fbpx Skip to content

Stay Up to Date!

Zip Code
This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Connecticut searches for vendor to analyze new tax strategy

The Connecticut Office of Policy and Management is searching for a vendor who could analyze and model a complicated new taxation strategy that would replace part of the income tax with a payroll tax.

If implemented, the new tax structure could result in employees seeing a pay reduction of 5 percent to make up for the increase in payroll taxes for the employer, but the employee could then see an increase in overall pay through a reduced federal tax liability.

The new taxation strategy is meant to reduce some of the losses Connecticut residents face due to a new cap on state and local tax deductions implemented by 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act.

Gov. Dannel Malloy’s administration estimated the cap would reduce SALT deductions by $10.3 billion for Connecticut residents and increase their federal tax payments by $2.3 billion.

The proposal was put forward by the CT School & State Finance Project in 2019 and the budget included a provision to analyze and study the idea.

The results of the analysis will be considered by a Payroll Commission, which will include the Commissioner of the Department of Revenue Services, the Secretary of the Office of Policy and Management and the co-chairs and ranking members of the Finance, Revenue and Bonding Committee.

The CT School & State Finance Project says the proposal could be a boon to Connecticut taxpayers.

“In short, the payroll tax proposal gives Connecticut wage earners and employers a tax break, paid for by the federal government, by reducing their net state and federal tax liability,” the CT Finance Project wrote.

The organization estimates Connecticut taxpayers would save $1 billion per year in reduced taxes and businesses would save $600 million per year through reducing their payments for social security and Medicare.

The SALT cap elicited outrage from Malloy and former Attorney General George Jepsen filed suit along with other states, alleging President Donald Trump’s administration was targeting high-tax, largely Democrat-led states. The lawsuit was dismissed by a federal court.

The cap also raised concerns that it could exacerbate Connecticut’s loss of wealthy individuals to other states with lower property taxes.

CT School & State Finance’s payroll tax idea received interest from Gov. Ned Lamont and lawmakers on both sides of the political aisle, particularly since it could increase revenues to the state by upwards of $300 million.

Connecticut currently faces a crushing projected deficit of $7 billion over the next few years due to the COVID-19 pandemic and economic downturn.

Marc E. Fitch

Marc E. Fitch is the author of several books and novels including Shmexperts: How Power Politics and Ideology are Disguised as Science and Paranormal Nation: Why America Needs Ghosts, UFOs and Bigfoot. Marc was a 2014 Robert Novak Journalism Fellow and his work has appeared in The Federalist, American Thinker, The Skeptical Inquirer, World Net Daily and Real Clear Policy. Marc has a Master of Fine Arts degree from Western Connecticut State University. Marc can be reached at [email protected]


  1. Donna Ann DeFelice-Junk
    June 3, 2020 @ 2:27 pm

    Another outside vendor yet the state employees that deserve their raises aren’t getting them? TOO MANY PRIVATE CONTRACTORS doing the jobs that are already occupied by state employees. This only proves the incompetency of state employees in critical positions. I say the many Commissioners, Executives & their assistants need to do their jobs especially with the salaries & perks they receive or be dismissed! We shouldn’t need outside private vendors!!


    • Thad Stewart
      June 5, 2020 @ 4:53 pm

      Eloquently stated, too bad the gubner won’t hear it. He is deaf to any spending cuts.


  2. Paul Bartomioli
    June 3, 2020 @ 3:26 pm

    Governor Lamont is following the progressive method of governing. “Experts” are brought in to effect government policy whether that policy is an EO or a law passed by the legislature. It has its roots in FDR’s administrations and in the 1960s, LBJ and his “Great Society” codified it into law. Over the years, both on a state level in CT and a national level, the legislature is no longer responsible for the day to day mechanics of a law. Witness the fiasco of the “grocery tax” wherein the “experts” apparently grossly overstepped the intent of the legislature; or did they? The beauty of the system is the codification of the childhood response, “I didn’t do it.”


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *