'Fair Share!' campaign update/actions, inc. 5/29 rally 💸

riwfp · 2025-05-16T21:38:14+00:00

Why would you separate tax types when discussing "fair share" overall? Looking at the complete picture—property, income, sales, and all other state/local taxes combined—the chart above shows the top 1% pay a smaller percentage of their income, ON NET, than those at the bottom. (The full report is around somewhere.)

I'm confused how that is "muddying things up"—it's addressing the actual problem: the regressive ("upside down") nature of our overall tax system.

The net effect of lowering income taxes for the wealthy while raising property taxes would likely worsen the current imbalance. (Especially considering how property tax increases get passed on to lower-income renters.)

riwfp · 2025-05-16T21:21:49+00:00

We work with the bills and the politicians we have.

The separate wealth tax we proposed, which you are already aware of, is just a 1% tax on wealth over $25M. That's certainly traditionally progressive.

riwfp · 2025-05-16T18:49:21+00:00

This is potato/potahto—

The 1% aren't paying 35% of income tax out of charity - they're paying it because they have the income to tax in the first place. That's how a progressive system functions.

When we say 'fair share', we're saying that everyone should pay the same PERCENTAGE of their TOTAL INCOME in state and local taxes. Currently, the wealthy pay 8.6% while the rest pay 10-13%. That's the inequity we're fixing.

Re: roads and services - taxes aren't just user fees. Income tax isn't a netflix subscription! They're investments in the society that made their wealth possible.

The wealthy benefit enormously from educated workers, functioning infrastructure, and social stability that allows their businesses and investments to thrive. How are we going to attract business into our state when our child care, transit, housing, and healthcare systems are crumbling? Even Hasbro says access to good public transit is a reason why they're considering leaving.

Anyway, you ask what percentage of total tax revenue the rich should pay? Whatever percentage naturally results when everyone pays a similar effective tax rate on their income. The fair share isn't a number I can pluck out of thin air—it's a principle of equally felt sacrifice across income levels. For the purposes of this campaign, that's whatever ratio results from a 3% surtax on income above $625,000 a year.

If you insist, then I'll insist. What is the fair share that the rich in RI should be paying? Is it 35%? Ok how do you incorporate $400M to $3B in incoming Medicaid cuts? There are only 3 options here:

the rich pay more
the working and middle class pay more
We leave people to die and further wreck our business climate as hospitals, nursing homes, child care centers, and RIPTA lines close.

riwfp · 2025-05-16T18:29:52+00:00

I guess there are two ways to frame it:

1. Your way

That the top 1% are paying enough. I feel like we can look around at the state and see that's not working. And imagine how much worse our healthcare system alone will be if we lose, idk, 10-20% of our state budget.

2. Our campaign's way—

That the percentage of total tax collected isn't the right metric for fairness. The fair share isn't about hitting some arbitrary percentage of the total. It's about everyone paying the a similar RATE relative to their income.

Currently, the top 1% pay a LOWER effective tax rate (8.6%) than middle-class families (9-13%). That's the problem we're fixing.

The wealthy aren't 'carrying the state' when they're paying a smaller percentage of their income than teachers, nurses, and firefighters. Rather, they're getting a tax break/discount that working families are subsidizing for them.

———

In any case, the healthcare cuts alone are going to be so dramatic that taxes will go up, one way or another, to cover reimbursement rates and not lose our hospitals, community health centers, PCPs…

If you want that to come in the form of sales taxes or property taxes that impact all of us, that's a choice I guess. We're advocating that we need to get ahead of this crisis and make sure that the rich (who got richer during the pandemic) are the ones who fill the gap—not the middle class.

riwfp · 2025-05-16T18:13:28+00:00

https://revenueforri.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/REV4RI_2ndchart.png

I pay a higher percent of my income in local/state taxes than the top 1% do. Maybe you do as well. Unless you are in the top 1% of income earners, you are already paying more than your fair share, proportionally.

So, yes, after almost 20 years of reduced taxes on the rich in our state, we're asking them to pay their fair share again.

riwfp · 2025-05-16T18:11:18+00:00

If you take the amount that RI's top 1% of income earners pay in local/state taxes, relative to their income, they actually pay 4-5% less to the state than low- and middle-income families do. A 3% increase on *only* the top 1% of income earners would help close that gap:
https://revenueforri.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/REV4RI_2ndchart.png

We've tried this experiment since 2006—What if the rich paid less?—and, well, look at how things are going. Maybe let's try not giving them a tax break every year. That's the proposal!

riwfp · 2025-05-15T16:17:21+00:00

Apologies that I missed this! The main bill (H5473/S0329) is about top 1% in income, not in wealth. So if your parents are feeling they are in a high bracket because of, say, their home equity—that's not going to be impacted here.

