* Cal Skinner listened to Senate Republican Leader Christine Radogno’s Sunday radio interview…
On Sunday night, in an interview with WLS-Radio newsman Bill Cameron on “Connected to Chicago,” she said she thought it was “off the table.” Here’s the transcript:
“One thing that I think is off the table is taxing retirement income–even at a high limit, which personally I’m not sure I 100% agree with that, but I think it is off the table.”
Why?
“I think people are worried about pushing more seniors out of the state because people are so ready to leave it as it is.”
Radogno hasn’t been opposed to the tax in the past.
- anon - Monday, Jun 6, 16 @ 3:17 pm:
The credible proposal is to tax retirement income solely above a certain income, say $50,000 or $100,000. So it would not hit the poor. Nonetheless, she’s opposed. I’m afraid the taxes she eventually supports will hit the working poor.
- Anonymous - Monday, Jun 6, 16 @ 3:17 pm:
The high earners will establish a residence in Florida, TN, Texas, etc and spend their money elsewhere for 6 months 1 day.
- Honeybear - Monday, Jun 6, 16 @ 3:26 pm:
Hey if your taxes are that much of an issue, please just go. Leave. Immediately. I’m so tired of that ridiculous threat of “leaving”. Fine, get the heck out.
- BK Bro - Monday, Jun 6, 16 @ 3:31 pm:
What exactly IS on the table? Anything?
- UIC Guy - Monday, Jun 6, 16 @ 3:32 pm:
I didn’t know there was a table….
- South Illinoisian - Monday, Jun 6, 16 @ 3:34 pm:
Every government entity has to have an adequate revenue stream. If they don’t get it from taxing income, they’ll get through property taxes, at the cash register etc.
- Belle - Monday, Jun 6, 16 @ 3:39 pm:
What about if they used their time to actually say something.
- Annonin' - Monday, Jun 6, 16 @ 3:42 pm:
So SqueezeTheBeast wants to leave millionaire seniors off the hook….smart move.
- Anonymous - Monday, Jun 6, 16 @ 3:43 pm:
If the votes aren’t there for taxing retirement income, then the votes aren’t there.
- Anonymous - Monday, Jun 6, 16 @ 3:49 pm:
Retirees aren’t exempt from tax on all income, only on pensions, IRA/401k distributions, and a few other things. There is only so much money one can put into a 401k/IRA, so the real “millionaire seniors” (like the governor) are still going to be paying tax on most of their income. What this does is help keep people like my parents, who collectively got about $53,000 from pensions and social security, in the state, paying property taxes. A couple thousand a year does make a difference. It’s a policy decision for the state, sure, but on a fixed income a couple thousand matters.
- Federalist - Monday, Jun 6, 16 @ 3:49 pm:
“The high earners will establish a residence in Florida, TN, Texas, etc and spend their money elsewhere for 6 months 1 day”
That is the reality but those who hate retirees with higher incomes allow that to cloud their judgment.
- OurMagician - Monday, Jun 6, 16 @ 3:49 pm:
Tapas Das Gupta is probably a fine person. And they probably enjoy their $466,409 pension that they paid $475,331 into. But, really Christine? Not even a 2% income tax on someone earning that much pension each year? Your boss likes to say the Speaker isn’t serious about a deal, neither are you.
- Federalist - Monday, Jun 6, 16 @ 3:51 pm:
- Annonin’ - Monday, Jun 6, 16 @ 3:42 pm:
So SqueezeTheBeast wants to leave millionaire seniors off the hook….smart move
So you are saying that only those with pension incomes of over $1 million a year would be taxed?
- Anonymous - Monday, Jun 6, 16 @ 3:55 pm:
I AM leaving…..to paraphrase, “you all can stay in hell, I’m go in’ to Texas!” YeeHawww!
- Anonymous - Monday, Jun 6, 16 @ 3:56 pm:
And yes, it’s perfidous
- TominChicago - Monday, Jun 6, 16 @ 3:58 pm:
BK Bro - Monday, Jun 6, 16 @ 3:31 pm:
“What exactly IS on the table? Anything?”
They are still fighting over the shape of the table.
- OldIllini - Monday, Jun 6, 16 @ 3:59 pm:
Bizarre. I would think that a person with a $150K untaxed state pension would be embarrassed about not carrying their weight, and could hardly object to an income tax, which would be around $5K. Not enough to justify a move to Florida.
