|
June 14, 2022
Sales Tax Holiday Weekend Set for
August 13 & 14, 2022
Yesterday, the Massachusetts Legislature adopted a resolution (S.2934) setting the dates for this year’s Annual Sales Tax Holiday, now confirmed to be held on the weekend of August 13th and 14th, 2022.
While the operation of the holiday weekend is expected to be very similar to that of previous years, members are encouraged to closely review any and all releases from the MA Department of Revenue (DOR) in the coming weeks. Specific rules governing the Sales Tax Holiday can be found in the DOR regulation, 830 CMR 64H.1.8: Sales Tax Holiday.
Coalition to Stop the Tax Hike
Amendment Call to Action
RAM has joined the Coalition to Stop the Tax Hike Amendment because we believe in protecting our small businesses, retirees, family farmers and economy from the harmful effect of the Tax Hike Amendment. We urge you to do the same. please consider joining the growing coalition of over 340 businesses, organizations, chambers of commerce and individuals at https://stopthemataxhike.com/#join.
SJC Ballot Question Decisions- Alcohol Reform a Go, App Based Drivers a No
This week the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court issued a pair of decisions determining whether two separately filed initiative petitions may proceed to the ballot in November. Both of the initiative petitions were challenged before the SJC for failing to adhere to the constitutional requirement that initiative petitions contain only related subjects.
Upholding the Attorney General’s previous certification, the SJC ruled that the 21st Century Alcohol Retail Reform ballot question met the constitutional requirements to proceed to the ballot. Proponents still have to collect and submit a second round of signatures (13,374) by the end of June to qualify, but barring some unforeseen issue, the alcohol question will be appear before the voters in November. RAM is opposed to this proposal.
Regarding the proposed Network Company/App-Based Drivers ballot question, the SJC rejected the measure as it contained “multiple subjects that are not related” in violation of the state constitution. The Court found that while majority of the proposal focused on establishing a new contract based relationship between network companies and app-based drivers, other provisions went beyond that single subject to also limit liability from third parties. The petitions thus violate the related subjects requirement because they present voters with two substantively distinct policy decisions. This decision marks the end of the line for this ballot proposal.
|
