees and year-to-date receipts) · Massachusetts Office of Campaign and Political Finance · 2026-10-19 Official record