For the Many: NJ Advocates Rally at Statehouse to Demand Tax Justice at the State and Federal Levels

Today, advocates from across New Jersey, joined by Senator Britnee Timberlake, rallied at the Statehouse to demand tax justice at the state and federal levels just a few days before Governor Phil Murphy’s final budget address.

As Murphy prepares to deliver his final budget address on Tuesday, February 25, advocates made clear that he faces a choice: balance the budget through cuts to programs and services that people rely on, or raise new revenue by targeting wealth and big corporations. Collectively, the coalition called for more taxes on the wealthy to make New Jersey more resilient to the chaos happening in Washington, DC, and allow the state to support and invest in working families who are feeling the pinch of rising costs.

“The federal government, right now, is saying to states, “If you don’t get on the same page as our agenda, we will cut your funding; we’ll roll it back. That’s why it’s important for the entire [NJ] legislature to make sure we’re filling gaps, so if the federal government wants to pull their support, we step forward and say, ‘Not here in NJ!’”, called New Jersey Senator Brittnee Timberlake. “We call on corporations to even step up and fill some of the funding gaps. We call for a hard look at the budget that Gov. Murphy is working on right now to make sure we’re filling some of the budget gaps that are coming out of or being created out of Washington’s nonsense.”

The rally also drew attention to looming federal threats, as Congress considers massive tax breaks for millionaires, billionaires, and wealthy corporations at the expense of Medicaid, SNAP, TANF, and other critical state funding streams that working families rely on. With $27.5 billion in federal expenditures flowing into New Jersey annually, the chaos in Washington, DC is creating significant uncertainty.

“We are seeing at the federal level what happens when the government serves billionaires and the wealthy instead of helping those who need it most. We can’t let that happen in New Jersey — our state budget needs more revenue to stop the cuts to critical programs like schools and bridges that people count on,” said Peter Chen, Senior Analyst, New Jersey Policy Perspective.

Today the coalition presented a united front, supporting a range of popular, proven revenue-raising solutions that target the ultra-wealthy and highly profitable corporations—not working families. These measures, which have strong public support, are key to creating a more resilient and just state budget.

“Our FY2026 budget must maintain funding for essential community and social safety net programs,” said Maura Collinsgru, Director of Policy and Advocacy for New Jersey Citizen Action. “New Jerseyans are struggling to keep pace with the rising costs of healthcare, child care, groceries, housing and other essentials. We must find ways to raise revenues to address any deficit issues rather than considering cuts to programs and services families depend on to make ends meet. That includes taxing the very wealthy and our most profitable corporations. We urge our state lawmakers to put the interests of New Jerseyans living paycheck-to-paycheck above tax relief for the very wealthy and politically connected.”

“Any cuts to state programs and services would put families like mine into crisis,” said Mercedes Morán, a community leader and member of Make the Road New Jersey. “I’m calling on Governor Murphy and New Jersey leaders to stand with working families like mine and make the wealthy pay what they owe. Let’s set an example for other states — while Congress considers the No Bailout for Sanctuary Cities Act, New Jersey needs to set an example and make it clear that we stand with working families.”

“For too long, we’ve been told to sacrifice more—work longer hours, pay higher taxes, stretch our families thinner. But when do they sacrifice? When do they pay their fair share?” said Trina Scordo, executive director of NJ Communities United. “We stand here—childcare workers, parents, and allies—to demand New Jersey tax millionaires and billionaires, and invest that revenue where it belongs: in us. This is our vision: A New Jersey where we fund dignity, not disparity. Where we unite, from cribs to communities, to demand a future that works for the many—not the few.”

“At a time when we are seeing so many federal cuts, it is incredibly important that as a state, we fully fund public healthcare, including the only public hospital in New Jersey, University Hospital in Newark,” said Debbie White, RN, HPAE President. “We know that the budget cuts by the new administration will benefit the wealthy at the expense of our most vulnerable populations. Our poor, our underserved and our under and uninsured populations need public health. We must protect the citizens of New Jersey by ensuring that our public health systems stay intact.”

“In this time of grave federal crisis of cuts, layoffs and a general dismantling of government, our New Jersey state legislators must have their priorities straight: now is not the time to continue favoring the already well-off! We demand tax justice so that we can overcome the federal threats,” said Dennis Trainor, Vice President CWA District 1.

“Instead of proposing a budget that fights for working-class New Jerseyans, Governor Murphy and Legislative Democrats are mimicking the Trump-Musk Administration playbook—gutting essential services and spending in every single town across the state,” said Ben Dziobek, Climate Revolution Action Network founding member and Executive Director. “Governor Murphy, is this the legacy you want to leave behind?—caving to corporate interests, draining critical funds, and stalling New Jersey’s future just to appease your wealthy friends?”

“Last month, New Jersey made national news when heavily armed ICE agents raided a large-scale employer in one of the most immigrant-rich neighborhoods in our state’s largest city. But you wouldn’t know it based on the committee agendas in Trenton,” said Amy Torres, Executive Director with New Jersey Alliance for Immigrant Justice. ”One in three workers in NJ’s essential infrastructure economy is an immigrant. Immigrant New Jerseyans pay over $3 billion in taxes each year with undocumented immigrants making up $1.3 billion in state and local taxes alone. Enough is enough. I refuse to let lawmakers talk about fiscal cliffs unless they tell us how they’re protecting our most precious resource- our people. Governor Murphy stood here just last month and said, ‘I will never back down from defending our New Jersey values — if and when they are tested.’ Well, now is the time. New Jersey must invest in immigrant legal services, language access, and legislation that defends our communities.”

Watch a recording of the press event here.

Download photos of the press event here.

###

For The Many is a statewide coalition of more than 40 organizations working to expand funding for essential services and improve budget practices to meet current and future needs, especially for communities that have been historically left behind.

What to Look for in the New Jersey Budget for Fiscal Year 2026

Governor Murphy’s final budget proposal will set in place his legacy. Will his administration be able to follow through on its promise of balancing strong investments in schools and pensions with robust revenues that pay for those investments? Or will the budget fall back on cutting critical programs and one-time gimmicks, hurting working families now and the state’s fiscal footing in the future? As NJPP noted last year when the FY 2025 budget passed, the $2.1 billion structural deficit must be closed with new revenues to avoid a return to underinvestment and shortsighted cuts.[i]

In addition to setting the state’s path for the next administration, this budget must prepare our state for an unclear federal future. Congressional and executive dysfunction threatens to jeopardize critical federal funds — ranging from health insurance and food assistance to environmental protection and transportation infrastructure. For context, federal revenues contribute $27.5 billion to state programs, compared to $56.7 billion from state revenues.[ii] Even minor disruptions in federal funding could result in substantial pain for families and people living in New Jersey and the programs they depend on.

While threats from the federal level will make it difficult for New Jersey’s elected officials to meet their goal to make the state more affordable for residents, there are key areas where the state budget can improve affordability by directly assisting working-class and middle-class families, such as improved family tax credits and health insurance. However, these effective affordability measures will be difficult to expand without either increasing revenues or cutting back on tax breaks for wealthy households and big corporations.

Ahead of Governor Murphy’s budget address for Fiscal Year (FY) 2026, NJPP has identified the following key benchmarks and priorities to evaluate whether the next state budget sufficiently advances economic, social, and racial justice:

Protect the Surplus and Close the Deficit

The threat of federal funding volatility adds urgency to ensuring a robust surplus. With only $6.2 billion left in surplus compared to a $56.6 billion appropriation, the state has only enough revenue to sustain 40 days of government operations.[iii] With the state surplus shrinking rapidly due to structural budget deficits, the state must find additional revenue and end wasteful corporate subsidies to retain budget reserves.

Beyond the good practice of having substantial reserves to withstand economic downturns, the state faces threats at the federal level from congressional or executive branch proposals to weaken or cut existing programs, including:

  • Disaster relief funding,[iv]
  • Infrastructure funding for key programs like the Gateway Tunnel,[v] and
  • Potential cuts to key social safety net programs such as Medicaid, food assistance, and Temporary Assistance for Needy Families.[vi]

 

For example, any reduction in Medicaid funding would result in an enormous shortfall to a program that sends nearly $13 billion in federal funds to the state each year.[vii]

Fully Fund Pensions and Schools

New Jersey has maintained its commitment to funding pensions and schools after years of disinvestment, and doing so has helped to improve the state’s fiscal standing while following through on its obligations to its workers and residents.[viii] However, as the structural deficit makes additional spending on legislative priorities difficult, lawmakers may seek reductions in school and pension funding to help pay for pet projects. This would jeopardize the state’s credit rating, which has been sustained by robust surpluses and full pension payments. New Jersey has already seen the high cost of paying for past mistakes in underfunding the pensions,[ix] and schools need more, not less, funding to meet their goal of high-quality education for all students.[x]

Raise Revenues to Balance the Budget

One straightforward answer to the state budget’s structural budget deficit is to raise sufficient revenues to pay for the state’s investments and infrastructure. NJPP has proposed a package of revenue raisers that would adjust taxation for wealthy individuals and large corporations to raise roughly $4 billion to ensure that the state government has sufficient revenue to pay its bills and maintain its long-term investments.[xi] New Jersey can and should take steps to improve its tax system to take the state on a path toward fiscal responsibility, generate sufficient funds to invest in growth and affordability, reduce income and economic inequity, and ensure the wealthy pay their fair share. The proposal includes:

  • $410 million from expanding the fee on sales of very expensive homes to fund affordable housing
  • $772 million from raising marginal tax rates on people earning more than $2 million a year
  • $888 million from requiring large corporations to pay taxes on all their profits, including profits currently reported in foreign tax havens, and
  • $385 million from funding more auditors to pursue tax avoidance and evasion.

