149 Comments - Michelle Flaherty - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 2:50 pm: I didn’t think it was real to begin with but if Durkin is opposing it must mean half his caucus is prepared to vote for it and override the governor. - Nacho - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 2:53 pm: In favor. Money has declining marginal utility so it makes sense to tax those who earn more at a higher rate. - 47th Ward - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 2:55 pm: I think a progressive income tax is far fairer than the current flat tax, but changing the constitution is going to be an uphill battle that will take three years. I think it’s worth the fight and I hope they start sooner rather than later. I don’t believe the alarmist cries of those who say the wealthy will simply move away. Plenty of other states have progressive income taxes and have not experienced the financial calamity that opponents like Rauner predict will befall Illinois. Do it. Now. - cdog - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 2:57 pm: Only if the windfall is used in a tax swap. Get the schools off our property tax bills. - blue dog dem - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 2:58 pm: In favor. But can’t start until $250k/ yr. - West Sider - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 2:59 pm: A flat tax made sense, when Chicago had a huge industrial tax base off of which the rest of the state could draft. We no longer live in that world. We have to pay the bills. - Silicon Prairie - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 3:04 pm: Cant believe anyone would say ” Please tax me more”….. Be careful what you ask for. Most of these progressive taxes start at 50 grand, not a million a year - Perrid - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 3:04 pm: I think it’s a very good idea, in general. A small decrease for the majority of people, offset (or more than offset, to make up for some of the deficit) with a small increase for the better off, would make sense to me. Looking at DoR’s 2015 report, returns with an AGI of less than $50,000 make up 52% of all returns, but only make up 13% of the total income tax. So a small decrease per return would have a relatively small impact on the state as a whole, while it would likely help lower income people a lot. At $50k a year, a 1% reduction would be $500 a year, which would be very helpful I’m sure. The devil is always in the details though, so I want to know where they want to draw the line of winners/losers. - Michelle Flaherty - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 3:06 pm: For perspective, Wisconsin, Iowa, Missouri all have progressive income taxes with top brackets higher than Illinois’ flat tax. Most states with an income tax have a progressive rate system. Indiana is a fellow flat taxer, but Indiana lets locals impose income taxes. For example, the income tax rate in Indianapolis is higher than the income tax rate in Illinois. Illinois casino industry already pays a graduated income tax. - UICGuy - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 3:07 pm: I’m in favor on the grounds of fairness, and the declining marginal utility of money (nice point Nacho). That’s even though it would probably cost me money (the idea of it’s starting at $250K is a fantasy). Average (mean) household income is much higher than median household income, so it’s easy to raise more revenue and make most people better off. The challenge is explaining that to people who don’t want to take the time to think about the difference between the mean and the median. (And between average tax rate and marginal tax rate.) For that reason I have some sympathy with JB, since he’s the person who’ll have to sell it. - Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 3:08 pm: As a Republican… here’s the point for me. I want lower taxes, sure. I know we must pay our bills, on time, and the pensions need to be paid, and that part must get in track. If Durkin and his caucus are saying no to progressive income tax, I could support that take, and support them having that position… but here’s the rub. If we’re all Republicans, and we hem and haw about accountability… show me your cuts to keep the tax level as is… or lower the taxes… and meet the fiduciary responsiblities… … …to governing. If Leader Durkin can’t, (or won’t), and won’t own the cuts, or own where spending is to be “curbed”, or where spending just ends, cutting not the spending, but the program… …what are we really taking about? “We oppose it” Ok. Now what? That’s the discussion I’d like to see the GOP have, and be a part of in shaping who we are. It might mean, like I said many times, raise the income tax, then in a 3-year, 3-phase cutting, allow those facing those cuts time to move forward, and still pay bills, use the monies to be strong fiscal stewards, and then run in a 3 year tax cut, while paying bills, and preparing Illinois for a fiscal change that’s smart, and responsible. Progressive income tax, not my first choice, but what other choice is Durkin and company giving me? Republicans pay bills. They use to. That’s who we were, “then”… We need to be better. Show me better Leader Durkin. I gave you my thoughts. OW - Actual Red - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 3:10 pm: Absolutely necessary, because: -the current flat rate makes taxes regressive in aggregate. Lower earners pay a higher percentage when factoring sales taxes etc. -we need to raise revenues to handle our debt obligations, and progressive tax could do that while