In the Maine Senate race, ads from pro-Republican groups give Democratic candidate Troy Jackson the nickname “Taxin’ Jackson,” but they make misleading claims about his proposal for Social Security taxes and his votes on some other issues.
The ads say that Jackson “wants to raise Social Security taxes,” with one adding, “hurting our seniors.” But Jackson’s proposal would affect high-income earners who are still working. He wants to remove the cap on the maximum amount of income subject to Social Security payroll taxes.
The ads also claim that Jackson voted in the state Legislature to increase Mainers’ taxes on such items as gasoline and groceries, but cite votes in favor of taxes or fees that did not directly pertain to those items.
One of the ads, from Defending Main Street PAC, says “it’s tough to make a living when you pay so much in taxes” and blames Jackson before making several claims about alleged tax increases that he backed.
The other ad, from Pine Tree Results PAC, makes a number of the same tax assertions and says Jackson “claims to be for working Mainers” but is “definitely not on our side.”
We reached out to both groups about the claims in the ads. Only Pine Tree Results PAC responded with information beyond the sources listed on screen as footnotes.
Jackson is running for the seat held by his opponent, Republican Sen. Susan Collins. The Cook Political Report rates the race as a toss-up.
Social Security Taxes
The language used in the ads could give viewers the false impression that Jackson wants to increase the Social Security payroll tax, or that he wants to raise taxes on Social Security benefits. Neither is Jackson’s plan.
The ad from Defending Main Street PAC says, “Jackson wants to raise Social Security taxes, hurting our seniors.” The ad from Pine Tree Results PAC says, “He wants to raise our Social Security taxes.” Both ads show older people while those claims are being made.
What Jackson has proposed is changing the amount of annual earnings subject to the Social Security payroll tax, which is 12.4%, split between employers and employees, who each pay a 6.2% tax on wages earned. He wants to eliminate the cap on taxable earnings that is set at $184,500 for 2026.
People who make more than that amount do not have to pay the tax on the additional income, and neither do their employers. Jackson has said the change would extend the life of the Social Security program and potentially boost retirement benefits.
“Here’s my plan for Social Security, to make sure it’s there for current and future retirees,” Jackson wrote in a Sept. 11 opinion piece published in the Bangor Daily News. “First, we put Social Security on firmer financial ground by scrapping the cap. If you make more than $184,500 a year, you don’t pay Social Security taxes on income over that amount. Meanwhile, if you make less than that, you pay on your full income.
“It’s not fair, and I’ll fight to change it,” he said. “And second, I support increasing the benefits that retirees receive rather than cutting them.”
Jackson said the same thing at a July Democratic candidates’ debate that was cited in small print in the two ads. And he reiterated his plan at an Oct. 8 debate against Collins. At that October debate, Collins said that she, too, supports increasing the earnings cap — although she didn’t say by how much.
As for the claim that eliminating the earnings cap would end up “hurting our seniors,” Jonathan Schwabish, a senior fellow in the tax and income supports division at the Urban Institute, told us that current Social Security beneficiaries are unlikely to be affected. He said in an interview that the policy change would increase the amount of taxes paid by high earners with pay above the current capped amount.
The Social Security Administration says about 6% of workers each year earn more than the taxable maximum.
However, removing the earnings cap could have some broader economic implications, Schwabish said.
“There is the possibility, of course, that increasing the tax max could have an impact on economic growth,” which “could affect the economy as a whole,” he said.
Because some individuals and employers would have to pay more in taxes, “you could imagine overall economic growth changing, maybe slowing down,” he said. But he said that’s an economy-wide issue, not one that just affects seniors.
Rather than hurting seniors, there are potential direct benefits to seniors. Without any changes to current law, the Social Security trust funds used to pay benefits will be depleted by 2032, according to the most recent Social Security Trustees’ report. At that time, the revenue coming in from the payroll tax would only be enough to cover 78% of scheduled benefits.
The trustees’ report estimated that eliminating the earnings cap could close 58% of Social Security’s long-term budget deficit — if scheduled benefits are not increased for those high-income earners who would be paying more in taxes. If benefits are increased for those paying above the current-law taxable maximum, the long-term funding gap would be reduced by 45%.
Other Tax Claims
The anti-Jackson ads also make three identical, or similar claims, about him supporting various tax increases as a member of Maine’s Legislature from 2002 to 2014 and again from 2016 to 2024. But some of those claims are misleading or unsupported.
Gasoline: The claims that Jackson “voted to tax our gas” or “increase the gas tax” are based on his vote for L.D. 1509 in June 2013. As part of that appropriations bill, Maine’s general sales tax increased from 5% to 5.5%, and the tax on lodging, alcohol and prepared meals went from 7% to 8%. (So, Jackson did vote to increase the sales tax, as one of the ads says.)
But those sales tax increases did not apply to gasoline. Maine’s fuel tax of 30 cents per gallon of gas has been the same since 2011.
Groceries: One ad says “Jackson taxed our groceries,” and the other says “Jackson voted to raise the sales tax, increasing the cost of groceries.” But both ads cite the same three votes on bills that were not a direct tax on groceries.
L.D. 1541, which was signed into law in 2021, created Maine’s Stewardship Program for Packaging. It requires large companies to pay fees for the recycling of consumer packaging, taking some of the financial burden off of local municipalities and taxpayers.
At the time the bill was being considered, the Maine Chamber of Commerce, which opposed it, said studies of similar proposals found that companies paying the packaging fees could pass their costs onto consumers by raising prices, causing grocery bills to go up by 4% to 6%, on average. But the Natural Resources Council of Maine, a nonprofit that supported the bill, said other studies found no correlation between packaging programs and higher grocery prices.
Meanwhile, L.D. 1532, which became law in 2019, banned single-use plastic carry-out bags to reduce plastic waste. Certain retailers were then required to provide customers with reusable bags or recycled paper bags, and charge a fee of at least 5 cents per bag.
Of the three bills, L.D. 1495, enacted in 2009, was the only one pertaining to a direct tax on food – but only certain “prepared food” items. The bill defined those as “meals served on or off the premises of the retailer,” “drinks that are prepared by the retailer and ready for consumption without further preparation,” “food and drinks sold from an establishment whose sales of food and drinks that are prepared by the retailer account for more than 75% of the establishment’s gross receipts,” and candy.
Importantly, the legislation said prepared food “does not include bulk sales of grocery staples.”
Income taxes: The claims that Jackson “raised taxes on our paychecks” or “supported higher … income taxes” are based on his vote for L.D. 258 in July 2023. To be clear, the legislation did not increase income tax rates. Instead, the appropriations bill, in part, established Maine’s Paid Family and Medical Leave program, which provides eligible workers up to 12 weeks of paid time off for certain reasons.
The program is financed by a payroll tax, split between employers and employees, depending on the size of the company. Employees cannot be charged more than 0.5% of their pay.
And if you were curious about the “tax” on Max the dog, as the Pine Tree Results PAC ad says, that is a reference to Jackson’s vote in May 2003 for L.D. 1545, a bill that, among other things, increased state licensing fees for dogs. Dog owners and keepers pay the fees and the money supports the state’s Animal Welfare Fund. It’s worth noting that Jackson voted for a successful amendment to the bill that lowered the amounts by which the fees increased.
Editor’s note: FactCheck.org does not accept advertising. We rely on grants and individual donations from people like you. Please consider a donation. Credit card donations may be made through our “Donate” page. If you prefer to give by check, send to: FactCheck.org, Annenberg Public Policy Center, P.O. Box 58100, Philadelphia, PA 19102.