 

Maintain StayNJ’s Guardrails

The StayNJ proposal, a subsidy program for senior homeowners, is an expensive program providing the bulk of its benefits to wealthier residents while leaving lower-income seniors with limited to no benefit.[xii] Fortunately, lawmakers included guardrails requiring that the state maintain at least a 12 percent surplus before the program can send out its checks.[xiii] The fiscal year 2025 budget failed to reach that benchmark, reaching less than 11 percent of the total budget.[xiv] A healthy surplus is even more critical now due to the volatility in federal funding, so the state should abide by the original statute and avoid spending hundreds of millions of dollars on a new expensive benefit without ensuring the state can pay all its existing bills.

Maintain Funding for Services for Immigrants

Immigrants make up nearly roughly 1 in 4 New Jersey residents, and the state budget has funded programs for immigrants in recent years to fill gaps left by restrictions on federal funding for noncitizens. Given recent attacks on immigrants regardless of status and increases in deportations, New Jersey should maintain or increase funding for:

  • Cover All Kids health insurance coverage for all children regardless of immigration status
  • Detention and deportation defense legal assistance
  • Legal representation for children and youth, and
  • Office of New Americans coordination to connect immigrant residents to services such as child care and job training.

 

Expand and Improve Tax Credits for Working Families

Despite repeated calls by lawmakers to make the state affordable for all in the last budget, the state did not expand two critical family tax credits to support affordability for working families – the Child Tax Credit and the Earned Income Tax Credit. These credits effectively reduce poverty by giving money back directly to families who need it through their tax refund each year.[xv] Both programs need increased funding and expanded eligibility to reach more families.[xvi] Even in a tight budget year, small increases in benefits or expansions in age eligibility would directly help more families afford life in the state.

Increase Benefits in WorkFirst NJ to Reduce Poverty

With all safety net and cash assistance programs under threat of federal cuts, it is even more urgent for the state to ensure that the lowest-income residents can meet the high cost of living in the state.[xvii] New Jersey’s benefits for WorkFirst New Jersey, its cash assistance program for very-low-income households, remain woefully inadequate, with less than $7,000 annually for a family of three.[xviii] To improve affordability, the budget should start by expanding the WorkFirst New Jersey grant amount to get closer to the state’s actual cost of living.

Expand Affordable Health Insurance Options

New Jersey’s considerable progress in reducing the uninsured rate for children and adults faces serious federal threats, ranging from possible work requirements for Medicaid to expiring subsidies for marketplace plans. To prepare for these threats, the state budget should set money aside to ensure that families can continue to afford care by:

  • Creating a buy-in option for NJ FamilyCare plans
  • Opening the marketplace and its subsidies to all eligible residents, regardless of immigration status, and
  • Fully funding existing coverage expansion programs such as Cover All Kids.[xix]

Keeping all the state’s residents insured helps keep the state healthier and more affordable.

 

Keep the Corporate Transit Fee Funding Transit

Last year, New Jersey dedicated funding in the state budget for New Jersey Transit for the first time, creating the Corporate Transit Fee on corporations with more than $10 million in profit.[xx] The fee represented an enormous step forward for stable funding of this critical infrastructure. However, just one year later, lawmakers may raid Corporate Transit Fee revenues to help fund their other priorities in a tight budget, as they have with other dedicated funds such as the Clean Energy Fund.[xxi] This would be a mistake for our economy and for riders: New Jersey Transit desperately needs the funds from the fee to pay for essential operations, as riders face long delays, uneven service, and fare hikes.[xxii] New Jersey’s mass transit has dealt with decades of disinvestment due to raids and shortsighted decisions to underinvest; the Corporate Transit Fee must remain with transit.

Use the Clean Energy Fund on Clean Energy

Thanks to the Corporate Transit Fee, this budget also represents an opportunity to ensure that clean energy funds are not diverted to NJ Transit to pay for basic maintenance instead of its intended purpose of promoting the use of clean energy.[xxiii] Rather than go to basic operations, these dollars should be earmarked with specific language in the budget to ensure that they support transitioning the agency’s buses, trains, and buildings to green energy and zero emissions. 

End Predatory Prison Communication Fees

Despite evidence that communication with family and community members can reduce recidivism for people in incarceration, New Jersey still requires the families of people who are incarcerated to pay private contractors for phone and video calls with their loved ones. The state should pay for these services and eliminate the $15 million in fees these families currently pay to contact their loved ones.[xxiv] The cost to the state would amount to roughly 1.4 percent of the overall $1.1 billion state correctional department budget.[xxv]


End Notes

[i] Peter Chen et al., New Jersey Policy Perspective, New Jersey Chooses People Over Profits in the Fiscal Year 2025 State Budget, June 28, 2024, https://www.njpp.org/publications/blog-category/new-jersey-chooses-people-over-profits-in-the-fiscal-year-2025-state-budget/.

[ii] New Jersey Department of the Treasury, Office of Management and Budget, The State of New Jersey Appropriations Handbook Fiscal Year 2025 (2024), p. D-16, C-2, https://nj.gov/treasury/omb/publications/25approp/AppropriationsHandbookFull.pdf

[iii] 42 days calculated by dividing the projected closing balance ($6,197,868) by total appropriations ($56,613,303). See New Jersey Office of Legislative Services, Fiscal Year 2025 Appropriations Bill (P.L.2024, c.22 with Line Item Veto and Revenue Certification) (2024) p. 1. https://pub.njleg.state.nj.us/publications/budget/Scoresheet_FY_2025_Appropriations_Act_(P.L.2024,_c.22).pdf

[iv] Lauren Peller, Speaker Mike Johnson suggests ‘conditions’ needed on disaster aid for LA wildfires, ABC News, Jan. 13, 2025, https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/speaker-mike-johnson-suggests-conditions-needed-disaster-aid/story?id=117636693

[v] Colleen Wilson, Could Trump executive order hold up money for NJ Transit projects, Gateway tunnel?, NorthJersey.com, Jan. 27, 2025, https://www.northjersey.com/story/news/transportation/2025/01/27/could-trump-order-block-money-for-key-nj-transit-projects/77912637007/

[vi] House Ways and Means Committee, Untitled memo on list of possible cuts to the federal tax reconciliation bill, Jan. 23, 2025, available at Read: Draft Options for G.O.P. Cost Cuts for Tax Bill, N.Y. Times, Jan. 23, 2025, https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2025/01/23/us/politics/republican-tax-spending-cuts-options.html.

[vii] New Jersey Department of the Treasury, Office of Management and Budget, The State of New Jersey Appropriations Handbook Fiscal Year 2025 (2024), p. D-6, https://nj.gov/treasury/omb/publications/25approp/AppropriationsHandbookFull.pdf.

[viii] Peter Chen et al., New Jersey Policy Perspective, Evaluating Governor Murphy’s Budget Proposal for Fiscal Year 2025, Mar. 8, 2024, https://www.njpp.org/publications/report/evaluating-governor-murphys-budget-proposal-for-fiscal-year-2025/

[ix] Gordon MacInnes & Sheila Reynertson, New Jersey Policy Perspective, The Notorious Nine: How Key Decisions Sent New Jersey’s Financial Health Spiraling Down Over Two Decades, Sept. 2016, https://www.njpp.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/NJPPNotorious9Sept2016.pdf.

[x] Bruce Baker & Mark Weber, New Jersey Policy Perspective, Unlocking Academic Success: Revitalizing New Jersey’s School Funding Formula for Student Achievement, Sept. 14, 2023, https://www.njpp.org/publications/report/unlocking-academic-success-revitalizing-new-jerseys-school-funding-formula-for-student-achievement/

[xi] Peter Chen, New Jersey Policy Perspective, Fair and Square: Changing New Jersey’s Tax Code to Promote Equity and Fiscal Responsibility, Nov. 14, 2024, https://www.njpp.org/publications/report/fair-and-square-changing-new-jerseys-tax-code-to-promote-equity-and-fiscal-responsibility/.

[xii] Peter Chen, New Jersey Policy Perspective, How StayNJ is Even More Regressive Than at First Glance, Jun. 24, 2024, https://www.njpp.org/publications/blog-category/how-staynj-is-even-more-regressive-than-at-first-glance/.

[xiii] P.L. 2023, c.75, at C.54:4-8.75m.17.e. https://njleg.state.nj.us/bill-search/2022/A1/bill-text?f=PL23&n=75_

[xiv] The fiscal year 2025 $6.198 billion unreserved balance is roughly 10.9 percent of the state budget’s overall appropriations of $56.613 billion. New Jersey Office of Legislative Services, Fiscal Year 2025 Appropriations Bill (P.L.2024, c.22 with Line Item Veto and Revenue Certification) (2024) p. 1. https://pub.njleg.state.nj.us/publications/budget/Scoresheet_FY_2025_Appropriations_Act_(P.L.2024,_c.22).pdf

[xv] Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, Chart Book: The Earned Income Tax Credit and Child Tax Credit, May 24, 2016, https://www.cbpp.org/research/chart-book-the-earned-income-tax-credit-and-child-tax-credit.