reducing or keeping rates neutral for the majority of people in the state -Any talk about reducing property taxes (which often disproportionately impact lower earners) requires higher state funding for education, which means we need more revenue -reducing the tax burden on the working poor and middle classes would help stem some of the migration out of the state The current mandatory flat tax makes it so any attempt to raise revenue will squeeze the working class even further. It’s a political weapon for the wealthy to avoid paying higher rates. - Real - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 3:10 pm: In favor. Rauner needs to pay his fair share instead of buying elections. - People Over Parties - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 3:13 pm: The progressive income task does absolutely nothing for Illinois if people don’t have reasons to move and live here. An emphasis on a strong economy is a must. We need to increase our tax base. And at the moment, that’s not happening. Enact the progressive income tax without a strong economy and we’ll end up just like Connecticut- An expensive state with no reason to stay. - DuPage Saint - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 3:13 pm: I am semi for it. Semi because a piecemeal solution if going to try and amend constitution go whole hog state fund 100% of schools take that off real estate taxes and maybe seniors buy in. That said unless zombies take over earth a constitutional amendment to go to a progressive tax will never happen. So please tell me plan B - ItsMillerTime - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 3:17 pm: @Michelle Flaherty The thing I find amusing about Wisconsin, Iowa, and Missouri having a progressive income tax is that Rauner constantly tells us how much better those last two states are in stealing jobs from us. So if a progressive income tax is a “disaster” as the Governor puts it, how are those two states, in Rauners own words, doing better then us if they implemented it? - Cheryl44 - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 3:18 pm: I don’t understand why we don’t already have one. - Chicago 20 - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 3:21 pm: I’m for a progressive income tax with most capital gains taxed at the same rates as ordinary income. - Pundent - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 3:23 pm: By now it should be obvious to everyone that there are no magical cuts to spending (pensions or otherwise) that will right the ship. We need revenue. Period. Full stop. We should absolutely have an honest discussion around a progressive tax. It’s working in our neighboring states and they don’t seem to be plagued by the “disaster” that Rauner predicts. We know spending cuts alone won’t fix the problem and we also know that the “reforms” Rauner fought so hard for only bring about 1.4% in benefits. - Back to the Mountains - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 3:23 pm: @People, Maury is filmed in Connecticut, and if that isn’t reason enough to stay, I don’t think anything will convince you. To the post, yes, we should have a progressive income tax. Businesses like low tax, but they love consistency. Raise the rate, pay off our bills, get the pensions under control — basically, act like adults — and things will get better. - Anonymous - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 3:24 pm: Median family income in Illinois is $77,900. This is gonna hurt a lot of people. Opposed. Good on Durkin to put this on the record. - SuburbanRepublican - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 3:27 pm: When Rep. Lang proposed this a few years ago it was expected to raise about $2 billion. Unless the rates are going to be near 10% for upper income earners, I don’t see how JB is going to get away with not increasing taxes on middle income earners. Our bill backlog is 4x that $2 billion estimate from Lang’s bill. I thought the revenue increase last year was needed to stabilize our finances but I think going to a progressive tax is the absolute wrong way to go. - d.p.gumby - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 3:29 pm: Does his resolution also support motherhood, puppies and unicorns?? - Anonymous - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 3:30 pm: Median family income in Illinois is $77,900. Get ready to empty your wallet if Mr. Pritzker wins. - Anonymous - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 3:31 pm: Pundent, all of our neighboring states have lower tax burdens than illinois and are relatively well managed. - Dee Lay - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 3:31 pm: “Enact the progressive income tax without a strong economy and we’ll end up just like Connecticut.” Chicago’s economy is larger than the country of Sweden…who has a progressive income tax! - Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 3:36 pm: Dear - Anonymous - I’m confused. What the median family income in Illinois? Never mind. I found it, about 77,990 times. - ZC - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 3:36 pm: At a minimum I think we need the -flexibility- to experiment with a progressive income tax, meaning that constitutional provision really should go. Try it, if it works, keep it, but above all, try something, etc. - JS Mill - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 3:36 pm: I support a progressive income tax. Illinois will only improve when the bills start getting paid and on time. That alone will jump start the economy. - Sue - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 