On May 27, 2020

Money, money everywhere, but not a lot to spend

By Jack Hoffman

Vermont’s April revenue collections highlight the absurdity of federal rules restricting the use of the Coronavirus Relief Fund—the $150 billion that Congress appropriated in the CARES Act to help the states. The state’s personal income taax receipts dropped by two-thirds last month. Instead of taking in $184 million, as forecast, the tax department received $63 million. But according to the latest guidance Vermont can’t use its federal relief funds to close that gap—to pay for the programs and services that would have been covered by the $121 million the state didn’t collect.

One of the most critical problems facing states now is the sharp drop in tax revenue because so many people are out of work. We’ve known unemployment is bad. About 90,000 Vermonters have filed initial claims for unemployment benefits, which are reported on a weekly basis. That’s been mostly in the last six weeks, and that number is more than a quarter of the people who were working in February.

Because there is a lag in the collection and reporting of tax receipts, it’s been hard to know the toll unemployment and business closures were having on the state’s finances. We start to get a picture of state revenue decline with the April figures:

Personal income tax: down $121.1 million

Corporate taxes: down $12.4 million

Rooms and meals taxes: down $9.3 million

Sales and use taxes: down $10.3 million

And that’s really just a first glimpse. The rooms and meals and sales and use taxes were collected before April 1, but some businesses also took advantage of an option to delay payments because of the pandemic. We’ll need to wait until May and June to see the brunt of the pandemic and stay-at-home orders.

Vermont fared well with the Coronavirus Relief Fund. Thanks to an allocation formula devised many years ago by Sen. George Aiken, Vermont received a small-state minimum of $1.25 billion, which was more than four times the funding it would have gotten through a straight per-capita distribution. It’s a lot of money when compared to the state budget or the revenues the state normally collects on its own.

But we don’t yet know the need. If Congress doesn’t renew the $600-a-week supplemental unemployment benefits, which expire at the end of July, or decides against another round of stimulus payments to individuals, Vermont may need to use some of the Coronavirus Relief Fund for direct income support. People without jobs or income will still need to eat, pay for housing, and, come winter, pay for heat.

The current federal rules have a narrow definition of how this money can be spent. You can use the money to fight the virus and the effects of the pandemic, including helping individuals and business that have been hurt—for example, from stay-at-home orders. But the money can’t be used to backfill state coffers, even though those coffers are running low because people and businesses can’t pay their taxes as a result of the pandemic and subsequent stay-at-home orders.

If these rules are allowed to stand, it poses a dire risk to Vermont’s schoolchildren.

The federal government released more specific guidance last week saying the Coronavirus Relief Fund money cannot be used to help people and businesses pay property taxes, even though property taxes need to go up sharply because of the Covid-driven losses of other revenues.

That puts Vermont—and probably most states—in an untenable position: make deep cuts in education or put all of the burden of making up lost revenue on the back of property taxpayers, whose income has shrunk.

The sensible solution is for Congress to either lift restrictions on the use of the Coronavirus Relief Fund or appropriate more direct aid to states that can be used to cover revenue shortfalls. The one thing we can’t do is shortchange Vermonters who happen to be school-aged during this pandemic. Our state depends on the education of those in school today. Protecting their education in this crisis is protecting our future.

Jack Hoffman is a policy analyst for Public Assets Institute (publicassets.org), a non-partisan, non-profit organization based in Montpelier.

Do you want to submit feedback to the editor?

Send Us An Email!

Related Posts

The public reality of private schools

June 25, 2025
Dear Editor, In their June 13 commentary, “The Achilles’ heel of Vermont education reform,” the Friends of Vermont Public Education state that, “Since the early 1990s, we have been operating two parallel educational systems — public and private.” The organization calls upon the Vermont Legislature to create “one unified educational system,” arguing that, “The current…

Alternative steps for true education reform

June 25, 2025
By Jim Lengel Editor’s note: Jim Lengel, of Duxbury and Lake Elmore, started teaching in Vermont in 1972, worked for the state board of education for 15 years, and retired back in Vermont after helping schools all over the world improve the quality of teaching and learning. Our executive and legislative branches have failed during…

Protect SNAP—because no Vermonter should go hungry

June 25, 2025
Dear Editor, As a longtime anti-hunger advocate, a former SNAP recipient, and a proud Vermonter, I am deeply alarmed by proposals moving through Congress that would gut the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), known here in Vermont as 3SquaresVT. If passed, these cuts would devastate thousands of families across the Green Mountain State that rely…

The Good, the Bad & the Ugly of H.454

June 25, 2025
By Sen. Ruth Hardy Editor’s note: Ruth Hardy, of East Middlebury, represents Addison County in the Vermont Senate. She wrote the following reflection (originally posted at ruthforvermont.com) on voting “no” on H.454, the eduction transformation reform bill that passed last week.  On Monday, June 16, the Legislature passed H.454, the education transformation bill that was…