[xvi] Peter Chen, New Jersey Policy Perspective, Boost Family Tax Credits to Boost Affordability, Feb. 25, 2025, https://www.njpp.org/publications/blog-category/boost-family-tax-credits-to-boost-affordability/

[xvii] Brittany Holom-Trundy, New Jersey Policy Perspective, Expand Anti-Poverty Programs to Help Families in Crisis, Jan. 22, 2025, https://www.njpp.org/publications/blog-category/expand-anti-poverty-programs-to-help-families-in-crisis/

[xviii] Brittany Holom-Trundy, New Jersey Policy Perspective, Outdated and Ineffective: Why New Jersey Needs to Update Its Top Anti-Poverty Program, May 22, 2024, https://www.njpp.org/publications/report/outdated-and-ineffective-why-new-jersey-needs-to-update-its-top-anti-poverty-program/

[xix] New Jersey Department of Human Services, Cover All Kids, accessed on Feb. 7, 2024, https://nj.gov/coverallkids/

[xx] Alex Ambrose, New Jersey Policy Perspective, Corporate Transit Fee Should Only Go to NJ Transit, Jan. 28, 2025, https://www.njpp.org/publications/blog-category/corporate-transit-fee-should-only-go-to-nj-transit/

[xxi] Alex Ambrose, New Jersey Policy Perspective, Stop the Raids: The Clean Energy Fund Should Fund Clean Energy, Jan. 12, 2023, https://www.njpp.org/publications/report/stop-the-raids-the-clean-energy-fund-should-fund-clean-energy/

[xxii] For more on the challenges facing New Jersey Transit’s reliability, see Larry Higgs, It will take years to fix the problems that led to the summer of hell for N.J. rail commuters, officials say, NJ.com, Nov. 21, 2024, https://www.nj.com/news/2024/11/it-will-take-years-to-fix-the-problems-that-led-to-the-summer-of-hell-for-nj-rail-commuters-officials-say.html

[xxiii] Alex Ambrose, New Jersey Policy Perspective, Stop the Raids: The Clean Energy Fund Should Fund Clean Energy, Jan. 12, 2023, https://www.njpp.org/publications/report/stop-the-raids-the-clean-energy-fund-should-fund-clean-energy/

[xxiv] Marleina Ubel, New Jersey Policy Perspective, End Predatory Prison Communication Fees, Jan. 15, 2025, https://www.njpp.org/publications/blog-category/end-predatory-prison-communication-fees/.

[xxv] Marleina Ubel, New Jersey Policy Perspective, Prison Profiteers: How Private Companies Profit From Prison Phone Calls and Harm New Jersey Residents, Aug. 19, 2024, https://www.njpp.org/publications/report/prison-profiteers-how-private-companies-profit-from-prison-phone-calls-and-harm-new-jersey-residents/#_edn13

 

 

Boost Family Tax Credits to Boost Affordability

All children in a state as wealthy as New Jersey deserve to grow up without fear of homelessness or hunger. Yet many families with children struggle with affordability due to the state’s high cost of living, especially for housing and transportation. More than 1 in 4 New Jersey children live in a low-income household — less than $62,000 for a family of four. To make the state the best place to raise a child, New Jersey’s state budget must prioritize programs that help working families meet the cost of raising children.

New Jersey already has two programs that help families meet those rising costs:

 

However, these tax credits do not reach all families with children who need assistance, due to the children’s age, the tax filer’s citizenship, or other eligibility requirements. Also, the credit amounts should increase to keep up with the rising child-related costs like food and child care.

As a recent NJPP report lays out, New Jersey should expand its Child Tax Credit to children beyond age 5 through 11 and increase the maximum benefit from $1,000 to $1,500 for children under age 6. In addition, expanding the Earned Income Tax Credit by another 25 percent and increasing eligibility for all workers who file taxes.

These changes would put hundreds of dollars back into families’ pockets, helping make New Jersey the best place to raise a family by providing an estimated $432 million to low- and moderate-income households. By amplifying the antipoverty effects of these critical lifelines, the state can help more households meet basic needs and raise the standard of living for working families.

Changes to New Jersey Tax Policy Would Assist New Jersey Families by Increasing Credit Amounts and Expanding Eligibility

These tax credits can help address the affordability crisis for families in the most straightforward way – by giving them cash to help pay critical costs. Working family tax credits have a long track record of reducing poverty and helping families meet basic needs. New Jersey’s budget for fiscal year 2026 should include expanded funding for working family tax credits to put money back in families’ pockets and make good on the state’s promise to its children.

Extending Trump Tax Cuts Would Benefit the Wealthiest New Jerseyans

Fair tax policy depends on prioritizing the well-being of all households, not just the wealthiest. New Jersey, and the nation as a whole, cannot afford to hand special tax breaks to the most affluent residents by slashing essential services such as health insurance for working families. New analysis of the Trump administration’s plan to make tax breaks from the 2017 tax law permanent shows that the proposal would do just that. It would make the wealthiest New Jerseyans even richer while cutting programs and support for families who need help affording basic necessities like food and health care.

This proposal means that the average tax break for the top 1 percent will be nearly 200 times the benefit of the lowest-earning 20 percent of the state’s households. And those differences add up: nearly half the benefits would go only to the top 5 percent of income earners.

Extending these tax breaks perpetuates regressive tax policy – sending enormous benefits to the richest 5 percent while doing little or nothing to help residents struggling to make ends meet.

For more on this analysis and its methodology and other state-by-state analyses, check out the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy’s issue brief here.

New Jersey can and should make its own tax code fairer by raising rates on the wealthiest individuals and corporations, not giving them even more tax breaks.

Expand Anti-Poverty Programs to Help Families in Crisis

All New Jersey families, regardless of income, race, size, or family structure, deserve to feel supported and have the opportunity to build a bright future here in the Garden State. Yet, hundreds of thousands of residents continue to face economic challenges and are looking for relief.

Federal threats to funding loom over all safety net programs including Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), which provides cash assistance to families with the lowest incomes. In response, New Jersey leaders must protect and improve anti-poverty programs to demonstrate a commitment to helping families in need, rather than subject them to further cuts.

NJPP’s previous research showed that the lack of action to update and fund the Work First New Jersey programs (TANF, General Assistance, and Emergency Assistance) has resulted in a gradual decline and failure of these anti-poverty programs to adequately support families during modern economic times.

As noted in NJPP’s prior reports, the state’s stagnant TANF amount has even less purchasing power than it did in 1998, losing approximately 30 percent of its value since then. As a result, the assistance that a family receives each month now barely covers the average cost of the month’s groceries.

New Jersey's TANF Benefits Have Lost 30 Percent of Their Value Since 1998

In addition to declining benefit amounts that do not adequately support residents’ needs, the TANF system suffers from outdated rules that fail to represent current understandings of poverty, as well as underfunded and understaffed offices to support people in poverty. This perpetuates racial inequities, keeps residents — including thousands of children — in poverty, and worsens long-term health, social, and economic outcomes for families throughout the state.

With many residents struggling to meet the high cost of living in the state, now is the time for New Jersey to demonstrate leadership in fighting poverty by increasing monthly grant amounts, updating program rules, and improving customer service with better funding. Increasing TANF grant amounts in next year’s budget will demonstrate commitment to New Jersey’s residents with low incomes – to help them reach their full potential and build a brighter future for the Garden State.

Fair and Square: Changing New Jersey’s Tax Code to Promote Equity and Fiscal Responsibility

New Jersey is a rich state with high median wages, high concentrations of wealth, and high productivity.[i] But that wealth does not translate into prosperity for all — more than 1 in 8 children live in poverty,[ii] and key public investments, including schools, public transportation, and municipal services, have faced decades of underfunding and underinvestment. The top 1 percent of households by income take home more than 24 times more than the bottom 99 percent.[iii] Meanwhile, economic growth is increasingly concentrated in multinational corporate profits instead of workers, deepening a system of haves and have-nots.[iv] This inequality exacerbates racial economic divides, with Black and Hispanic/Latinx workers paid lower wages and holding less wealth than white households.[v]

New Jersey can counter these trends, sustain public investments, and reduce income concentration in wealthy households and corporations, by strengthening its progressive tax system. In this system, wealthier individuals pay a higher tax rate, while those with lower incomes pay less.[vi] This approach reflects societal values that those who have benefited the most from our economic systems should contribute a higher percentage of their income and pay back their fair share to the rest of the state, while those with fewer financial resources should pay a smaller share.

Now is the moment to address tax fairness, as more revenue will be needed to improve affordability for the state’s residents. Unfortunately, the state’s revenues have not kept pace with existing obligations, in part because of years of underinvestment in pensions, deferred maintenance on New Jersey Transit,[vii] and failure to fully fund the school funding formula.[viii] These choices led to irresponsible budgeting, which mortgaged the state’s future for short-term budget patches.[ix] As a result, the state is now running a structural deficit, meaning it collects less in revenue than it spends on programs and services.[x] As these longer-term fiscal projections from an independent group of New Jersey budget experts show in the graph below, this deficit will expand in the years to come, draining the state’s surplus and hampering new investments.[xi]

New Jersey's State Budget is Projected to Bring in Billions Less in Revenue to Sustain Current Public Services and Programs

New Jersey’s need for tax reform has additional urgency because of looming threats to the national landscape. Federal tax law changes from 2017 gave substantial tax cuts to wealthy individuals and corporations starting in 2019, but those changes may become permanent in 2025 when those provisions expire.[xii] Expiring federal funds from pandemic-era aid for states will create fiscal cliffs for critical programs such as New Jersey Transit, which has already led to fare increases and the end of popular fare programs.[xiii] The state’s economy needs increased investment in public services at exactly the time when federal support for progressive tax policy and aid to states is declining.

To meet these policy goals, this report lays out a range of revenue-raising options that meet key criteria:

  • Raise new revenues for the state
  • Are based on former or current tax systems such as gross income, sales, or corporate taxation
  • Increase the overall progressivity of the state’s tax system
  • Improve racial and economic equity by closing existing income and wealth disparities.

 

The full package of revenue increases outlined in this report would raise nearly $4 billion annually for the state’s budget — enough to make all school meals free, restore state aid to schools getting cuts, and cover the state’s entire deficit. The full package includes the state’s major revenue streams, including gross income, sales, corporate business, and inherited wealth taxes, identifying targeted changes to generate much-needed funding without placing those costs disproportionately on the people who need the most help:

  • Income tax: Revising the income tax to add brackets for higher-income residents, including new rates on earners over $2 million, $5 million, and $10 million in income, while expanding working-family tax credits such as the Child Tax Credit and Earned Income Tax Credit to ensure that low- and moderate-income households benefit from the tax changes.
  • Inherited wealth tax: Reforming inherited wealth taxes to reduce unearned wealth transfers and tax large inheritances.
  • Sales tax: Restoring the sales tax to 7 percent, along with modernizing services exemptions, which have excluded accounting, advertising, engineering, and other high-end services from taxation.
  • Realty transfer fee: Adding two percentage points to the existing 1 percent realty transfer fee on home sales over $1 million and four percentage points on sales over $2 million.
  • Corporate tax: Requiring large multinational corporations to report profits from overseas subsidiaries, forcing them to stop offshore profit-shifting.