3:36 pm: It’s difficult to voice any opinion without knowing the brackets and rates there on. In a vacuum it’s not a bad idea but if the Dems use it politically to “tax the rich” I would strongly oppose and contribute heavily to lobby against it. The State needs to retain an environment where it’s not chasing awY it’s most significant tax payers otherwise all we will do is end up poorer overall - wondering - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 3:37 pm: 34 states have one. Rich people will leave? For where? Rauner will leave? Griffin? Who will miss them? Feds have it, Rauner and Griffin still here. - Rich Miller - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 3:37 pm: ===That alone will jump start the economy. === C’mon. It’s an $800 billion economy. Past-due bills are about 1 percent of that. It’ll help, for sure, but it’s not a cure. - People Over Parties - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 3:37 pm: Then again, what do economies and cost of living matter anyways? I’m sure people are leaving Illinois en masse for other reasons. The weather has been a bit chilly this year, I suppose. - Anonymous - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 3:38 pm: @Annonymous: median household income in IL is about $61K: http://www.deptofnumbers.com/income/illinois/ Half the households make less than that. Not hard to devise a rate structure that makes them better off, and still raises more revenue. - Cool Papa Bell - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 3:38 pm: For it. Cut the rate for more than 50% of workers. Nearby states top rates are from about 7.65 to 9.85 percent. Pick a midpoint and go from there. Use some of that extra revenue to find a way to enact property tax relief and you’ve got a winner. - Anonymous - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 3:39 pm: At a minimum we need flexibility to change public employee retirement benefits - The Iceman Cometh - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 3:39 pm: I’m in favor, but only if there’s some kind of rate limitation so voters would have to weigh in on potential increases. Otherwise, I’m voting no. Something along the lines of: 1. Tax brackets for single filers shall be equal to 50% of those for married filing joint. 2. A Marginal Married Filing Joint bracket shall not exist that exceeds 3% for the amount equal to the 50th percentile household income in Illinois. A Marginal Married Filing Joint bracket shall not exist that exceeds 5% for the amount equal to the 75th percentile household income in Illinois. A Marginal Married Filing Joint bracket shall not exist that exceeds 7% for the amount equal to the 90th percentile household income in Illinois. No tax bracket shall exist that exceeds 9%. 3. IL Dept. of Revenue shall perform annual studies to ensure conformity of this section, and refund taxes received to the extent that tax brackets in effect for the relevant year exceeded this section. I use household income percentiles rather than static numbers so the whole thing can adjust for inflation without relying on indexes like the CPI-U, whose formulas could be changed without the GA’s or IL voters’ input. For reference: https://dqydj.com/united-states-household-income-brackets-percentiles/ - Anonymous - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 3:41 pm: Median family income in Illinois is $77,900. You are correct about household income being less. - SAP - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 3:41 pm: For it in principle. Would like to see the details though. - Dr. M - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 3:42 pm: People who are wealthy enough to be affected by a progressive income tax and yet choose to remain in Illinois must have a strong incentive to live here. They likely have business interests or work in professions that require they live in or near a major City like Chicago. High-earners like this don’t have the option of moving to another state with similar economic opportunities that doesn’t also have a progressive income tax. Dallas, sure, but natural disasters. Seattle, maybe, but it rains all. the. time. LA? NYC? DC? Expect to pay higher (progressive) income taxes. Not everyone can live out their days in Florida. Many of us have to work. The higher-income earners who have remained here are doing so for a good reason. If tax revenues can be used to pay down our debt and rebuild our communities, infrastructure, and education systems, perhaps Illinois can even convince more successful, wealthy people to move here because it will be a nicer place to live. It’s worked pretty well in California. - Anonymous - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 3:43 pm: Illinois has a. Higher tax burden then it’s neighboring states except it’s tied with Wisconsin at 5th highest. - wondering - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 3:44 pm: I would be in favor of abolishing the sales and real estate taxes and go strictly progessive income tax. Obviously the flat tax is not working, common sense dictates progressive. - Grandson of Man - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 3:45 pm: 100% support. We can go the Rauner way, which is to gouge and scapegoat working class government employees and PLA workers, or we can ease back on their cuts and get more revenue from those like Rauner, Pritzker, Uihlein and Griffin, who can retire thousands of times over. Republicans are so openly for the super-rich, including Trump. How the heck did working people get suckered by a con artist