- What a plan... - Monday, Jun 6, 16 @ 4:07 pm:
I finally get it. They don’t want to tax seniors because they don’t want them to move out of state. That must be why they like regressive taxes like the sales tax and property tax. Tax poor people enough and hopefully they’ll move out of state.
- m - Monday, Jun 6, 16 @ 4:12 pm:
Seems everyone is missing what she said. She never said it’s off the table because of her or her side. She’s commenting on where she thinks negotiations or a deal would land.
- Jocko - Monday, Jun 6, 16 @ 4:12 pm:
I’m surprised she veered from the ‘reforms then revenue’ script. The “tell” is that Christine knows taxes must go up.
- Railrat - Monday, Jun 6, 16 @ 4:14 pm:
Good for her ! Anonymous @349 correct well said ! Let’s not tax tampons but tax shaving cream and razor blades lol let’s not revisit MFT from what 91? Just think how much MFT got swept ? Infrastructure and construction jobs in Illinois ? Oh but let the trade unions give mega $$$ to MJM and JC ! Duh
- blue dog dem - Monday, Jun 6, 16 @ 4:16 pm:
I would only tax retirement income on public servants who’s pension is over $125 k/ yr. I would increase that tax by 3%. That seems like a good number. I think that should be put on the November ballot and worded as such that it passes court challenge. What ya’ll think the odds of that winning?
- Rich Miller - Monday, Jun 6, 16 @ 4:20 pm:
===but tax shaving cream and razor blades ===
Ahem. Some men prefer not to use those silly items.
- BigDoggie - Monday, Jun 6, 16 @ 4:23 pm:
Honeybear, not sure you can call the threat of leaving “ridiculous” when our state leads the nation in people actually leaving. If things continue to get worse (which seems absolutely inevitable), the number of people hitting the road will grow as well.
- Illinois Bob - Monday, Jun 6, 16 @ 4:27 pm:
Not to worry. She, Madigan and Cullerton will change their minds on this about the 10th of November, AFTER the elections.
Remember how much of a campaign issue the 67% income tax increase was a few years ago? It wasn’t even on the table either….
- Illinois Bob - Monday, Jun 6, 16 @ 4:32 pm:
Rich, don’t you think it’s long overdue to have a “beard tax” in Illinois?LOL After all, having a beard is a privilege, not a right…..
Of course, the “richer” the beard, the higher the tax rate. It’s time the well-bearded paid their fair share! If you don’t like how your beard was “assessed”, Madigan’s law firm can challenge the assessment for 50% of the tax savings in the first year. We also will need to hire beard assessors for this important task…
OMG….I’m starting to think like a Cook County DEMOCRAT! Stop me before I tax again!
- blue dog dem - Monday, Jun 6, 16 @ 4:34 pm:
Beards may only be taxed if they have been color enhanced!
- Anonymous - Monday, Jun 6, 16 @ 4:55 pm:
All the people with state pensions, if you feel badly that you are not paying the freight, write a check to the state. Especially those making a $100K per year, mostly subsidized by taxpayers. Is there much, or any, remorse that you are paid so handsomely in retirement?
- Anonymous - Monday, Jun 6, 16 @ 4:57 pm:
Glad politicians realize that taxing retirement income is a people loser!
- 13th Ward - Monday, Jun 6, 16 @ 4:59 pm:
Go where the $$$ is. Instead of taxing seniors on fixed incomes tax ad revenue - the Tribune and TV stations can afford to pay their fair share and can’t move.
- Bull Moose - Monday, Jun 6, 16 @ 5:02 pm:
If Radogno, Rauner, & Co. are going to take just about every revenue option off the table, someone ought to call them on the enormous cuts they will have to make instead.
Remember when Voices for IL Children showed that even if they cut everything except K-12, they still can’t get out of this mess?
http://www.voices4kids.org/balance-the-budget-without-new-revenue-nearly-impossible/
- Railrat - Monday, Jun 6, 16 @ 5:03 pm:
RM @ 420 and bless you/those that have the manly genes to exhibit the lack of need ! Lol
- Federalist - Monday, Jun 6, 16 @ 5:23 pm:
“Tax poor people enough and hopefully they’ll move out of state.”
And your point? At least in terms of the state budget, services rendered and those paying the taxes.
- Federalist - Monday, Jun 6, 16 @ 5:25 pm:
OldIllini - Monday, Jun 6, 16 @ 3:59 pm:
Bizarre. I would think that a person with a $150K untaxed state pension would be embarrassed about not carrying their weight, and could hardly object to an income tax, which would be around $5K. Not enough to justify a move to Florida.
