Affordability takes center stage in New Jersey gubernatorial race as nominees spar over sales tax

Affordability dominated the New Jersey gubernatorial debate as candidates sparred over how best to ease the cost of living for residents. In a Lawrenceville matchup on Sept. 21, 2025, Republican nominee Jack Ciattarelli again pledged that he would not raise the state’s 6.625% sales tax, arguing that relief should come from shrinking government and cutting other tax burdens. He framed the issue as a test of whether New Jersey can deliver tax relief without broad tax increases and emphasized targeting the income and property taxes that many households feel most acutely.

Democrat Rep. Mikie Sherrill offered a nuanced answer when pressed on the sales tax, saying she would not commit to any specific tax posture on the spot. “I’m not going to commit to anything right now, because I’m not just going to tell you what you want to hear,” she said, positioning her argument around comprehensive affordability measures rather than a single tax cut. During the debate she highlighted a plan to address costs of essential services, including a proposed Day One State of Emergency on Utility Costs aimed at ending rate hikes and lowering bills for families.

In a statement released after the debate, Sherrill’s campaign sought to clarify her stance on sales taxes. “While Jack has repeatedly said a 10% sales tax is on the table, I have been very clear on this: it’s off the table for me and I will not raise the sales tax as your governor,” the campaign said, signaling a bifurcated approach within her own camp on how best to address affordability. Ciattarelli’s advisers quickly seized on the remark as evidence that Sherrill would pursue tax increases in the future, a charge his campaign framed as a continuation of Democratic tax policy from Trenton.

Ciattarelli’s campaign strategist Chris Russell told Fox News Digital that Sherrill’s comment Sunday underscores what he called her plan “to follow in the footsteps of Phil Murphy and Trenton Democrats and raise taxes again.” The candidate’s team has argued that the real test is whether New Jersey can reduce the size of government and curb costs to provide relief without extending the tax base. Ciattarelli has repeatedly argued that the state should focus on cutting the income tax and the property tax, which he described as the most burdensome taxes faced by residents.

Outside groups have multiplied the political heat surrounding the tax issue. Greater Garden State, a super PAC aligned with the Democratic Governors Association, released an ad labeling Ciattarelli “High Tax Jack” for past remarks about a hypothetical 10% sales tax on everything. Ciattarelli dismissed the attack on the debate stage and amplified his own message that voters should expect a plan centered on reducing government costs rather than sweeping tax hikes. He also pointed to a campaign website that seeks to debunk the Democrats’ narrative about his tax stance.

Polls conducted earlier in the cycle have shown Sherrill with a lead in the race, with figures suggesting she held a several-point advantage in the context of a 2026 bellwether race. The numbers illustrate how affordability remains a driving issue among voters as the campaign intensifies, even as both candidates outline diverging strategies about how best to reduce costs for New Jersey households.

Beyond taxes, energy costs have emerged as a focal point of the affordability debate. The New Jersey Board of Public Utilities had projected that monthly electricity bills would rise roughly 17% to 20% by June 1, underscoring why Sherrill has pushed a plan to curtail rate increases from day one. Her proposal would pursue a legal and administrative framework aimed at stabilizing prices for utility customers, a policy she argues would deliver immediate relief to families and small businesses. Ciattarelli has countered that long-term savings must come from controlling state government size and costs rather than expanding exemptions or altering tax rates in the near term.

The debate and its surrounding discourse reflect a broader theme in New Jersey politics: affordability as a defining criterion for voters seeking relief from the costs of daily life. Ciattarelli positions himself as the candidate who will shrink government and reduce tax burdens across the board, arguing that relief should trickle down to residents’ bottom lines through lower income and property taxes. Sherrill, by contrast, frames affordability as a suite of protections against rising costs, from utility bills to public services, and emphasizes safeguards against tax increases as a governing principle.

As the campaign moves forward, both candidates are expected to press their plans in town halls and policy forums, with voters likely to weigh the immediacy of utility relief against longer-term tax strategies. The affordability question remains central: will voters favor a strategy of tax restraint paired with targeted cost-cutting, or a broader approach that prioritizes protecting households from rate shocks even if it entails conservative tax policy down the line?