like Trump, who loved himself some free trade and outsourcing? Oh yeah, cheap slogans, illegal Mexicans, Muslims, Hillary. Those massive federal tax cuts ain’t helping, as our national deficit grows astronomically. - UICGuy - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 3:46 pm: What is ‘family income’? Who counts as being in the same family? Households are the tax units, so two members of the same family who are not in the same household would not have their income added together for tax purposes. And where does your figure come from? Households are what the census keeps track of. - Anonymous - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 3:47 pm: last I checked Illinois is not California. And California has the tax burden as illinois right now - Anonymous - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 3:49 pm: GOM, the government kleptocrats have been gouging Illinois taxpayers for decades - Anonymous - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 3:52 pm: HUD has the definition of family. I pulled the new family income numbers from their website. - Annonin' - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 3:57 pm: Six pages of mumbo jumbo praising the filthy rich and hopin’ to be like states with lower media income and lower ranked universities…quite the brain storm Durkie. - Wow said I - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 3:57 pm: It would bring equity to a system that is broken. A mom with six kids making 50 thousand should pay less of her income than a Rauner, than a Madigan, ETC. - Anonymous - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 3:57 pm: When is JB going to pay his “fair” share? - DuPage Moderate - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 3:58 pm: While a progressive income tax will whack me in the wallet, I’m okay with it insofar as we have legitimate pension reform. If we don’t structurally fix the pension mess here and start fresh with new hires, we should just kiss our state economy and housing equity goodbye. - Anonymous - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 3:59 pm: Agree completely dupage moderate - Steve - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 4:04 pm: There’s always been a logic to having a flat tax : it deters politicians from constantly raising taxes because then everyone feels the pain. Illinois is known as a high property tax state, also known as a high sales tax state. If it wants to become a high income tax state it probably will not help population growth… or its’ budget problems. - Nick Name - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 4:04 pm: ===Only if the windfall is used in a tax swap. Get the schools off our property tax bills=== That’s the whole idea. - Amalia - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 4:08 pm: yep. it’s both fair and a way of raising revenue. government services cost money. we have to figure out a way to pay for things. OR, cut the budget. citizens need to realize that their want for government services is not free. - Anonymous - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 4:10 pm: I’m all for it. It’s about time we catch up with the vast majority of other states (not counting those with no state income tax at all.) However, I think it should happen along with increased revenue legislation such as legal recreational marijuana and more casinos. - Steve - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 4:13 pm: How school administrators does Illinois really need? Aren’t teachers and taxpayers more important? - Actual Red - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 4:15 pm: It obviously depends on the final rate structure, but there are models out there that give 80-90% of the state an income tax with neutral or higher revenue. Just as an example, a rate structure proposed by Sen. Harmon in 2015 would tax: -income up to $12,500 at 2.9%, -everything from $12,500 - $180,000 at 4.9%, -above $180,000 at 6.9%. That means everyone making below $180,000 gets a tax cut, because your paying less on that first $12,500 you make. The cut is a bigger chunk of your total income the less money you make. That’s around 94% of households in the state getting at least a little more money, without hurting revenues. Of course, that’s not the only way rates could be structured. But it does show that it’s certainly possible to increase revenues while helping most families pay lower taxes. - Ron - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 4:16 pm: Steve, how dare you ask such a sensible question? - Grandson of Man - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 4:16 pm: Fairness is the key—especially because our super-rich governor profited off of a decades-long low state income tax and public sector pension profits. - Ron - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 4:17 pm: We already have the 5th highest tax burden in the nation. You shooting for 1st? - Silicon Prairie - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 4:20 pm: Well said Ron. Hey JB if you hurry up we can be #1 tax burden is the US - i miss bentohs - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 4:21 pm: + Median family income in Illinois is $77,900. Get ready to empty your wallet if Mr. Pritzker wins. + As a fiscal conservative, I am willing. This idea of not saving one dollar in expenses but then not paying what you budget, is starting to tick me off too much. I’m not too happy that over $1bil will be going to pay late fees for not paying our bills either. - Ron - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 4:25 pm: What special services do illinois taxpayers get for the 5th highest tax burden in the nation? - Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 4:25 pm: ===Well said Ron.