Is $150K your starting point and nothing below? Or is that just a stalking horse to lower it down and down and down.
- AnonymousOne - Monday, Jun 6, 16 @ 5:41 pm:
Some are envious of a senior citizen earning an income of 100k and not paying taxes on it? Why not miffed about those earning a million or more who wouldn’t even notice a blip on the screen if they paid a few more percentage points worth of tax? Why are middle class people ripping out each others’ throats and letting such privileged people off scot free?
- Illinois Bob - Monday, Jun 6, 16 @ 5:55 pm:
I wonder. Did all those teachers, AFCSME and SEIU workers who marched on Springfield a few years ago chanting “raise my taxes!” ever contribute the amount they wanted their taxes raised? I think not.
What they REALLY meant was raise my taxes a LITTLE and give me a LOT from YOUR taxes…
- Sue - Monday, Jun 6, 16 @ 6:06 pm:
Hey honey- you never fail to amaze- the people who you suggest can leave pay a lot more in taxes then the folks who don’t have the luxury to relocate. If we leave- who will pay for your benefits
- wordslinger - Monday, Jun 6, 16 @ 6:12 pm:
–Radogno hasn’t been opposed to the tax in the past. –
Meh, that was before The Boss told her what she thinks.
- RNUG - Monday, Jun 6, 16 @ 7:46 pm:
== I would only tax retirement income on public servants who’s pension is over $125 k/ yr. ==
blue dog, I agree with a fair amount of what you say … but one targeted at just government retirees would never survive a court challenge citing the diminishment clause. Going to have to tax everyone’s retirement income to avoid having it ruled unconstitutional.
- RNUG - Monday, Jun 6, 16 @ 7:51 pm:
== Is there much, or any, remorse that you are paid so handsomely in retirement? ==
I don’t have a $100K pension … but he’ll no! For the positions I had, the last 20 years of my career I was underpaid anywhere from 40% to 60% and I still have the job offers on paper showing it.
- Robert the 1st - Monday, Jun 6, 16 @ 8:17 pm:
=For the positions I had, the last 20 years of my career I was underpaid anywhere from 40% to 60% and I still have the job offers on paper showing it.=
How many more years would you have had to work before you could even touch your 401k without federal tax penalties if you went that route? How much more would you have paid for health insurance? You pension also was based on cashed in holiday, vacation, and sick days that isn’t a thing in the private sector. Did you factor that in?
- gg - Monday, Jun 6, 16 @ 8:18 pm:
FYI Dr. Das Gupta Brought 100’s of millions in research grants to the University of Illinois.
I am not sure he lives in Illinois currently.
I think most of his extended family is in India.
- gg - Monday, Jun 6, 16 @ 8:53 pm:
@Robert the 1st
You cannot cash in holiday pay or sick pay as of 2000. There is a limit of converted vacation pay of about three months.
The added pension amount is less than 1 percent increase. The average pension is about $ 20,000.
You need 8 years vested to get a pension.
I am tired of hearing how the pensioner’s are scoring big time. It is just not true.
- Anonymous - Monday, Jun 6, 16 @ 8:58 pm:
RNUG, it begs the question, why didn’t you take those jobs? How old were you when you retired?
- Anonymous - Monday, Jun 6, 16 @ 9:03 pm:
gg, what you can do(or could do) is add sick time to your service years.
I would like to see a link that shows the average pension is about 20 grand. Maybe if you include Maude and Henry, who are in their 80’s and earned 10 thousand a year. If you averaged the people in their 50’s and 60’s right now, no way it is only 20 grand. And don’t forget that free health insurance.
- Last Bull Moose - Monday, Jun 6, 16 @ 9:27 pm:
The worst part of these discussions is the envy that drips corrosively into them.
Taxpayer mobility is part of the analysis. Will taxing retirement income lead some people to move; sure it will. Will total tax revenues increase; probably. But the calculation is not simple and straightforward.
I read once that retirees move the first time to cut costs and the second time to be close to grandkids. In a way that becomes an argument to grow the economy. Jobs here means kids stay in state, they have kids, and grandparents stay.
- Robert the 1st - Monday, Jun 6, 16 @ 10:54 pm:
Average pension is $20k? Can we drop this lie already? I know at least a dozen retired state workers from AFSCME and the lowest I’ve looked up started at $48k (at 50 years old mind you). Nearly all of these people are IDOT and IDOC employees with no college degree (of course these are just the people I happen to know). The only way 20k is true is by factoring in people with multiple pensions as separate and non-career workers.