 

Net Effect of Tax Policy Changes Would Result in Nearly $4 Billion in New Revenue Annually Right-Size the Income Tax: Raise Rates at the Top, Lower Them at the Bottom

Proposal Overview

Making New Jersey’s income tax more progressive would increase revenue and improve affordability for working- and middle-class households. This proposal would add new tax brackets for incomes over $2 million, $5 million, and $10 million, affecting only a tiny fraction of taxpayers but targeting a significant portion of the state’s wealth. Additionally, it would expand the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) to 50 percent of the federal credit and make all workers who file taxes eligible to claim it. The Child Tax Credit (CTC) would also be expanded to $1,500, extending eligibility to children up to age 11. While the expanded working-family tax credits would reduce overall revenues, they would reduce income inequality and provide more financial support to low- and moderate-income households. Combined, this proposal would generate about $772 million annually.[xiv]

Raise Rates at the Top: Higher Marginal Income Tax Rates for High Earners

 New Jersey’s gross income tax applies different rates to income brackets, starting at 1.4 percent for the first $20,000 and reaching 10.75 percent for income over $1 million. This tax funds the state’s local property tax relief and serves as the primary revenue source for school aid.[xv] Even with these progressive elements, wealth continues to remain heavily concentrated in high-income households, with the top 20 percent of households taking home more than half the state’s total income.[xvi]

As shown in the table below, the proposal introduces new tax brackets at $2 million, $5 million, and $10 million, in addition to the existing 10.75 percent rate on earnings over $1 million, known as the “Millionaires Tax.” This adjustment alone would raise more than $1.2 billion for essential state programs while affecting less than 1 percent of households.[xvii] As wealth continues to concentrate at the top, a fair tax system should impose higher rates on the highest earners.

Proposed Tax Rates Would Increase Rates on Only the Top 1% of Incomes

As the state’s experience with the millionaires tax has shown, gross income tax receipts continue to climb despite the increasing marginal rates for those earning over $1 million and $5 million income.[xviii] Additionally, research shows that raising income tax rates on high earners has minimal impact on economic growth.[xix] High-income residents continue to call New Jersey home, and the number of tax filers with over $1 million in income increased by nearly 50 percent between 2019 and 2021.[xx]

Lower Rates at the Bottom: Expanding Working Family Tax Credits

New Jersey, like many states, uses its tax code to reduce poverty and improve affordability to working families and households to help them meet the cost of living by putting cash directly into their bank accounts to help cover the cost of living in the state.[xxi] In particular, the state funds two major tax credits that reduce poverty statewide: the state Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC)[xxii] and the state Child Tax Credit (CTC).[xxiii] As the name implies, the EITC pays workers back by enhancing their incomes, while the CTC provides cash rebates to families with children under age 6. The success of the federal Child Tax Credit has shown that even modest increases in credit amounts can dramatically reduce child poverty.[xxiv]

However, in New Jersey, both programs are still limited in their eligibility, weakening their antipoverty effects. The EITC, for example, is not available for workers without a Social Security number, excluding immigrant workers who pay and file taxes each year.[xxv] The CTC is only available for families with a child under age 6,[xxvi] despite research showing that children’s expenses grow as they age.[xxvii]

New Jersey should expand its Earned Income Tax Credit to 50 percent of the federal credit, and expand eligibility to all workers who file taxes, not just those with Social Security numbers.

Similarly, New Jersey should expand its Child Tax Credit to children ages 6 to 11 and increase the maximum benefit from $1,000 to $1,500 for children under age 6.[xxviii]

These changes would put hundreds of dollars back into families’ pockets, helping make New Jersey the best place to raise a family. These combined proposals would increase the progressivity of the tax code by providing an estimated $432 million to low- and moderate-income households. By amplifying the antipoverty effects of these critical lifelines, the state can help more households meet basic needs and raise the standard of living for working families. 

Net Effect of Combined Income Tax Proposals

Expanding tax credits for the lowest 40 percent of earners while raising income tax rates for the top 1 percent would make the state’s income tax system more progressive. This would generate additional income for the state while reducing the financial burden on its lowest-income residents, with no changes to rates for the majority of taxpayers.

Lower-Income Groups Would See Benefits While Only Highest 1% Would See Increases

This combination of income tax changes would boost revenue and make the tax system fairer — a win-win for both New Jersey and its residents. The annual increase of $1.2 billion in revenue based on the bracket changes at the top of the income spectrum would be partially offset by the $432 million in reductions for low- and moderate-income households, resulting in a net revenue increase of $772 million. These tax law changes raise costs only for the wealthiest one percent while helping those who need the most help and funding critical state priorities.

Restore Taxes on Inherited Wealth Transfers

Proposal Overview

Taxation of intergenerational wealth is critical to reducing wealth inequality, shrinking the racial wealth gap, and equitably generating revenue. New Jersey currently has an inheritance tax which taxes the money collected by heirs, but the state no longer has an estate tax which taxes the overall value of the deceased person’s estate.[xxix] The proposed options aim to either eliminate inheritance tax exemptions or restore the estate tax, ensuring that intergenerational wealth transfers among the wealthiest households contribute to critical state needs. By implementing these changes, New Jersey could generate between $450 million and $598 million annually.[xxx]

Proposal Details

Currently, the inheritance tax includes major exemptions, covering lineal descendants (children, grandchildren, etc.), spouses, or lineal ancestors (parents, grandparents, etc.).[xxxi] Since the majority of inheritances come from parents or grandparents,[xxxii] these broad exemptions have resulted in most estate wealth being exempt from taxation entirely: Of the nearly $5.8 billion in total estate wealth in 2017, less than $2.5 billion (43 percent) was taxable.[xxxiii]

These loopholes run the risk of worsening wealth disparities and racial wealth inequality. Inheritances disproportionately benefit higher-income people, who compound their existing wealth while lower-income people are unlikely to receive any inheritance at all.[xxxiv] Across races, the difference in inheritance rates reinforce existing disparities: 30 percent of white families nationally report having received an inheritance, compared to only 10 percent of Black and 7 percent of Latinx/Hispanic families.[xxxv]

The Majority of New Jersey Estate Wealth Avoids Taxation Due to Broad Exemptions

Compounding matters, New Jersey eliminated its estate tax for residents passing away after December 31, 2017.[xxxvi] Estate taxes were levied on the total value of the estate of the deceased person, and the elimination of this tax has led to substantial revenue loss for the state, estimated at $560 million in 2022 — $598 million in 2024 dollars.[xxxvii]

Concerns about the potential risks of inherited wealth taxes at the state level, such as forced home sales to cover tax costs or an exodus of older high-wealth residents, do not have a strong basis in the available evidence. Real estate such as homes and land do not make up the bulk of estates, which are overwhelmingly composed of intangible property such as retirement and bank accounts.[xxxviii] Meanwhile, research on aging adults and their moving behavior shows, at most, little effect on residence decisions.[xxxix]

New Jersey has two options for taxing inherited wealth transfers:

  • Eliminating the inheritance tax exemptions and subjecting all transfers to taxation;
  • Restoring the estate tax.

 

Removing inheritance tax exemptions would generate an estimated $451 million in annual revenue for the state[xl]. Restoring the estate tax could generate between $450 million and $598 million annually. These amounts could vary, depending on state policy decisions such as the size of exemptions, whether some heirs would still have partial exemptions, and the interplay between the two taxes. Nonetheless, taxing intergenerational wealth transfers is an effective way to raise revenue while reducing wealth inequality.

Restore the Sales Tax Rate and Eliminate Loopholes and Exemptions

Proposal Overview

Reversing the damaging Christie-era sales tax cut while modernizing the sales tax by eliminating gimmicks and exemptions would create a broader tax base and generate much-needed revenue. Specifically, the proposal aims to: restore the sales tax from 6.625 percent to 7 percent; eliminate loopholes for car rental companies and yacht purchases; and tax high-end professional services. Taken together, this proposal could generate about $859 million.

Restoring the sales tax to 7 percent would generate $702 million annually, while eliminating the car rental and yacht loopholes would add another $157 million. Estimates for eliminating high-end professional services vary due to the complexity of industry-specific sales data.

Proposal Details

Increasing sales taxes can bring in much-needed reliable revenue for a budget facing a structural deficit.[xli] New Jersey’s sales tax supports the state’s general fund by taxing consumer purchases, with exemptions for groceries, medicine, and various services.[xlii] Although the sales tax does place proportionally more financial burden on lower-income residents, the below graph shows that people in the bottom 60 percent of incomes would see increases of under $100 if the sales tax cut were reversed, with even smaller amounts for lower-income residents.

To counter the impact on low- and moderate-income households, New Jersey can maintain and improve its overall progressive tax code by expanding refundable working family tax credits as detailed in the income tax section above.[xliii]

Returning the Sales Tax to 7% Would Cost Most Households Less Than $100 Per Year

Robust sales tax collections are essential for aligning the state’s revenues with state economic activity. However, it is crucial not to compound the sales tax’s regressive nature by allocating the revenue generated on regressive tax programs such as property tax credits.[xliv] Past ill-planned tax cuts, like the Christie-era sales tax reduction, cost the state hundreds of millions in much-needed tax dollars while providing little in terms of economic benefits.[xlv]

Restoring the sales tax to 7 percent would generate roughly $700 million in additional revenue for the state. About one-quarter of the revenue generated — around $180 million — would come from non-residents, such as tourists and shoppers from neighboring states.[xlvi]

Additionally, New Jersey’s sales tax is primarily geared toward goods, even though services now make up a larger portion of the economy as a whole. Services account for nearly two-thirds of all consumer spending in the state,[xlvii] yet high-end services remained exempt. Put differently, when a family goes to buy a computer, they pay taxes on that purchase, but if a large corporation buys computing services from a third-party vendor, they do not pay taxes on that service.