=== Rise of the Bots To the Update.. ===…nothing about creating an unfair, unequal, and avaricious tax system helps the General Assembly accomplish these ends=== So… we going to try for a budget? The HGOP felt “betrayed” according to Ms. Wheeler when the state got a budget… which I’m pretty sure helps a state when the state… has to had a budget… but, I digress… - ChrisB - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 4:25 pm: There’s a lot of “as long as someone else is paying it” in this thread. Figures. “Everyone else is doing it” is also a terrible reason. I might be OK with it, so long as I actually saw the value for what I was paying. Right now, I’m not seeing it though. As long as we’re cracking open the IL Constitution, if Springfield can horse trade a couple of other clauses, like pension reform, you might find some bipartisan support. All in the name of paying our bills. But that will never happen. Both sides have their untouchable golden goose. - Annonin' - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 4:26 pm: “Tell us how you really feel Leader” Well if Durkie allowed the progressive rate for the rich from in his beloved Iowa GovJunk pays the state $8,171,800. Here GovJunk paid about $3.45 million. - Ron - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 4:26 pm: What ChrisB said x 1,000,000 - Ron - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 4:30 pm: The only bots here OW are kleptocracy apologists. - Earnest - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 4:31 pm: Favor. I think it’s fairer. Room for plenty of debates on levels and rates and how it fits into an overall strategy to address revenue and expenses. - Demoralized - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 4:37 pm: ==unfair, unequal, and avaricious tax system== Why not just add the repeal of the 16th Amendment while your at it. Sheesh. - Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 4:38 pm: The key isn’t for Durkin to be against it. That’s the easy part. The difficult part is paying what’s owed, paying for priorities, and trying to keep from allowing the state to fail on its responsibilities. This vitriol against pensions… they’re owed. That’s not changing. The workers are paying in, its the state that’s not. Keep up. I want to see how Durkin wants the budget balanced. I stated my tax idea, and how to go about the next 3 after. This is a bunch of words, making a sentence, with a period. Ok, now what? - Ron - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 4:42 pm: Cut as much spending as needed to make the ridiculous pension payments. Let the population know the true cost of our kleptocracy. - Grandson of Man - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 4:44 pm: We need the money to structure proper and stable pension debt payment. We need to also take care of the people who take care of us, the child care workers, teachers, prison guards, nurses and others who do our vital work, so we don’t try to whack them Rauner style. - Generic Drone - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 4:46 pm: The only income bracket making gains are the wealthy, then get it done. - Anonymous - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 4:46 pm: A progressive tax is being pushed by democrats as a way to make taxes fair, when in reality it will raise the majority of tax payers taxes. It is also being done, to push another tax increase, after we just got one. It will make it easier for politicians to increase taxes in the future, by changing income levels and increasing taxes, without the stigma of having to go through, with trying to push for a tax increase. It is a tax increase, under the guise of tax reform. - Pundent - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 4:46 pm: =As long as we’re cracking open the IL Constitution, if Springfield can horse trade a couple of other clauses, like pension reform= For the umpteenth time you have pension reform. It’s called Tier II. What new “reform” are you exactly advocating for? - Anonymous - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 4:47 pm: Close CSU, EIU, WIU. Slash education spending. Close a state prison. No more mental health workers. Just pay the pensions instead. - Ron - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 4:48 pm: I am advocating for no pensions at all and no pension protection in the state Constitution - Demoralized - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 4:49 pm: ==I am advocating for no pensions at all== You’re a heckuva human being. - Henry Francis - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 4:49 pm: Jeeze Jimbo, Bruce and the billionaire boys hear you loud and clear. These poor rich folks, they are already taxed so much. It’s really holding them back. If they weren’t already taxed so much, maybe they would be rich(er). - Ron - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 4:50 pm: Public workers will do fine with SSA and a 401k ( non matched until public employee benefit protection is removed from the Constitution). - Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 4:50 pm: ===Close CSU, EIU, WIU. Slash education spending. Close a state prison. No more mental health workers. Just pay the pensions instead.