While removing these exemptions could generate hundreds of millions more a year for the state’s coffers, Lamont would find it extremely difficult to sell lawmakers on the idea of taxing bread, milk, and medicine — even with the lofty goal of fiscal stability.

“In order to build a better budget — one that will attempt to provide the much-needed stability for economic growth through the next two years and through the next decade — we need to explore new and different options,” said Chris McClure, spokesman for the governor’s budget office. “This means leaving no stone unturned, and engaging in all necessary conversations so we can evaluate and analyze ways to achieve and retain balance.”

The new governor’s first budget proposal isn’t due to legislators for another month. But his administration has been researching options to broaden the sales tax base and reduce the 6.35 percent rate across-the-board, a variation on a post-election recommendation made by some members of the Commission on Fiscal Stability and Economic Competitiveness.

The study group called for an end to most exemptions, and a 2 percent tax on groceries.

Expanding the sales tax would not break any campaign promise made by Lamont, but it would draw Democratic legislators, few of whom have close relationships with the new governor, into an uncomfortable debate about a tax that would be felt most deeply in the homes of the working poor and middle class.

Mitigating that impact is a federal law barring the taxation of of food purchased through SNAP, the supplemental nutrition assistance program formerly known as food stamps. It now serves 384,000 individuals in 215,000 households in Connecticut.

Billions in sales tax exemptions

The sales tax is projected to generate $4.2 billion this fiscal year, the second-largest source of revenue for the $20 billion budget after the income tax. It also has dozens of exemptions, many dating back decades, that could raise another $2.7 billion if ended, according to the legislature’s nonpartisan Office of Fiscal Analysis.

The exempted goods and services run the gamut from college textbooks to vegetable seeds, electrolysis services to winter boat storage. Critics argue no economic analysis of these types of breaks was performed before they were approved, and rarely are they re-examined.

Former Sen. Tony Guglielmo, R-Stafford, advocated repeatedly for a broader sales tax base during the first decade of the 2000s. “We shouldn’t be picking winners and losers” in the marketplace, Guglielmo told the CT Mirror.

Most of these are worth a few million dollars or less, a tiny fraction of the overall sales-tax stream. But there also are some large ones. The challenge, though, is that those have broader appeal.

Consumers would pay an estimated $424 million more this year on groceries if the full 6.35 percent sales tax was applied. The exemption for prescription medication, syringes and needles saves shoppers another $387 million — or $416 million after the tax break for over-the-counter medications.

If Connecticut were to impose a sales tax on groceries, it wouldn’t be the first state to do so.

According to the Tax Foundation, a Washington, D.C.-based tax policy research group, 14 states currently impose rates ranging from 1 to 5 percent. But none of them are Connecticut’s neighbors, including the other five New England states, New York and New Jersey.

‘Wrong direction’

To sell such a plan to Democrats, Lamont mostly likely would stress that the blow to consumers.

Sen. John Fonfara, D-Hartford, co-chairman of the tax-writing Finance, Revenue and Bonding Committee, said his litmus test for the governor’s tax proposals will be simple: “My objective is to grow our economy and I will look at the tax structure in that regard. Does it support economic growth?”

Republican legislative leaders said they’ll judge Lamont’s plan on two key criteria: How much tax relief is there to offset any new sales tax burdens? And does the new budget cut enough spending?

Deputy House Minority Leader Vincent J. Candelora, R-North Branford, said middle-class families won’t be too excited about property tax relief in two or three years if they pay even more in sales taxes.

“The public is going to see it as a tax increase the minute it hits their bottom line,” he said, adding he also is wary of the impact of taxing groceries and medications in poor communities.

Democrats have similar concerns, even some who worked for Lamont’s election and served on his transition, such as Rep. Toni E. Walker, D-New Haven, the longtime co-chair of the Appropriations Committee. She said while there are many in Connecticut who want property tax relief, there are far more who buy groceries and medicine.

“We’re struggling to try and get people on health care,” she said, noting that added sales tax burdens could lead some to ignore medical problems.

“We’ve hit bottom on mental health and addiction services, we’ve got a dramatic opioid problem,” Walker said. “We’re going in the wrong direction.”

The Connecticut Food Association, which represents the state’s grocers, said a new sales tax burden could be one part of a much-larger hit on stores and shoppers. For example, association president Wayne Pesce asked, what happens if a new sales tax charge arrives at the same time as electronic tolling and an increased Connecticut minimum wage?

“All of these things tend to be looked at independently when they could hit us collectively,” he said. “It would be an extreme challenge and if you’re a brick-and-mortar retailer in Connecticut, you’re having trouble sleeping at night.”