Examples of services exempt from sales tax include:

  • Accounting and Bookkeeping
  • Architects
  • Land Surveying
  • Attorneys
  • Engineers
  • Advertising and Marketing
  • Public Relations and Management Consulting
  • Lobbying and Consulting
  • Data Processing Services

 

These high-end services, categorized under “Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services” in the North American Industry Classification System, generated $67.6 billion in revenue in New Jersey, based on 2017 data,[xlviii] much of which was not subject to sales tax.[xlix]

Major Service Industries Are Not Subject to Sales Tax, Leaving Potentially Billions in Revenue on the Table

Updating the state’s sales tax code to include these services and closing loopholes can bring in substantial revenue. Closing the car rental loophole alone could generate $174 million annually,[l] while repealing the yacht purchase tax would bring in about $15 million in additional annual revenue.[li]

The state has precedent for updating services subject to sales tax, but it has been nearly 20 years since the last major revision in 2006.[lii] That update expanded the tax to include services like pre-written computer software, flooring installation, storage units, and personal care services such as tanning salons and massage therapy.

Raise Fees on Super-Luxury Homes Sales

Proposal Overview

 New Jersey’s market for super-luxury homes continues to grow, as homes with high price tags continue to sell faster than more moderately priced homes.[liii] Currently, New Jersey levies a 1 percent tax on home sales greater than $1 million.[liv] This proposal suggests increasing the tax to 3 percent for homes over $1 million and 5 percent for homes over $2 million. This proposal would generate about $410 million in new annual revenues while affecting only the top 10 percent of home sales.

Proposal Details

The existing fee has done little to dampen the luxury home market, with sales of very expensive homes continuing to grow while the overall housing market has cooled. While many residents struggle with the high cost of housing in New Jersey, very expensive homes continue to change hands at a high rate. However, as detailed in a recent NJPP analysis, an added fee on expensive home sales would provide substantial revenue for the state.[lv] Home sales over $1 million represent less than 10 percent of home sales in the state, with home sales over $2 million making up less than 2 percent.[lvi] These transactions affect high-income or high-wealth households, leaving the vast majority of homeowners unaffected.

Home Sales Over $1 Million Make Up a Small Percentage of Total Home Sales

Require Worldwide Combined Corporate Reporting to Fight Against Profit Offshoring

Proposal Overview

As large multinational corporations have enjoyed the lion’s share of economic growth, they have also grown sophisticated in hiding their profits, shifting to tax haven countries to avoid tax exposure in the United States. As corporations have used sophisticated tax avoidance strategies to move their profits overseas, they have hidden their true profit margins from state regulators.[lvii] Across the country, the overall corporate tax base has shrunk even as corporate profits have skyrocketed to record levels.[lviii] New Jersey can help fight back against this corporate tax offshoring through a straightforward solution: require all corporations to report profits from global subsidiaries, not just those based in the United States. This approach, called “mandatory worldwide combined reporting,” is a critical tool to address profit offshoring, which has accelerated in recent years, significantly reducing the corporate tax base.

Currently, New Jersey taxes corporations that meet a certain threshold of sales in New Jersey by applying a tax to their overall profits, based on the proportion of those sales occurring in the state.[lix] By expanding this to include all global profits, New Jersey would increase its overall tax base, raising an estimated $888 million in annual revenue simply by requiring corporations to disclose all profits, including those declared overseas.

Proposal Details

The concept of requiring full disclosure, called “mandatory worldwide combined reporting,” simplifies the complex web of corporate offshore holdings by requiring that all profits generated by companies controlled by a parent company be included in New Jersey’s corporate tax calculations.[lx] Currently, under “water’s edge reporting,” New Jersey only requires that corporations disclose profits generated by companies in the United States, taxing them based on the portion of sales made within the state.[lxi] But, by shifting profits overseas, many corporations make their biggest profits invisible to the state’s taxing authority.

Mandatory combined reporting would close this loophole and level the playing field, by forcing large multinational corporations to show where their profits are hidden. This would also benefit smaller domestic corporations that lack the resources to establish foreign subsidiaries or operate in foreign tax haven countries.

An estimate from 2019 placed the potential benefit to New Jersey of adopting worldwide combined reporting at $714 million.[lxii] This figure is now projected to be nearly $890 million adjusted for inflation.

Increase State Tax Enforcement Workforce

Proposal Overview

The New Jersey state’s tax division hires auditors and collectors to examine the returns of taxpayers to identify errors and collect assessments. This workforce helps ensure the state maximizes its collections and reduces fraud and errors, particularly among high-income and high-wealth taxpayers. However, the number of auditors has declined since the Great Recession. New Jersey should restore its auditor workforce to pre-Great Recession levels, increasing the number of auditors from 340 to at least 485.[lxiii] This proposal would generate about $385 million annually.

Proposal Details

Over the past 20 years, New Jersey’s auditor workforce has shrunk by 30 percent, even though the complexity of the state’s budget and tax code have grown substantially. This reduction has weakened the state’s ability to combat tax fraud and ensure accuracy, especially for complex tax returns. On average, each New Jersey auditor identifies about $2.35 million in assessments.[lxiv] Restoring the workforce to 485 would yield $341 million in additional annual revenue.[lxv] Reinstating the 20 compliance officers lost since 2004 would add another $44 million, bringing the total potential revenue increase to $385 million.[lxvi] These figures are consistent with past performance when auditor staffing levels were higher, with assessment surpassing $1 billion during from 2007 to 2010 when auditor workforces were at their peak.[lxvii]

The Number of Tax Auditors Has Not Recovered from Christie-Era Cuts

Federal efforts to target high-income individuals and large corporations out of compliance with their tax obligations have yielded substantial collections, with nearly $1 billion in past-due taxes collected.[lxviii] Federal tax authorities have noted that the complexity of higher-income audits and auditor attrition has extended the amount of time needed to complete audits.[lxix]

What’s Next for New Jersey

New Jersey needs a set of new revenue streams that will fund the next generation of programs to improve affordability and induce economic growth for generations to come. Whether that comes in the form of increased investments in housing and infrastructure, substantial expansions of tax credits and cash assistance for working families, or increased support for K-12 and higher education, any expansions in public programs to assist affordability will need funding. However, to fully advance equity and lift up the state’s working-class and middle-class residents, these revenues must be generated progressively, ensuring that the state’s wealthiest residents pay their fair share for prosperity for all.

Broadly, this package of potential revenue raisers would set New Jersey on a path toward fiscal responsibility, generate sufficient funds to invest in growth and affordability, and reduce income and economic inequity. Without bold changes in tax policy, New Jersey runs the risk of falling back into the rut it was in at the end of the Christie administration, with a low credit rating, enormous pension and school funding liabilities, and a budget that slashed state employment and investment.[lxx] The choice is clear: New Jersey can choose prosperity for all through targeted taxation of the very wealthy, or a return to fiscal brinkmanship and the continued deferral of essential investments in the state’s well-being.

Net Effect of Tax Policy Changes Would Result in Nearly $4 Billion in New Revenue Annually


End Notes

[i] New Jersey ranks second in the nation in median income at $99,781. See Katherine Engel and Kirby G. Posey, U.S. Census Bureau, Household Income in States and Metropolitan Areas: 2023, p. 3, tbl. 1 (Sept. 2024), https://www2.census.gov/library/publications/2024/demo/acsbr-023.pdf. New Jersey ranks in the top ten in median net worth. See U.S. Census Bureau,

Wealth and Asset Ownership for Households, by Type of Asset and States: 2022, table 1,

Survey of Income and Program Participation, Survey Year 2023, https://www2.census.gov/programs-surveys/demo/tables/wealth/2022/wealth-asset-ownership/state_wealth_tables_dy2022.xlsx. New Jersey’s gross domestic product ranks tenth nationally. U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis, SQGDP1 State quarterly gross domestic product (GDP) summary (accessed Wednesday, October 16, 2024), https://apps.bea.gov/itable/index.html?appid=70&stepnum=40&Major_Area=3&State=0&Area=XX&TableId=532&Statistic=3&Year=2024:Q2&YearBegin=-1&Year_End=-1&Unit_Of_Measure=Levels&Rank=1&Drill=1&nRange=5.

[ii] U.S. Census Bureau, U.S. Department of Commerce. “Poverty Status in the Past 12 Months.” American Community Survey, ACS 1-Year Estimates Subject Tables, Table S1701, 2023, https://data.census.gov/table/ACSST1Y2023.S1701?q=child poverty&g=040XX00US34. Accessed on October 16, 2024.

[iii] Estelle Sommeiller & Mark Price, Economic Policy Institute, The New Gilded Age: Income Inequality in the U.S. by State, Metropolitan Area, and County at tbl. 1 (July 19, 2018), https://files.epi.org/pdf/147963.pdf.

[iv] U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis, Corporate Profits with Inventory Valuation Adjustment (IVA) and Capital Consumption Adjustment (CCAdj) [CPROFIT], retrieved from FRED, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/CPROFIT, October 16, 2024. U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis, Compensation of Employees: Wages and Salary Accruals [WASCUR], retrieved from FRED, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/WASCUR, . https://fred.stlouisfed.org/graph/?g=G8JT.

[v] New Jersey Institute for Social Justice, The Two New Jerseys by the Numbers: Racial Wealth Disparities in the Garden State (March 2023), https://njisj.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/Two_New_Jerseys_By_the_Numbers_Data_Brief_3.23.23-compressed.pdf.

[vi] By contrast a regressive tax system has higher tax rates for lower-income residents. For more information on progressive and regressive tax systems, see Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy, Who Pays? A Distributional Analysis of the Tax Systems in All 50 States, Seventh Edition (Jan. 2024), https://sfo2.digitaloceanspaces.com/itep/ITEP-Who-Pays-7th-edition.pdf.

