The Boston Globe tells
The Boston Globe tells us that a compromise has been reached on health care assessments for Massachusetts employers
Now, that's a lot better than many of the proposals, which included variants on the Maryland Wal-Mart tax. Now here's what I love about journalistic integrity:
Let's be clear: a 7% payroll tax. $295 per year/employee. So with the very small exception of lemonade stands and other employers with an average employee salary of $4214, the payroll tax was far and away more expensive. But the wording here implies that this isn't so clear cut, and maybe those opposing the payroll tax aren't so rational?
Speaker Salvatore F. DiMasi and Senate President Robert E. Travaglini agreed to assess companies with 10 or more employees that do not provide health coverage $295 a year for each worker.
Now, that's a lot better than many of the proposals, which included variants on the Maryland Wal-Mart tax. Now here's what I love about journalistic integrity:
Widmer, Meade, Connors, and others had cobbled together a coalition of business groups to produce the compromise that could satisfy both the House and Senate leaders while protecting the state's business interests. They particularly wanted to block DiMasi's payroll tax, which was seen as more expensive to businesses than the assessment proposed yesterday. [emphasis added]
Let's be clear: a 7% payroll tax. $295 per year/employee. So with the very small exception of lemonade stands and other employers with an average employee salary of $4214, the payroll tax was far and away more expensive. But the wording here implies that this isn't so clear cut, and maybe those opposing the payroll tax aren't so rational?
