Supermajority Requirements to Raise Taxes

As the economy tightens and the fiscal outlook darkens, states, many of which face balanced-budget requirements, will find themselves forced to make tough choices, and will have to weigh spending cuts against tax increases in the coming months.

Unfortunately for taxpayers, too often, when faced with these choices, lawmakers lean towards what they perceive as less painful politically, and opt for tax increases.  

For more than a decade, fiscally conservative lawmakers and activists have sought to minimize the ability of elected officials to raise taxes without a legislative super plurality or direct approval of voters. Known as tax limitation amendments (TLAs) or “supermajority” requirements, these measures require majorities of two-thirds, three-fifths, or three-fourths of votes of each legislative chamber before a tax increase can be enacted.
 

States with Supermajority Requirements

As many as sixteen states have such supermajority requirements to raise taxes on the books, either statutory or constitutional in nature. Click here to view a chart.

Most of these states--Arizona, California, Colorado, Louisiana, Nevada, South Dakota, and Washington--have opted for two-thirds requirements. Others--Delaware, Florida (for corporate income tax increases only), Kentucky, Mississippi, and Oregon--require a three-fifths majority.

The most restrictive requirements exist in Arkansas and Oklahoma, where any tax increase must be approved by a three-quarters majority of members of each chamber.

The supermajority requirements implemented in Michigan and Missouri do not appear on all listings compiled by scholars researching the issue. Michigan requires approval by three-quarters of the legislature on any adjustment to the state property tax assessment. Missouri's constitution mandates that all tax increases exceeding the revenue limit first achieve a declaration of emergency by two-thirds of each of the legislature's two houses.
 

Constitutional vs. Statutory

Many of the first supermajority measures were enacted by statute instead of by amendment to the state constitution. Critics argue this has created a measure without teeth strong enough to constrain tax hikes. Supermajority statutes can be voided, temporarily or permanently, by legislators passing another statute. Washington State is a case in point, with a legal challenge of the state’s statutory supermajority requirement pending before the State Supreme Court.

On the other hand, constitutional supermajority requirements that are more difficult for lawmakers to circumvent, are often the last line of defense against big spenders' attempts to raise taxes.
 

Raising the Bar

The Center for Fiscal Accountability is a strong proponent of supermajority requirements to raise taxes because taxes are assessed on wide cross-sections of the populace.  A simple majority is an insufficient expression of the will of the people for the government to compel the citizenry to release more funds.   

CFA believes that taxes are too high now, and the taxpayer will benefit by raising the bar for future tax increases.