Question 5: State Revenue Limit & Rebate
Would change the formula behind the state's 1986 tax-revenue cap so it's tied to actual collections. Supporters say this would mean larger, more frequent taxpayer rebates; that's their prediction, not a guaranteed outcome.
Last verified October 27, 2026 against the official guide.
A YES vote: Rebate cap grows from actual collections; supporters expect bigger, more frequent refunds. A NO vote: Cap stays tied to the current, rarely-triggered formula.
Page 1 of the official AG-certified petition text. View the full PDF on mass.gov
A YES vote ✓ Your choice
Changes how the state's revenue cap (known as ) is calculated: instead of growing from the prior year's cap, the new cap would grow from the prior year's actual tax collections, increased by the average growth of wages and salaries in Massachusetts over the most recent three years. That wage-growth factor is what makes it a moving limit rather than a freeze. It would also count revenue from the 2022 on income over $1 million toward the cap. All of it would take effect July 1, 2027. That's the legal change. Supporters project both changes would make it more likely collections exceed the cap, which is what triggers rebates. But future tax collections aren't guaranteed, so the size and frequency of any rebate can't be promised in advance.
A NO vote ✓ Your choice
Keeps the current formula, which grows the cap from the prior year's limit rather than from actual collections plus wage and salary growth, and excludes surtax revenue, which is why rebates have only been triggered twice since 1986.
Who this affects
- Every Massachusetts taxpayer, who'd likely see more frequent (but less predictable) rebate checks
- State-funded programs that rely on stable, predictable tax revenue
- The portion of the 2022 millionaire's-tax revenue that funds education and transportation
Common questions
Are opponents against tax rebates?
Not exactly. Opponents say they aren't fighting the idea of rebates. Their objection is specifically about folding the 2022 surtax (the extra 4% tax on income over $1 million) into the cap calculation, since that revenue is earmarked for education and transportation.
Wouldn't tying the cap to last year's collections freeze it in place?
No. The new cap would be the prior year's net state revenue increased by the average growth of wages and salaries in Massachusetts over the most recent three years, so it moves with the state's earnings.
Does this guarantee a rebate?
No. Supporters project the change makes a rebate more likely and larger when one happens, but it still depends on actual future tax collections, which aren't guaranteed.
How often has the current cap actually triggered a rebate?
Only twice since 1986, most recently in FY2022, because the cap grows from the prior year's limit rather than from what the state actually collects.
Who's for it, who's against it, and why
Supporters say
The Massachusetts High Technology Council and Citizens for Limited Taxation sponsored the petition. Business groups including the Massachusetts Fiscal Alliance, NFIB, and the Retailers Association of Massachusetts back the yes side. Their argument is that the current formula grows the cap from itself rather than from what the state actually collects, so it rarely constrains spending (the 62F refund has only triggered twice since 1986), and that tying it to real collections would make rebates work the way voters intended.
Funding: Taxpayers for an Affordable Massachusetts has reported about $686,000 in cash receipts plus roughly $1.96 million in in-kind support. The in-kind figure is most of the YES side's resources here, and about $1.9 million of it comes from a single group, the Massachusetts Opportunity Alliance. Named cash donors include $100,000 from Analog Devices co-founder Ray Stata and $50,000 from the Retailers Association of Massachusetts.
Opponents say
Protect Massachusetts' Future is leading the opposition, a coalition of public-sector unions and the Massachusetts Budget and Policy Center. They warn that tying the cap to actual collections would make it swing with short-term ups and downs in the economy, so a weak year in the stock market or a spike in unemployment claims could force sudden, hard-to-plan-for budget cuts, and that it could even affect the state's bond rating, echoing how an earlier tax-cap law rattled municipal finances in the 1980s.
Funding: About $938,000 across four committees, plus roughly $151,000 in in-kind support. Protect Massachusetts' Future accounts for $869,000 of it, including $400,000 from the SEIU Massachusetts State Council, $150,000 from the 1199 SEIU Massachusetts PAC and $150,000 from the Massachusetts Teachers Association. This is the only question with substantial money reported on both sides.
Committee filings at : Support: Taxpayers for an Affordable MassachusettsOppose: Protect Massachusetts Future · Raise Up Massachusetts 2026 · Democratic Socialists Against Austerity · Democratic Socialists Against Reactionary Rollbacks
Funding figures are total receipts reported to OCPF since each committee organized, through filings covering the period ending October 26, 2026, checked October 27, 2026. They will shift before Election Day.
How to read these numbers
In-kind support is noted separately where it's significant. Check every figure against OCPF's own ballot-question filings. OCPF's summary view reports money spent, and it splits a committee that works on two questions evenly between them, so its per-question totals are smaller than the receipts shown here. Each committee's own OCPF page shows its receipts.
Official source: Secretary of the Commonwealth, 2026 Information for Voters. The ballot language, official summary, and any fiscal statement come from there. Independent research: background and funding figures compiled by this site from Tufts University's Center for State Policy Analysis and OCPF campaign finance filings. Not an official state source.
Other places to look
No single guide should be your only one. These are worth your time, and a couple of them do things this site can't:
- Information for Voters, the state's "red book". Mailed to every household. It prints the full legal text and the arguments written by the campaigns themselves, which is a primary source no summary replaces. If anything on this site conflicts with it, believe the red book.
- League of Women Voters of Massachusetts. Explainers plus live forums where you can hear the campaigns and ask your own questions. They are nonpartisan on candidates and parties, and they do take positions on some of this year's questions; they say openly which ones.
- Tufts Center for State Policy Analysis. Nonpartisan analysis of what each question would actually do. Takes no positions.
- OCPF campaign finance filings. The raw source behind the funding figures here. Check my numbers against it.
- Ballotpedia. Background and history on each measure.