[vii] Alex Ambrose & Peter Chen, New Jersey Policy Perspective, Getting Back on Track: Fully Fund NJ Transit by Taxing Big Corporations, Sept. 27, 2023, https://www.njpp.org/publications/report/getting-back-on-track-fully-fund-nj-transit-by-taxing-big-corporations/.

[viii] For a review on the accumulation of insufficient funding of the school funding formula, see Bruce Baker & Mark Weber, New Jersey Policy Perspective, School Funding in New Jersey: A Fair Future for All, Part 3: The School Funding Reform Act – 2020 Update (Nov. 2020), https://www.njpp.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/NJPP-School-Funding-in-New-Jersey-A-Fair-Future-for-All-Part-3.pdf.

[ix] Gordon MacInnes & Sheila Reynertson, New Jersey Policy Perspective, The Notorious Nine: How Key Decisions Sent New Jersey’s Financial Health Spiraling Down Over Two Decades (Sept. 2016), https://www.njpp.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/NJPPNotorious9Sept2016.pdf.

[x] Multi-Year Budget Workgroup, Steve Sweeney Center for Public Policy, New Jersey’s Fiscal Cliff: Current Services Budget Projections, Long-Term Economic Forecast, and the Multi-Year Structural Deficit (June 13, 2024), https://chss.rowan.edu/centers/sweeney_center/mybwreportjune2024web.pdf.

[xi] Multi-Year Budget Workgroup, Steve Sweeney Center for Public Policy, New Jersey’s Fiscal Cliff: Current Services Budget Projections, Long-Term Economic Forecast, and the Multi-Year Structural Deficit (June 13, 2024), https://chss.rowan.edu/centers/sweeney_center/mybwreportjune2024web.pdf.

[xii] Steve Wamhoff, Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy, Extending Temporary Provisions of the 2017 Trump Tax Law: Updated National and State-by-State Estimates, Sept. 13, 2024, https://itep.org/trump-tax-law-tcja-permanent-state-by-state-estimates/.

[xiii] Nikita Biryukov, NJ Transit approves $3B budget amid outcry over fare hikes, New Jersey Monitor, Jul. 25, 2024, https://newjerseymonitor.com/2024/07/25/nj-transit-approves-3b-budget-amid-outcry-over-fare-hikes/.

[xiv] Based on analysis by the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy.

[xv] John Reitmeyer, Explainer: A Look Under the Hood of NJ’s Income Tax and Its Special Quirks, NJ Spotlight News, Apr. 9, 2019, https://www.njspotlightnews.org/2019/04/19-04-08-explainer-a-look-under-the-hood-of-njs-income-tax-and-its-special-quirks/.

[xvi] Data shows that the top 5 percent of households by income in New Jersey take home more than 22 percent of the state’s aggregate income. The top 20 percent take home more than 51 percent. B19082 Census 1-year 2023 estimate.

[xvii] Based on analysis by the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy.

[xviii] U.S. Census Bureau, State Government Tax Collections, Individual Income Taxes in New Jersey [NJINCTAX], retrieved from FRED, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/NJINCTAX, October 16, 2024.

[xix] Wesley Tharpe, Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, Raising State Income Tax Rates at the Top a Sensible Way to Fund Key Investments (Feb. 7, 2019), https://www.cbpp.org/research/state-budget-and-tax/raising-state-income-tax-rates-at-the-top-a-sensible-way-to-fund-key.

[xx] The number of tax filers with $1 million or more in income increased from 22,720 to 33,770 between 2019 and 2021. Compare Internal Revenue Service, Statistics of Income, Table 2: Individual Income and Tax Data, by State and Size of Adjusted Gross Income, Tax Year 2019 (Dec. 2021), https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-soi/19in31nj.xlsx with Internal Revenue Service, Statistics of Income, Table 2: Individual Income and Tax Data, by State and Size of Adjusted Gross Income, Tax Year 2021 (Feb. 2024), https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-soi/21in31nj.xlsx.

[xxi] Samantha Waxman et al., Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, Interactive Map: States Should Continue Enacting and Expanding Child Tax Credits and Earned Income Tax Credits (Aug. 24, 2024), https://www.cbpp.org/research/state-budget-and-tax/states-should-continue-enacting-and-expanding-child-tax-credits-and.

[xxii] New Jersey Division of Taxation, NJ Earned Income Tax Credit Frequently Asked Questions (last updated Dec. 2023), https://www.nj.gov/treasury/taxation/eitc/eitcfaq.shtml

[xxiii] New Jersey Division of Taxation, Child Tax Credit (last updated Jan. 5, 2024), https://www.nj.gov/treasury/taxation/individuals/childtaxcredit.shtml.

[xxiv] Elise Gould, Child Tax Credit expansions were instrumental in reducing poverty rates to historic lows in 2021, Economic Policy Institute Working Economics Blog, Sept. 22, 2022, https://www.epi.org/blog/child-tax-credit-expansions-were-instrumental-in-reducing-poverty-to-historic-lows-in-2021/.

[xxv] Vineeta Kapahi, New Jersey Policy Perspective, Building a More Immigrant Inclusive Tax Code: Expanding the EITC to ITIN Filers (July 2020),

https://www.njpp.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/NJPP-Report-Building-a-More-Immigrant-Inclusive-Tax-Code-Expanding-the-EITC-to-ITIN-Filers-1.pdf. For more on the nearly $100 billion in tax payments by undocumented immigrants including more than $1.3 billion in New Jersey alone, see Carl Davis, Marco Guzman & Emma Sifre, Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy, Tax Payments by Undocumented Immigrants, Jul. 30, 2024, https://sfo2.digitaloceanspaces.com/itep/ITEP-Tax-Payments-by-Undocumented-Immigrants-2024.pdf.

[xxvi] N.J. Stat. Sec. 54A:4-17.1

[xxvii] Mark Lino et al., U.S. Department of Agriculture, Center for Nutrition Policy and Promotion, Expenditures on Children by Families, 2015,. Miscellaneous Publication No. 1528-2015 (Mar. 2017), p. 15, https://fns-prod.azureedge.us/sites/default/files/resource-files/crc2015-march2017.pdf.

[xxviii] For additional information on proposals to expand the state’s Child Tax Credit, see Peter Chen, New Jersey Policy Perspective, How an Expanded Child Tax Credit Would Help More Hard-Working New Jersey Families, Jan. 31, 2023, https://www.njpp.org/publications/report/how-an-expanded-child-tax-credit-would-help-more-hard-working-new-jersey-families/. Analysis of an expanded child tax credit has shown that New Jersey could reduce child poverty by 25 percent with a $2,000 credit for children under age 6 and $1,700 for ages 6-18. See Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy, Columbia Center on Poverty and Social Policy, Child Tax Credit Options for Reducing Child Poverty (2022),  https://itep.sfo2.digitaloceanspaces.com/Child-Tax-Credit-Options-New-Jersey-2022.pdf.

[xxix] New Jersey Division of Taxation, General Information: Inheritance and Estate Tax, O-10-C (Jan. 2017), https://www.nj.gov/treasury/taxation/pdf/other_forms/inheritance/o10c.pdf.

[xxx] See Samantha Waxman, Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, State Taxes on Inherited Wealth, Jun. 2021, https://www.cbpp.org/research/state-budget-and-tax/issue-brief-state-taxes-on-inherited-wealth; Martin Poethke & Patrick Brennan, New Jersey Office of Legislative Services, Legislative Fiscal Estimate [Second Reprint], Assembly, No. 12, Oct. 12, 2016, https://www.njleg.state.nj.us/bill-search/2016/A12/bill-text?f=A0500&n=12_E3.

[xxxi] N.J. Stat. Sec. 54:34-2

[xxxii] Andrew Van Dam, How inheritance data secretly explains U.S. inequality, Washington Post, Nov. 10, 2023, https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2023/11/10/inheritance-america-taxes-equality/.

[xxxiii] State of New Jersey Department of the Treasury, Office of Revenue and Economic Analysis, Transfer Inheritance Tax: Statistical Report for Tax Years 2015-2017 (Jul. 28, 2021), https://www.nj.gov/treasury/economics/documents/pdf/stats/Transfer-Inheritance-Tax-Statistical-Report-TY-2015-2017.pdf at 5.

[xxxiv] Andrew Van Dam, How inheritance data secretly explains U.S. inequality, Washington Post, Nov. 10, 2023, https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2023/11/10/inheritance-america-taxes-equality/.

[xxxv] Bhutta, Neil, Andrew C. Chang, Lisa J. Dettling, and Joanne W. Hsu (2020). “Disparities in Wealth by Race and Ethnicity in the 2019 Survey of Consumer Finances,” FEDS Notes. Washington: Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, September 28, 2020, https://doi.org/10.17016/2380-7172.2797.

[xxxvi] N.J. Stat. Sec. 54:38-1.a.(4). Previously the minimum size of an estate to be eligible for the tax was $675,000. As with other estate taxes including the federal estate tax, wealthy residents could still avoid the tax through a variety of methods. See U.S. Senate Committee on Finance, Estate Tax Schemes: How America’s Most Fortunate Hide Their Wealth, Flout Tax Laws, and Grow the Wealth Gap, Oct. 12, 2017, https://www.finance.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/101217%20Estate%20Tax%20Whitepaper%20FINAL1.pdf.

[xxxvii] Martin Poethke & Patrick Brennan, New Jersey Office of Legislative Services, Legislative Fiscal Estimate [Second Reprint], Assembly, No. 12, Oct. 12, 2016, https://www.njleg.state.nj.us/bill-search/2016/A12/bill-text?f=A0500&n=12_E3.

[xxxviii] Personal property made up 70 percent of estates, compared to real property at 18 percent in tax year 2017, the most recent year of available data State of New Jersey Department of the Treasury, Office of Revenue and Economic Analysis, Transfer Inheritance Tax: Statistical Report for Tax Years 2015-2017 (Jul. 28, 2021), https://www.nj.gov/treasury/economics/documents/pdf/stats/Transfer-Inheritance-Tax-Statistical-Report-TY-2015-2017.pdf at 6.