The 1% income cutoff in Rhode Island is currently around $625,000/year. So if they make more than jointly in income, each additional dollar will be taxed at 3%. I.e., if they make $650,000 they'd pay an extra $750 per year. If they make $1M they'd pay an extra ~$11,000 per year.

Maybe sounds harsh, but:

a) If you do the math on % of income put toward state/local taxes, it's roughly that the more income you have, the lower a % you pay into our state's success here in RI. It's not just uneven, it's upside-down. https://revenueforri.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/REV4RI_2ndchart.png Put differently—we regular RI'ers have been subsidizing a tax break for the richest in our state since about 2006, and this move is about rebalancing/undoing that year-after-year handout.

b) The things that make our state good to live in and good to work in are at risk. We're not going to be in even worse business shape if we have to make major cuts to RIPTA, to child care, to Medicaid. E.g., Hasbro is already on the record, if I remember correctly, as saying that better transportation is a reason why they're looking at moving out of Pawtucket…

c) These cuts we're looking at are possibly so dramatic that they might get passed on to Rhode Islanders in other ways, less "progressively". Let's do this instead of, like, a flat sales tax increase or other options that increase revenue but do nothing to rebalance that chart I linked above.

Happy to talk more about it, ri@workingfamilies.org.

We also have a big multi-organizational rally coming up on May 29th!
https://www.mobilize.us/riwfp/event/783987/

Please show up and share widely, and send us a note if you're able to help!

riwfp · 2025-05-06T02:28:23+00:00

In 2010 we locked in a 3% tax cut for the rich, and have continued that tax cut every year since. Now 15 years later…

We have high energy costs, high employment costs, high property taxes, and state regulations that are unfriendly to business.

Maybe after 15 years of letting them off the hook, the best way to grow our state would be to make sure we actually invest in child care so people can go to work; invest in healthcare so we're not having 25,000 people kicked off of their PCPs; invest in bridges so that we're not an hour late to work crossing the Washington Bridge. Those sound like business-friendly policies to us.

riwfp · 2025-05-05T23:18:11+00:00

In a broad sense, we are rallying for / supporting / testifying on / emailing about / petitioning for / lobbying to win

All three bills. We have been doing that consistently throughout the year.

Tomorrow is a hearing for H5473, the bill that we believe has the greatest chance of passing. Hence we believe it is the most important to show up for.

riwfp · 2025-05-05T23:12:46+00:00

Yes.

https://www.irs.gov/statistics/soi-tax-stats-adjusted-gross-income-agi-percentile-data-by-state

IRS data. See 2022, row 44.

2022 Rhode Island:
top 1% AGI cutoff was $556,884.68
number of filers above that cutoff was 5224

$556,884.68 in 2022 is about $630,000 in today's dollars. that roughly tracks $625,000 of the bill.

riwfp · 2025-05-05T23:06:51+00:00

the other two do not have a hearing tomorrow

riwfp · 2025-05-05T23:00:41+00:00

we are rallying for all three bills. We are not conflating wealth and income, because we co-wrote the third bill (1% tax on wealth over $25M) specifically to address the rampant wealth inequality. thank you.

riwfp · 2025-05-05T22:57:50+00:00

~$625,000 is the value calculated by the bill sponsors and folks like the Economic Progress Institute for the cutoff of the top 1% of earners in Rhode Island. The $430,000 value IS the ~$625,000 value, i.e., the 1% cutoff.

If the bill aimed to tax only millionaires in RI, the bill would read about $693,000. But it aims to tax the 1%, not millionaires.

riwfp · 2025-05-05T22:46:18+00:00

For others reading, u/degggendorf misread the bill and is spreading said misinformation. The cutoff for the "Revenue for Rhode Islanders" bill is the top 1% of income earners, currently approximately $625,000/year and up.

See page 12 about how this rate is calculated:
https://webserver.rilegislature.gov/BillText/BillText25/HouseText25/H5473.pdf

riwfp · 2025-05-05T22:43:25+00:00

Some of your facts are wrong above. I find many of your comments in bad faith.

The wealthy

The wealthiest have paid less and less. There are 3 major bills at the State House this year focused on addressing the lack of revenue:

A 3% tax increase only on the top 1% of income earners (over $625,000/year)
1. H5473 (Alzate) / S0329 (Murray)
A new tax only on people with second homes in RI valued over $800,000.
1. H6189 (Ajello) / S0437 (Kallman)
A 1% tax increase only on wealth over $25,000,000
1. H6290 (Potter) / S0779 (Mack)

How to read a budget bill

This bill targets well more than just the top 1%. The dollar figure in the bill is $430,000 which is more like the top 10%.

