For now, here are the new laws — and expiring ones — to watch:

More money (to come)

Come 2024 tax season, residents can start taking advantage of many of the cuts and beefed-up tax credits included in the state’s $1 billion tax package. That includes a bigger tax credit for low-income workers, a sizable tax cut for day traders who made short-term capital gains, and a bigger deduction for renters that translates into modest (about $50) savings.

But some parts of the law technically didn’t take effect until Monday, meaning residents can’t realize their full benefits until they file their 2024 taxes, likely in spring 2025. That includes an enhanced tax credit for parents of children or caretakers for disabled adults or seniors.

The law increased credits for child and dependent care from $180 to $310 per dependent claimed on an individual’s 2023 taxes, while also lifting the cap on how many dependents a caretaker can claim. In 2024, the tax credit then jumps $440 per dependent. That means a family with four children could eventually claim $1,760; before the changes, that same family would have been able to claim $360.

Another change going into effect will require all married couples who file joint federal returns to also file jointly at the state level, rather than individually. Some business leaders opposed the measure, but the goal, proponents say, is to prevent wealthy couples from avoiding the so-called millionaires tax, a 4 percent surtax on annual incomes over $1 million, by filing separately.

With the new year, the cap on credits awarded to developers through the Housing Development Incentive Program, or HDIP, also resets to $30 million — up from the $10 million allowed before the bill passed but a drop from the temporary $57 million cap the law set for 2023.

The credit aims to spur more market-rate housing in midsize and smaller cities, and the changes marked one of the first times state House and Senate leaders were in alignment on a major housing policy initiative in 2023. The increase chafed some Democratic lawmakers, who argued that the program’s focus on creating more market-rate housing does little to address a desperate need for more affordable units, too.

Pandemic policies

COVID-19 has not gone away. In some cases, neither have the laws it inspired, at least until early 2024.

The Legislature last March extended several pandemic-era policies, passing language allowing restaurants to sell cocktails to go with takeout meals and for expanded outdoor dining. But those laws — first passed during the depths of the public health emergency as a lifeline to restaurants — are currently slated to end April 1.

That is, of course, unless lawmakers move to extend them again. In the case of cocktails to go, an extension would be the fourth in as many years.

That measure was at a center of a fight between restaurant owners and liquor stores in 2023. Some lawmakers also hesitated, at least initially, to keep the law in place, particularly in the Senate, which greeted the prospect of another extension coolly before the chamber’s leaders ultimately agreed to it.

Steve Clark, president and CEO of the Massachusetts Restaurant Association, said his group is already lobbying to extend both policies. Some restaurants, as well as the cities and towns where they operate, need more time to make permanent their plans to create outdoor dining spaces, particularly those in public spaces, such as sidewalks, he said.

Some restaurants, typically ones serving Asian or Mexican food, have also embedded specialty to-go drinks into their offerings, Clark said, arguing that an extension to the rule — or a permanent change — would benefit many establishments still struggling to catch up to pre-pandemic sales.

“If there was more of a sign that it’s going to last forever, people would be more inclined to utilize it,” he said.

Package stores, however, are likely to push back hard on any effort. Rob Mellion, executive director of the Massachusetts Package Stores Association, said that the advantage of selling to-go alcohol “must end” and argued that third-party delivery services are ripe for abuse by underage drinkers.

He pointed to the Alcoholic Beverages Control Commission’s most recent annual report from 2021, which said in December of that year alone, every one of the more than two dozens deliveries it investigated went to someone underage.

Sticking with the minimum

One of the more notable developments of the calendar flip is what’s not happening: Those earning the minimum wage in Massachusetts won’t see a pay raise in January.

For years, hundreds of thousands low-income workers — who made $8 an hour a decade ago — could bank on earning more in the new year thanks to legislative changes, including a 2018 law known as the grand bargain. Under that measure, the state’s minimum wage rose each year starting in 2019, gradually increasing to $15 from $11. Minimum wages for tipped employees also steadily rose to $6.75 from $3.75, and the law also gradually phased out mandatory time-and-a-half pay on Sundays and holidays.

Those changes, however, took their final steps in January 2023. When the law passed more than five years ago, the eventual $15 wage floor matched the highest in the country. It still ranks among them, but Connecticut ($15.69), California and parts of New York ($16), Washington state ($16.28), and Washington, D.C., (which hit $17 in July) all have higher minimums.

All told, workers in nearly half of US states were slated to see some type of increase in the new year.

That Massachusetts isn’t among them has prompted calls from labor leaders and advocates to pursue another increase to keep up with the state’s escalating living and housing costs.

“We have an affordability crisis in Massachusetts, and it’s hitting low-wage workers the hardest,” said Chrissy Lynch, president of the Massachusetts AFL-CIO.

Whether Beacon Hill is prepared to pursue another increase is a different matter. Democratic lawmakers have filed legislation that would gradually raise the wage floor to $20 and then tie future increases to inflation.

But legislative leaders have not signaled they have an appetite to pursue it. In a statement, a spokesperson for Senate President Karen Spilka noted she would review any proposals to increase the wage floor “should they move forward in the legislative process.” Aides to House Speaker Ronald Mariano did not respond to a request for comment.

Healey has said the wage floor should be adjusted “over time” to keep up with the cost of living, but she did not advocate for raising it before the legislative session ends in July.

“Governor Healey is a strong supporter of paying workers a fair wage and will review any legislation that reaches her desk,” said Karissa Hand, a Healey spokesperson.

Matt Stout can be reached at matt.stout@globe.com. Follow him @mattpstout.