A proposed Massachusetts ballot question that would add a 4% tax to incomes over $1 million could have been written more clearly to let voters know the added funds may be spent however the Legislature chooses, justices on the state’s highest court suggested Tuesday. Massachusetts currently has a flat 5% income tax and voters have rejected five past bids, the most recent in 1994, to change the state’s model to a graduated income tax. Goodwin’s Appellate Litigation partner and co-chair Kevin Martin, who litigated on the winning side in the first Anderson decision in 2018, argued the language in the current ballot measure is aimed at reversing that losing streak. “The reason why the spending language was put into the measure was to get [the voters] to approve a kind of measure that they previously had refused to approve,” Martin said. “This language was put there to have an impact on voters, to help log roll this measure to victory.” The challengers are represented by Kevin Martin, and Complex Litigation & Dispute Resolution associates Jordan Bock of Goodwin. Read the Law360 article here.