[xxxix]Samantha Waxman, Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, State Taxes on Inherited Wealth, Jun. 2021, https://www.cbpp.org/research/state-budget-and-tax/issue-brief-state-taxes-on-inherited-wealth, n.1.

[xl] Given that inheritance tax data is limited, this estimate is based on key assumptions. First, the estimate assumes that the effective tax rate on Class A (lineal descendants and spouses) and Class C (siblings) beneficiaries would be the same as the current effective tax rate on Class D beneficiaries if the current Class D marginal rate structure were applied to Class A and Class C beneficiaries. Second, it assumes that the exempt estate is evenly distributed over the currently exempt beneficiaries, even though lineal descendants and spouses likely inherit larger inheritances than unrelated persons and more distant relations. Third, the estimate assumes that the ratio of share of returns between Class C and Class D beneficiaries correlates with the size of the tax base for each category.

[xli] Sheila Reynertson, New Jersey Policy Perspective, Modernizing New Jersey’s Sales Tax Will Level

the Playing Field & Help the Economy Thrive, Feb. 2018,

https://www.njpp.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/NJPPSalesTaxReformsFeb2018.pdf.

[xlii] For a comprehensive look at New Jersey’s sales and use tax exemptions, see New Jersey Division of Taxation, New Jersey Sales Tax Guide, Tax Topic Bulletin S&U-4, July 2022, https://www.nj.gov/treasury/taxation/pdf/pubs/sales/su4.pdf.

[xliii] To see how New Jersey’s sales tax regressivity is counteracted by its progressive income tax, see Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy, Who Pays? New Jersey State and Local Tax Shares of Family Income (Jan. 2024), https://sfo2.digitaloceanspaces.com/itep/itep-whopays7-New-Jersey.pdf.

[xliv] Testimony of Peter Chen, Senior Policy Analyst, New Jersey Policy Perspective, Before Stay NJ Task Force, March 13, 2024, https://www.njpp.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/NJPP-StayNJ-Committee-Testimony-03-13-24.pdf.

[xlv] Based on analysis of data from the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy.

[xlvi] Based on analysis of data from the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy.

[xlvii] U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis, “SAPCE1 Personal consumption expenditures (PCE) by major type of product 1” (accessed Wednesday, October 16, 2024), https://apps.bea.gov/itable/?ReqID=70&step=1&_gl=1*1c592j9*_ga*NDUzNjQ0MzAyLjE3MjY1MTAxMDc.*_ga_J4698JNNFT*MTcyNjUxMDEwNy4xLjAuMTcyNjUxMDEwNy42MC4wLjA.#eyJhcHBpZCI6NzAsInN0ZXBzIjpbMSwyOSwyNSwzMSwyNiwyNywzMF0sImRhdGEiOltbIlRhYmxlSWQiLCI1MjQiXSxbIk1ham9yX0FyZWEiLCIwIl0sWyJTdGF0ZSIsWyIwIl1dLFsiQXJlYSIsWyIzNDAwMCJdXSxbIlN0YXRpc3RpYyIsWyIyIiwiMTMiXV0sWyJVbml0X29mX21lYXN1cmUiLCJMZXZlbHMiXSxbIlllYXIiLFsiLTEiXV0sWyJZZWFyQmVnaW4iLCItMSJdLFsiWWVhcl9FbmQiLCItMSJdXX0=.

[xlviii] U.S. Census Bureau, Survey of U.S. Businesses, The Number of Firms and Establishments, Employment, Annual Payroll, and Receipts by State, Industry, and Enterprise Employment Size: 2017 (2021), available at https://www.census.gov/data/tables/2017/econ/susb/2017-susb-annual.html.

[xlix] New Jersey Division of Taxation, New Jersey Sales Tax Guide, Tax Topic Bulletin S&U-4, July 2022, https://www.nj.gov/treasury/taxation/pdf/pubs/sales/su4.pdf, pp. 14-15.

[l] NetChoice, Big Rental’s Rules of the Road: Tax Loopholes and Sneaky Subsidies, Policy Note, April 2020, https://netchoice.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/Turo-VLF-v.3.pdf, p. 9. The $174 million estimate adjusts the annual estimate of $142 million in 2020 for 2024 dollars.

[li] Sheila Reynertson, New Jersey Policy Perspective, Modernizing New Jersey’s Sales Tax Will Level

the Playing Field & Help the Economy Thrive, Feb. 2018, https://www.njpp.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/NJPPSalesTaxReformsFeb2018.pdf.

[lii] Pub. L. 2006, c.44.

[liii] Allison Pries, The housing market in N.J. has slowed — except for these types of homes, NJ Advance Media for NJ.com, Mar. 10, 2024, https://www.nj.com/realestate-news/2024/03/the-housing-market-in-nj-has-slowed-except-for-these-types-of-homes.html.

[liv] NJ Stat. Sec, 46:15-7.2 (2023)

[lv] Peter Chen, New Jersey Policy Perspective, Taxing “Super Luxury” Home Sales Could Make New Jersey Affordable for More Residents, Sep. 10, 2024, https://www.njpp.org/publications/blog-category/taxing-super-luxury-home-sales-could-make-new-jersey-affordable-for-more-residents/.

[lvi] Peter Chen, New Jersey Policy Perspective, Taxing “Super Luxury” Home Sales Could Make New Jersey Affordable for More Residents, Sep. 10, 2024, https://www.njpp.org/publications/blog-category/taxing-super-luxury-home-sales-could-make-new-jersey-affordable-for-more-residents/.

[lvii] Michael Mazerov, Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, States Can Fight Corporate Tax Avoidance by Requiring Worldwide Combined Reporting, June 27, 2024, https://www.cbpp.org/research/state-budget-and-tax/states-can-fight-corporate-tax-avoidance-by-requiring-worldwide-0.

[lviii] Josh Bivens, Economic Policy Institute, Reclaiming Corporate Tax Revenues, April. 14, 2022, https://www.epi.org/publication/reclaiming-corporate-tax-revenues/ at figure G.

[lix] Michael Mazerov, Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, The “Single Sales Factor” Formula for State Corporate Taxes, Sept. 1, 2005, https://www.cbpp.org/sites/default/files/archive/3-27-01sfp.htm.

[lx] Michael Mazerov, Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, States Can Fight Corporate Tax Avoidance by Requiring Worldwide Combined Reporting, June 27, 2024, https://www.cbpp.org/research/state-budget-and-tax/states-can-fight-corporate-tax-avoidance-by-requiring-worldwide-0.

[lxi] N.J. Admin. Code § 18:7-21.15 (2024).

[lxii] Richard Phillips, Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy, A Simple Fix for a $17 Billion Loophole: How States Can Reclaim Revenue Lost to Tax Havens, Jan. 17, 2019, https://itep.org/a-simple-fix-for-a-17-billion-loophole/.

[lxiii] The state peaked at 485 auditors in fiscal year 2007.

[lxiv] In Fiscal Year 2007, New Jersey peaked at 485 auditors. See State of New Jersey Budget, Fiscal Year 2008-2009 at D-425. The per auditor assessment is based on the Revised FY 2024 figure in State of New Jersey Budget, Fiscal Year 2025, at D-402.

[lxv] In Fiscal Year 2007, New Jersey peaked at 485 auditors. See State of New Jersey Budget, Fiscal Year 2008-2009 at D-425. The per auditor assessment is based on the Revised FY 2024 figure in State of New Jersey Budget, Fiscal Year 2025, at D-402.

[lxvi] In Fiscal Year 2007, New Jersey peaked at 290 auditors. See State of New Jersey Budget, Fiscal Year 2008-2009 at D-425. The per collector collection is based on the Revised FY 2024 figure in State of New Jersey Budget, Fiscal Year 2025, at D-402.

[lxvii] NJPP analysis and inflation adjustment of state budget data from fiscal years 2004 through 2024. In fiscal year 2009, assessments reached over $1.5 billion in 2024 dollars.

[lxviii] Press Release, Internal Revenue Service, IRS tops $1 billion in past-due taxes collected from millionaires; compliance efforts continue involving high-wealth groups, corporations, partnerships, July 11, 2024, https://www.irs.gov/newsroom/irs-tops-1-billion-in-past-due-taxes-collected-from-millionaires-compliance-efforts-continue-involving-high-wealth-groups-corporations-partnerships.

[lxix] Government Accountability Office, Report to the Chairman, Subcommittee on Oversight, Committee on Ways and Means, House of Representatives, Tax Compliance: Trends of IRS Audit Rates and Results for Individual Taxpayers by Income (May 2022), https://www.gao.gov/assets/gao-22-104960.pdf, pp. 10-16.

[lxx] John Reitmeyer, The List: Tracking NJ’s 10 Credit-Rating Downgrades Under Gov. Christie, NJ Spotlight News, Nov. 21, 2016, https://www.njspotlightnews.org/2016/11/16-11-20-the-list-tracking-nj-s-10-credit-rating-downgrades-under-gov-christie/.

Taxing “Super Luxury” Home Sales Could Make New Jersey Affordable for More Residents

As the cost of housing in New Jersey continues to soar, making it increasingly unaffordable for many residents, the market for “super luxury” homes – properties with exceptionally high price tags – continues to rise at a faster rate than all other homes. Applying a higher fee to the sale of these expensive homes could generate hundreds of millions in revenue, helping to make the state more affordable for low-income and middle-class residents. Crucially, this tax would be targeted exclusively to the wealthiest households.

New research from national experts suggests that adding a 4 percent tax on the sale of homes above $1 million could raise substantial revenue for the state. With New Jersey already facing a structural deficit, this new revenue source could fund vital programs that make living and raising a family in the state more affordable. These programs could include affordable housing initiatives, rental and mortgage assistance, and working family tax credits like the Child Tax Credit and Earned Income Tax Credit.

