Wealth surtax may generate $3 billion
The Department of Revenue reported last month that the state had collected just less than $2.6 billion from the 4% surtax between July 1, 2024 and April 30, 2025, surpassing the $2.46 billion that the surtax generated in fiscal 2024 in just 10 months of fiscal 2025. May and June collections are expected to add to that total, and Gorzkowicz said Tuesday that he now thinks total fiscal 2025 surtax collections 'could be closer to $3 billion.'
'We will have the benefit of being able to spend those dollars on education transportation, as you've seen us do with our January supp as part of our transportation package this past year,' the secretary of administration and finance told the Local Government Advisory Commission, referring to the surtax surplus spending bill that is now in conference committee. 'We'll have another opportunity to do that again.'
The Healey administration and legislative Democrats have used conservative collection estimates in the first few years of the surtax, which was approved by voters in 2022. Under the constitution, revenue generated by the surtax can only be used for education or transportation initiatives and the conservative estimating has given lawmakers extra money to dole out separate from the traditional state budget process.
When they built the fiscal 2025 budget, the administration and legislative leaders agreed to spend $1.3 billion in surtax revenue this year. If Gorzkowicz's estimate proves correct, the Legislature could have as much as $1.7 billion to spend sometime after DOR certifies the full-year surtax collection amount in the fall.
When they agreed on a consensus revenue estimate for fiscal 2026 earlier this year, Gorzkowicz and the Ways and Means Committee chairs mutually estimated the state will collect $2.4 billion from the income surtax in fiscal 2026. But they agreed to spend at most $1.95 billion from that in the annual budget bill, which like the surtax surplus bill is also the subject of conference committee negotiations.
WWLP-22News, an NBC affiliate, began broadcasting in March 1953 to provide local news, network, syndicated, and local programming to western Massachusetts. Watch the 22News Digital Edition weekdays at 4 p.m. on WWLP.com.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
38 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Gilbert: Tony Evers' exit makes for a rare, truly open governor's race
Democrat Tony Evers' decision not to seek a third term means Wisconsin voters will experience something unusual in this political era — a truly 'open' race for governor. Nine of the past 10 gubernatorial contests in this state have involved a sitting governor. Now we know that the 2026 election will not. That makes the next campaign for governor more open-ended than it would have been, and harder to handicap. It also means there's a possibility both parties will have costly and hotly contested primaries for the state's highest office. Evers' decision not only alters the nature of the general election contest, but it also means the governor's race could serve as a platform for Democrats to debate their future in the aftermath of the party's momentous national defeat last year to Donald Trump and the GOP. For Democrats, a defeat for governor in 2026 in the nation's closest state would be hugely demoralizing. It also would be a major political failure, given the political advantage typically enjoyed in a midterm election by the party that is out of power in Washington. On the other hand, from a historical perspective, a Democratic victory would be groundbreaking. Coming as it would after Evers' two terms in office, it would produce the Democratic Party's longest hold on the governor's office in Wisconsin's nearly 180-year existence. Incredible as it sounds, Democrats have never occupied the office of governor for more than eight years in a row in Wisconsin. That is a testimony to several things: the dominance of the GOP in the state's first 100 years; the fact that until the 1970s, elections for governor here occurred every two years, not four; and the state's penchant for political swings in the current era of partisan parity and polarization. Let's look a little more closely at the history of governors' races here to put 2026 into some very broad perspective. Democrats have only once won three gubernatorial elections in a row in Wisconsin. It happened in the late 1950s and early 1960s when governors served two-year terms: Gaylord Nelson won in 1958 and 1960 and John Reynolds won in 1962. By contrast, Republicans have a history of longevity in power. There have been eight three-term Republican governors in Wisconsin's history, though only Tommy Thompson has done it since the four-year term was instituted beginning with the 1970 election. Thompson is the state's longest-serving governor (just over 14 years, from 1987 to 2001) and the only one to win four elections in a row. Only one other politician has tried to win three four-year terms, Republican Scott Walker, but he lost his bid for a third term to Evers in 2018. That Walker defeat illustrates some of the challenges a party faces staying in power in the current era. There is voter fatigue, which caught up with Walker after a drama-filled eight years, including a polarizing recall fight in 2014 and the failed bid he launched for the presidency in 2015. There is the cyclical nature of modern politics. Wisconsin has a history in mid-terms of voting against the party of the president, which worked against Republicans in 2002, against Democrats in 2010, and against Republicans in 2018. (Evers broke this pattern in 2022). In other words, America's frequent presidential swings have also produced frequent mid-term swings at the state level here. And finally, there is the state's extreme competitiveness. It was easier for a single party to stay in power when Wisconsin was dominated by one party. Since Wisconsin became a state in 1848, the governor's office has been held by four different parties: Republican, Democratic, Whig, and Progressive. But Republicans have been dominant for most of that history, at one point (between 1857 and 1930) winning 34 out of 37 contests for governor. Republicans have