- Anonymous - Monday, Jun 6, 16 @ 11:18 pm:
NO to a retiree tax. I draw it now and waited a lifetime for that benefit. Tax that man behind the tree. Once started even with limits it will be tinkered with in the future. fuhgetaboutit!
- No Raise - Monday, Jun 6, 16 @ 11:23 pm:
Quit bellyaching about pensions. Most are in the $35,000 range, and that’s for workers who have been there since the late 80s. And guess what? We were underpaid most of our careers But the deal was the pension so that’s why most of us stayed. All of you in the private sector laughed at us during the Clinton years. “Get a real job.” “Earn some real money….” I heard it all. But a deal is a deal. And guess what? Since 2007, our deal looks a lot better. But that’s for us older workers. New workers are already in Tier 2. Bottom line— we played by the rules. So shut your collective potato traps about State employee pensions.
- RNUG - Monday, Jun 6, 16 @ 11:26 pm:
Sorry for the duplicate post. It wasn’t showing up in my phone browser.
- AnonymousOne - Tuesday, Jun 7, 16 @ 6:14 am:
So we’re all riled up about public pensions while those with many multiples (of that pension income) of income go untapped for taxes? Pretty obvious that the only thing in play here is pension envy because taxing those with far higher incomes than say, 30-100K will solve our problem much faster. Why no envy of those high earners but crazy jealousy over a, say, 55K pension? That’s rich? If that’s as high as one can think, they’re in pretty sad shape.
- RNUG - Tuesday, Jun 7, 16 @ 6:31 am:
Weird. Some of my 11pm posts from the desktop aren’t showing up on the phone but others are.
- Freddy g - Tuesday, Jun 7, 16 @ 7:23 am:
Free insurance is a great perk but most pensioners don’t get it. I could have stayed on my plan when I left but it would have cost me 2 g a month. Not affordable on a 55 g a year pension.
- AnonymousOne - Tuesday, Jun 7, 16 @ 7:30 am:
Who does get free insurance? There is an assumption that every public employee does yet I know not one.
- Anonymous - Tuesday, Jun 7, 16 @ 7:35 am:
Ask people what is the max they get from social security when they retire at age 66.
Then come back here and compare it to many of these pensions. So, you have a great deal, good for you. Because it is a great deal and because the state needs money, step forward and pay more tax.
Don’t look to Joe Schmo, who worked in the private sector, probably long hours and earns quite a bit, to pay more tax to subsidize your ever growing lucrative pension.
- Anonymous - Tuesday, Jun 7, 16 @ 7:37 am:
AOne, anybody who has 20 years service when they retire, gets free health insurance.
- AnonymousOne - Tuesday, Jun 7, 16 @ 7:46 am:
For many, the pension is the only thing they receive to live on. Social Security was never intended to be what a retiree lives on. Ever. Where’ve you been your whole life not to know that? If that private employee “earns quite a bit”, where’s the retirement savings/investment to supplement that SSI? If these folks didn’t save and lived high on the hog while earning “quite a bit” whose fault is that? You’ve cooked your own goose and it’s no one else’s fault.
- Anonymous - Tuesday, Jun 7, 16 @ 8:35 am:
AOne, you have missed the point completely. Thanks for playing. Go check the database of state employee salaries.
- RNUG - Tuesday, Jun 7, 16 @ 9:01 am:
== Ask people what is the max they get from social security when they retire at age 66. ==
== you have missed the point completely. ==
First, Social Security has both retirement and disability portions. It was created to prevent poverty in old age and to be a kind of work comp for disability back in the day before work comp was common. It provides benefits to spouses, widows and children in addition to the better known retirement benefit. It also provides a minimum standard of living for people unable to work due to a disabity. As such, about half of all SS taxes are paid out for non-retirement reasons. So you can’t really compare the SS retirement benefit to a pension or annuity investment.
Second, some government workers were not / are not allowed by law to participate in Social Security, so their pension is designed to be both a pension and SS replacement. This primarily applies to teachers. And even if the teachers have earned SS credits from other jobs, there are a number of government pension offset rules that reduce or eliminate their claim on SS. Do again, apples and oranges.
Third, the way I learned retirement planning, it was a three legged stool: (1) pension, (2) personal savings like a IRA or 401K, and (3) Social Security. It takes all three parts to have a good retirement. The work place / robber barons have mostly eliminated pensions in this country in favor of a 401K type plan. If you have one of these at your workplace, you need to also have your own retirement savings in addition.