The impact of this fee would be limited to a small fraction of the housing market. Statewide, less than 10 percent of home sales exceed $1 million.[i] Levying a 4 percent tax on home sales over $2 million would affect only the top 2 percent of sales, while raising over $200 million in annual revenue for the state. Extending this same tax to homes sold over $1 million could generate hundreds of millions of dollars more for the state.

New Jersey’s existing 1 percent assessment on properties sold for over $1 million has not dampened the luxury home market. In fact, luxury home sales increased in 2023, even as overall sales declined.

Expanding the fee on very expensive homes would provide essential funding for affordable housing and critical infrastructure in New Jersey. It would also ensure that the state’s wealthiest residents, rather than low- and middle-income households, contribute their fair share to these vital resources.


End Notes

[i] Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy (ITEP) and Center on Budget and Policy Priorities (CBPP) analysis of data from Zillow, the National Association of Realtors, the U.S. Census Bureau, and various state and local agencies. Data on file with author.

 

New Jersey Chooses People Over Profits in the Fiscal Year 2025 State Budget

Headlined by a new tax on the world’s most profitable companies to fund public transit, New Jersey’s latest state budget prioritizes people over corporate profits. The newly adopted Corporate Transit Fee will collect $1.1 billion for NJ Transit, covering the agency’s looming budget shortfall and preventing drastic service cuts that would leave riders stranded.

This choice by lawmakers marks a significant departure from previous budget cycles that favored short-sighted corporate tax cuts and ignored long-term solutions for the state’s aging infrastructure. As the first-ever dedicated source of funding for NJ Transit, the Corporate Transit Fee will not only provide stable revenue to the historically underfunded agency but serve as a model for addressing New Jersey’s other pressing needs, from crumbling schools to an unprecedented shortage of affordable housing.

In this current era of record-breaking corporate profits that never seem to trickle down, there is no better time for lawmakers to call on those with the most wealth to pay their fair share towards the public goods that make New Jersey a great place to live, work, and raise a family.

The Corporate Transit Fee: A Model for New Jersey

At its core, the state budget is about what lawmakers choose to prioritize. This year, the choice was clear: The Corporate Transit Fee clawed back a $1 billion tax cut for large, mostly out-of-state corporations and set aside those funds to save NJ Transit, a pillar of the economy and lifeline for millions of riders.

The 2.5 percent fee will only be paid by corporations making more than $10 million in profits in New Jersey, like Amazon and Microsoft, and more than four out of five of the companies that will pay it are headquartered out-of-state. This policy recognizes that wealth generated in New Jersey is better off reinvested in New Jersey rather than sitting in a billionaire’s bank account or a corporate shareholder’s stock portfolio. And this is just the beginning.

State lawmakers will need to make similar choices in the future to further improve transit, upgrade centuries-old school buildings, develop new affordable homes, expand access to child care, and strengthen programs that make the state affordable for working-class families.

Looking ahead to next year’s budget, Fiscal Year 2026 already looks to be more challenging than this year’s financial outlook. The newly enacted state budget has the state operating at a structural deficit, where the state expects to spend $2.1 billion more than it’s projected to collect in revenue. This is compounded by projected cost increases on everything from health insurance to construction supplies. Making matters worse, the state continues to plow ahead with a regressive and expensive property tax credit program for senior homeowners, which will cost more than $1 billion annually with no funding source to pay for it. Without additional revenue, the state will struggle to afford its existing obligations, let alone any new investments.

And with elections looming in the next budget cycle, there is no shortage of new policy ideas from gubernatorial candidates, from guaranteed income to affordable child care for all to expanding health care access. But all of these ideas will require more revenue. Drawing on revenues from progressive sources like the Corporate Transit Fee will be crucial to ensuring that those who have benefited most from our state’s economy pay back what they owe to the rest of the state’s residents.

New policies that improve the daily lives of New Jersey residents will require broader changes to the tax code. Corporate tax reforms like “worldwide combined reporting” would close loopholes exploited by multinational corporations. The state could also rein in multi-billion-dollar tax credit programs for developers, Hollywood studios, and artificial intelligence companies with questionable returns on investment for residents. Additionally, lawmakers could end sales tax exemptions for high-end professional services and luxury goods like yachts, and reform taxes on inherited wealth on very wealthy estates.

As wealth accumulates further in the pockets of a small group of wealthy individuals and multinational corporations, it will take more of the same thinking embodied by the Corporate Transit Fee to deepen the state’s investments and build an economy that works for everyone.

Highlights and Lowlights

In many ways, the new state budget mirrors Governor Murphy’s proposal from earlier this year. Even with tax collections coming in lower than projected and federal pandemic aid expiring, the budget maintains funding for critical obligations and programs, from NJ Transit to another full pension payment to a record level of school funding.

With the budget now final, here are some highlights and lowlights on some of the key benchmarks and priorities NJPP identified earlier this year.

Highlights:

Corporate Transit Fee for NJ Transit
The new fee will collect more than $1 billion in fiscal year 2025 for NJ Transit, consistent with what Governor Murphy proposed in his initial budget. This will be NJ Transit’s first-ever dedicated funding in its 45-year history. Roughly 600 companies, 81 percent of them headquartered out-of-state, will pay the fee.

Full Pension Payment
The $7.1 billion pension payment continues a four-year streak of full payments, meeting the state’s promise to public workers and retirees while improving the state’s fiscal outlook and credit rating.

Increased School Funding
More than $900 million goes to additional K-12 school funding, including around $45 million to assist districts still receiving cuts even under a fully-funded school formula. Although these additions to the final budget do not entirely eliminate those cuts, the increase in overall school funding puts needed investments in New Jersey’s public school system.

Preserved Surplus
A $6.2 billion surplus maintains the levels from the governor’s original proposal, ensuring the state has funding left over to address any future economic downturns. Lawmakers resisted the urge to spend down the surplus, keeping the state prepared for volatile economic conditions.

Lowlights:

No Improvements to Tax Credits for Working Families
Family tax credits such as the Earned Income Tax Credit and Child Tax Credit remain flat-funded despite the high cost of living in the state. At the same time, the Legislature failed to advance bills to address the state’s appallingly low WorkFirst New Jersey grants for families in extreme poverty. 

Business Tax Credit Frenzy
In contrast to the lack of assistance for low- and middle-income families, the Legislature continued the feeding frenzy of business tax credits, loosening restrictions on credits for film and television productions and real estate development projects, while opening up half a billion dollars in credits to artificial intelligence, an unproven industry with ethical and environmental concerns.

Another Raid of the Clean Energy Fund
Instead of dedicating Clean Energy Fund dollars to support green energy upgrades for NJ Transit, the budget continues the state’s pattern of raiding the fund to pay for the agency’s basic utility costs.

No Reduction in the Cost of Communication for People Incarcerated
The final budget does not include funding to eliminate the high cost of communication for people incarcerated in state facilities. Currently, people who are incarcerated and their families must pay private contractors to send electronic messages and for phone and video calls, and even short conversations can cost more than a day’s pay.

New Corporate Transit Fee Sets an Example of How We Can Fund Essential Infrastructure

Today, the New Jersey Legislature passed the appropriations act (S2025/A4700) for Fiscal Year 2025, sending the state budget to Governor Murphy’s desk. The budget includes the new Corporate Transit Fee, which dedicates approximately $1 billion to NJ Transit. The 2.5 percent fee only applies to corporations with more than $10 million in profits and will primarily be paid by out-of-state corporations like Amazon, Microsoft, and Walmart. The budget also includes New Jersey’s fourth consecutive full pension payment and increased school funding. In response to the new state budget advancing, New Jersey Policy Perspective (NJPP) issues the following statement.

Nicole Rodriguez, President, NJPP:

“Budgets are about choices, and this budget shows how we all benefit when lawmakers choose people over corporate profits. The new Corporate Transit Fee will literally save NJ Transit, getting the agency’s finances back on track and preventing harmful service cuts that would leave riders stranded. This sets an example of how we can fund essential infrastructure that we all rely on, and how anything is possible when profitable corporations contribute their fair share in taxes. Between the new dedicated funding for transit, robust school funding, and a full pension payment, the budget bill represents a vision for New Jersey where everyone has a fair shot, not just those with high salaries.

“But the work isn’t over if we want an economy that works for the many and not a select few. Maintaining these types of public investments will require more revenue, so state lawmakers will have to find new ways to ensure the wealth generated in New Jersey is reinvested right back into New Jersey, rather than sitting in the bank accounts of corporate executives and shareholders.”

Read NJPP’s analysis detailing which corporations would pay the Corporate Transit Fee.

Read NJPP’s report detailing the history of underfunding at NJ Transit.

# # #

Film Tax Credit Expansion is a Bad Deal for New Jersey

Today the Assembly and Senate budget committees approved yet another expansion to the film and television tax credit program, making it easier for companies to receive credits and allowing film production studios to claim Pennsylvania workers as New Jersey film expenses. Despite overwhelming evidence that film tax credit programs offer pennies on the dollar in benefits for their costs to the state, this bill further loosens the strings on these credits. In response to this proposed legislation, New Jersey Policy Perspective and the American Economic Liberties Project issue the following statement.

Pat Garofalo, State and Local Policy Director, American Economic Liberties Project:

“The proposed changes to New Jersey’s expensive and wasteful film tax credit program make a bad deal even worse. Many of the film production jobs already go to transient workers from out-of-state. Now, this bill would let production companies claim out-of-state Pennsylvania workers — who pay Pennsylvania income taxes — as though they were New Jersey workers, further blunting any economic benefit to the state.”

Peter Chen, Senior Policy Analyst, NJPP:

“Diverting tax credits focused on affordable housing to profitable film production studios undermines their original intent and minimizes the public benefits. As each year passes, the film tax credit program continues to be a bad investment for New Jersey.”

For more information on the shortcomings of New Jersey’s film tax credit program, see NJPP and AELP’s joint analysis on film tax credit expansions.

# # #