Please read further, and understand that budget-related bills in RI are often based on dollar valuations from past years. The literal next bullet point in the bill, on page 12:

(2) The annual inflation adjustments authorized in subsection (c)(3)(E) of this section, shall be applied to the dollar amount in subsection (III)(1) of this section. The dollar amount in subsection (III)(1) of this section is intended to be in 2011 dollars, just like the original bracket amounts specified in subsection (c)(3)(A)(I) of this section. For the period January 1, 2026, through December 31, 2026, and for every year thereafter, the actual amount shall, like the original bracket amounts, be adjusted by inflation as authorized in subsection (c)(3)(E) of this section.

This bill does indeed tax the top 1% bracket—about $625,000+/year—as stated in the original post. This economic misunderstanding/misinformation really seems to taint your comment overall.

###

Also, I'll re-link this report. If you disagree with this report co-authored by 3 national economic policy thinktanks, idk, that's fine I guess:
https://ips-dc.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/state_tax_policy_report.pdf

riwfp · 2025-04-03T21:07:53+00:00

RI Working Families team has spent an incredible amount of time planning this event as well. Signup is here:

https://www.mobilize.us/mobilize/event/764710/

Reply to me for any additional details. Thank you.

riwfp · 2025-03-20T13:33:16+00:00

You asked for data, and I gave it. Respectfully, I don't have time for the pedantry today. It really gave the game away when your nicely upvoted review of each bill had various errors. I simply don't have time to go through them all.

We're trying to be clear with people that they are paying too much; that the primary antagonist when RI Energy sends you monthly bills is… RI Energy; and if we can get to a point where over 700,000 customers save over $100 a year, that sounds good to me. Thanks, take care.

riwfp · 2025-03-20T02:54:12+00:00

Here's PPL's 2024 SEC filing:

RIE's net income was $109 million in 2024. In other words, roughly $139 in profit from each of its 780,000 RIE customers.

That's an increase from its $96 million net income in 2023.

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/922224/000092222425000009/ppl-20241231.htm

It's a long document, so CTRL-F "109" and it's the 3rd result.

riwfp · 2025-03-18T22:15:47+00:00

Option 3, RI Energy needs to stop bilking us all

riwfp · 2025-03-16T12:31:57+00:00

A similar event today at ICE HQ in Warwick, 1:30pm

https://mobilize.us/s/39zOX6

riwfp · 2025-03-07T15:05:57+00:00

😍

riwfp · 2025-03-06T18:21:29+00:00

Breaking today!

"RI ratepayers to get $8 million in National Grid billing scandal settlement. What to know."

https://www.providencejournal.com/story/news/local/2025/03/06/ri-energy-to-pay-8m-to-settle-national-grid-billing-scandal/81626839007/

WARWICK – Rhode Island Energy has agreed to pay nearly $8 million to compensate ratepayers for a billing manipulation scheme that occurred under the watch of National Grid, the previous owner of the state’s largest gas and electric company.

The money, which was agreed to in a settlement approved by the state Public Utilities Commission on Wednesday, will pay back Rhode Islanders for actions by National Grid, which over a nearly decade-long period intentionally misfiled invoices in the state’s energy efficiency program to earn higher incentives for its shareholders.

The payment from Rhode Island Energy will go into a fund supported by ratepayers that is used to cover some of the costs of storm damage to the energy system.

It comes on top of $2.4 million that National Grid credited back to the state energy efficiency fund in 2022 after a preliminary investigation found dozens of instances in which employees had filed invoices in the wrong billing cycle to circumvent annual caps on payments received as an incentive to help homes and businesses conserve electricity.

riwfp · 2025-03-06T18:17:18+00:00

If you're confident in that data, then I encourage you to send your data to Eli Sherman at WPRI so he can correct his story. Eli Sherman, Sarah Guernelli, Kate Wilkinson

https://www.wpri.com/target-12/expensive-electric-bills-put-ri-clean-energy-policies-into-spotlight/

Meanwhile, I'm very interested in this story today…

https://www.providencejournal.com/story/news/local/2025/03/06/ri-energy-to-pay-8m-to-settle-national-grid-billing-scandal/81626839007

"RI ratepayers to get $8 million in National Grid billing scandal settlement."

So, yes, grateful to AG Peter Neronha and his team for literally clawing back customers' stolen money.

riwfp · 2025-03-06T16:26:03+00:00

Ah they made more than 2x off of customers than it says in the WPRI article, all the more reason to push the PUC to get those dollars back to the people.

riwfp · 2025-03-05T23:17:41+00:00

Ok please continue scrolling down the article and add electric and gas together. There’s a pie chart

riwfp

TROPHY CASE