never been shut out of the governor's office for more than eight years in a row (a streak now in jeopardy). And there have been five different periods when Republicans held the office of governor for longer than eight years: ∎ 1987-2001, the Tommy Thompson era. It only ended when Thompson left office halfway through his fourth term to be health secretary under President George W. Bush. His lieutenant governor, Scott McCallum, filled the remainder of that term before losing the 2002 election to Democrat Jim Doyle. ∎ 1943-1959, when four different GOP governors served and Republicans won seven elections in a row for governor (again, these were two-year terms). ∎ 1895-1933. This was the longest period of Republican governance. Ten different Republican governors served, including both Fighting Bob La Follette and his son Philip. The GOP won 19 consecutive elections for governor. ∎ 1876-1891. ∎ 1856-1874. That history of lopsided control is long gone in Wisconsin, replaced not only by frequent partisan swings but also by routinely close elections. The past two races for governor have been the two closest of the past 60 years. The fact that this is now an open-seat race, without a sitting governor on the ballot, adds to the suspense. The last time this happened was 2010, when Walker was first elected. But the last time before that was more than 40 years ago in 1982. Evers would have been a formidable candidate for re-election as the most popular politician in the state, according to polling by the Marquette Law School. At the same time, his age (73) and the challenges of winning a third term were potential election wild cards. Without Evers on the ballot, this race will still be hugely influenced by the national political climate next year and by public opinion toward Trump. Democrats will still go into this race with the historic advantage of running against the party of the president. But historical patterns don't dictate the outcomes of elections; they just put them in context. Candidate quality matters. And in 2026, that is now a big unknown for both sides. Craig Gilbert provides Wisconsin political analysis as a fellow with Marquette University Law School's Lubar Center for Public Policy Research and Civic Education. Prior to the fellowship, Gilbert reported on politics for 35 years at the Journal Sentinel, the last 25 in its Washington Bureau. His column continues that independent reporting tradition and goes through the established Journal Sentinel editing him on Twitter: @Wisvoter. This article originally appeared on Milwaukee Journal Sentinel: Gilbert: Tony Evers' exit makes for a rare, truly open governor's race
The Hill
39 minutes ago
- The Hill
Democrats ask SEC to investigate ICE detention contracts
A group of four Democratic lawmakers sent a Friday letter to the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) urging the agency to investigate no-bid detention center contracts with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). Reps. Joe Neguse (D-Colo.), Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.), Ranking Member of the Subcommittee on Immigration, Integrity, Security, and Enforcement, Jamie Raskin (D-Md.), Ranking Member of the Judiciary Committee and Bennie Thompson (D-Miss.), Ranking Member of the Homeland Security Committee, co-led the effort. 'As the Trump Administration has continued to solicit publicly traded companies to operate detention facilities for immigration enforcement— contracts worth tens of millions of dollars — we, the undersigned, believe that there is an increased need for close oversight by the SEC, in addition to other government accountability measures,' the group wrote to SEC Chairman Paul Atkins. 'Given the speed and opaque nature of these contracts, there is a heightened need to monitor and oversee the release of material information related to these no-bid contracts,' they added. The push comes as large demonstrations have taken place across the country opposing the treatment of undocumented immigrants detained in privately run facilities. California Rep. Jimmy Gomez (D) said constituents have reported concerns of overcrowding as detainees are living in tents with limited access to electricity, food and water. 'Given the numerous claims of civil rights violations, inadequate care, and misuse of resources by many of these companies, we believe that it is imperative that we provide every employee with trusted mechanism to provide Congress and the Federal government with pertinent information, including the SEC as it pertains to these contracts, disclosures, and conduct within the company that could violate federal law or SEC regulations,' the Democrats said. 'Furthermore, the Trump Administration essentially ended the ability of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to police itself or conduct oversight over its various components,' they added. Democratic lawmakers in New Jersey faced federal charges after attempting to conduct oversight at the Delaney Hall Detention Center, where ICE signed a $1 billion contract with the GEO Group to utilize the site for immigration enforcement. On Tuesday, a federal appeals court overturned a New Jersey law banning private operators from gaining contracts with the federal government to run immigration detention centers. Their ruling will now allow the CoreCivic prison firm to continue operating New Jersey's Elizabeth Detention Center, which has drawn broad attention amid the Trump administration's crackdown on undocumented immigrants.
Washington Post
40 minutes ago
- Washington Post
A House panel must subpoena the Epstein files. Here's what to know.
The Republican House will soon be forced into the uncomfortable position of issuing a subpoena for the voluminous criminal file on deceased sexual predator Jeffrey Epstein — putting the Trump administration in the equally uncomfortable position of deciding how to respond. Three Republicans joined Democrats this week in voting to subpoena the records from the Justice Department, as well as to demand testimony from prominent figures from Republican and Democratic administrations as the clamor for transparency about the Epstein case continues to roil President Donald Trump's Washington.
