Why I'm Staying in Massachusetts Despite the Millionaire's Tax

Sam Slater has a compelling reason to stay in Massachusetts despite paying the state's 4% millionaire's tax: his children. The 41-year-old real estate developer, who has lived in the state since age 10, is raising his two young kids in a town with a wonderful public school system.

While many of his wealthy friends have left Massachusetts or confirmed plans to do so, Slater's decision is rooted in family priorities rather than financial ones. "If my children weren't young, maybe my answer would be different," he reflects.

Slater runs a family office based in both Boston and Palm Beach, Florida, with business ventures spanning multiple industries. His primary focus is a well-diversified real estate portfolio that includes light industrial, agricultural, and multifamily properties across several U.S. states and Canada.

Beyond real estate, Slater maintains active involvement in sports and entertainment. He holds a minority ownership stake in the Seattle Kraken, an NHL team, and recently joined the ownership group of the Memphis Grizzlies. Over the past 15 years, he has also produced more than 40 feature films.

His connection to Massachusetts runs deep. Born in South Florida, Slater moved to the state at age 10 and has built his life and career there ever since.

Since its implementation in 2023, Slater has paid the 4% millionaire's tax on income exceeding $1 million. While the tax hasn't affected his lifestyle, he remains aware of the financial burden. "Fortunately, I haven't had to make any lifestyle changes because of the wealth tax, but I'm certainly aware of the taxes I pay in general, specifically as a result of this tax," he explains.

The tax has sparked national interest, particularly as other states consider similar measures. Slater notes that friends in other markets have asked about his experience. "It's been interesting to see an increase in national interest in the Massachusetts millionaire's tax as some initiatives in other states come up," he observes.

However, the tax has already influenced some of his peers. "With the progression of state taxes in the last few years, particularly the millionaire tax, I've seen many people, including friends in the hedge fund, private equity, and finance spaces, move or confirm their plans to do so," Slater says.

Slater's decision to remain in Massachusetts centers on his two children, ages 7 and 10. "I want my kids to grow up in Massachusetts," he states. "I would prefer them to grow up here with all that Massachusetts has to offer."

The family lives in a town with a wonderful public school system, and Slater values the region's accessibility and amenities. "Eastern Massachusetts and Boston, in particular, are highly accessible areas and offer a lot. We've got everything from sports to culture, and all four seasons," he explains.

His commitment to his children's upbringing outweighs the financial incentive to relocate. "I don't want to pull my kids from that for my desire to pay less in taxes," Slater emphasizes.

If my children weren't young, maybe my answer would be different.

Slater observes that the tax's impact on the local economy is complex. He notes that condominium sales in downtown Boston are at "extraordinarily low points both for pricing and velocity," especially compared to a 10 or 15-year horizon.

While he doesn't attribute this solely to the millionaire's tax, he acknowledges that "high earners leaving Massachusetts removes potential high-end condominium buyers from the market."

The broader economic landscape shows mixed signals. "The broader market conditions in the economy are, in certain areas, quite strong, while in other areas, they are not," Slater notes.

His concern extends beyond immediate market effects to long-term fiscal policy. "My question is, what will come next after this?" he asks, highlighting uncertainty about future tax changes.

Slater believes the tax's ultimate success depends on how Massachusetts invests the additional revenue. "What remains to be seen is how the additional revenue brought in to Massachusetts from this tax will trickle back to everyone in the Commonwealth," he states.

He points to specific infrastructure needs that could benefit from increased funding:

• Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA) - requires huge investments in infrastructure and operations
• Cape Cod bridges - two bridges nearly 100 years old needing replacement at multi-billion-dollar cost
• State budget programs - need for forward-looking investments rather than just staying afloat

Slater suggests that clearer communication about tax revenue allocation would build broader support. "I think more people who are paying the millionaire's tax would be on board if there were a more complete message about how the tax dollars would be used," he explains.

While Slater remains committed to Massachusetts for now, his position is conditional. "If taxes continue to increase and no one can point to any substantial changes being made in the state, I think that's when we'll see a more meaningful exodus of people, even potentially myself, from Massachusetts," he warns.

His hope is that state leadership will make "smart choices" regarding revenue allocation. The decision to stay or go ultimately depends on whether he sees tangible improvements in public services and infrastructure.

For now, Slater's priority remains clear: providing his children with the best possible upbringing in Massachusetts, even if it means paying higher taxes. The family's future in the state, however, remains tied to the government's ability to demonstrate value for the additional revenue collected.

Sam Slater's story illustrates the complex calculus high-net-worth individuals face when considering relocation versus family priorities. His decision to remain in Massachusetts despite the 4% millionaire's tax highlights how personal factors often outweigh financial considerations.

The broader implications extend beyond individual choices to state fiscal policy. Slater's experience suggests that tax policy success depends not just on collection but on visible, meaningful investment in public infrastructure and services.

As more states consider wealth taxes, Slater's perspective offers a valuable window into how affluent taxpayers evaluate their options—balancing financial incentives against quality of life, education, and community ties.