=== - Ron - Is this you? Sounds like you… Thanks. - DuPage - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 4:54 pm: - Michelle Flaherty - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 3:06 pm: ===For perspective, Wisconsin, Iowa, Missouri all have progressive income taxes with top brackets higher than Illinois’ flat tax. Most states with an income tax have a progressive rate system. Indiana is a fellow flat taxer, but Indiana lets locals impose income taxes. For example, the income tax rate in Indianapolis is higher than the income tax rate in Illinois.=== Also, counties in Indiana are allowed to put a personal property tax on vehicles. - Ron - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 4:59 pm: Indiana has the 22nd highest state and local tax burden. Illinois is 5th highest. - Anonymous - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 4:59 pm: @Pundent ==What new “reform” are you exactly advocating for? == The part that makes them untouchable and unchangeable. It’s unnecessarily restrictive. Even Detroit was able to restructure their pensions to get themselves back into (eventual) solvency. - Whatever - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 5:00 pm: ==Median family income in Illinois is $77,900.== HUD isn’t kind enough to tell us exactly how they got that figure, but it doesn’t really matter. According to the Department of Revenue’s web site, in 2015 (the most recent year they show), more than 57% of individual Illinois resident returns reported adjusted gross income of less than $50,000. So if you lower the rates for those with adjusted gross income of less than $100,000 and raise them for those higher than $100,000, you will reduce the tax for well over half of Illinois resident taxpayers. - Pundent - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 5:01 pm: =Public workers will do fine with SSA and a 401k=. And your certain that this results in a lower liability for the state than Tier II based on what, your street knowledge? - Ron - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 5:04 pm: HUD gets its information from the ACS. Same source as median household income. What tax rate should a family making $77,900 pay? - Ron - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 5:05 pm: How do you define middle class? - Ron - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 5:11 pm: Anyone care to explain what amazing services Illinois taxpayers get for the 5th highest tax burden in the country? - Pundent - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 5:15 pm: =The part that makes them untouchable and unchangeable. It’s unnecessarily restrictive.= Again pension reform was accomplished with Tier II. What remains to be dealt with is the unfunded liability from years of shorting the system. That state has to pay what it owes and there’s no “reform” that will change that. The courts have spoken. The tax rates should have been addressed years ago. They weren’t and the problem is now worse. Whining about pension reform is like a stammering 4 year old who just keeps saying “its not fair”. - blue dog dem - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 5:18 pm: Would ya’ll stop with the notion that Missouri has a progressive income tax. - anon2 - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 5:21 pm: Illinois has one of the most regressive state and local tax systems of any state. Poor people pay an effective tax rate several times higher than the top one percent. A way to reduce that overall regressivity is to institute a progressive income tax. The overall tax system will still be regressive, but not as much as it is now. - Anonymous - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 5:24 pm: How much should a family with a median income of $77,900 pay? - Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 5:25 pm: ===How much should a family with a median income of $77,900 pay?=== - Ron - Is *this* you? Thanks. - Anonymous - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 5:26 pm: Missouri’s top income rate starts at $9k income. - Anonymous - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 5:27 pm: Ron (ner’) said at 5:11pm =Anyone care to explain what amazing services Illinois taxpayers get for the 5th highest tax burden in the country?= Sure. We get the services of bond houses and whole bunch of other creditors because all the money we borrow. - blue dog dem - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 5:28 pm: Anony. Yup..not very progressive is it? - Anonymous - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 5:28 pm: Thanks Anonymous, great ain’t it? - m - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 5:30 pm: =That state has to pay what it owes and there’s no “reform” that will change that. The courts have spoken.= Unless/until the constitution is changed. Just wait until we’ve had a dem gov for awhile and Madigan goes back to wanting to whack the pensioners. - wordslinger - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 5:34 pm: –A move to amend the constitution to allow for such a repugnant affront to Illinois families would be an act of utter insult to Illinois taxpayers and a dereliction of the duty…– Is that bad? It sounds really bad. Is it the annual spring hair burn in the House GOP caucus? I guess Illinois is just a shining beacon with the flat tax, and it’s the federales and 42 other states that are repugnatin’, affrontin’, utterin’, insultin’ and derelictin’ the humanity. On Planet Earth, though, the rates — progressive or flat — don’t determine spending. Just who pays. You could have a progressive tax and spend less. - Anonymous - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 5:37 pm: Any other thoughts on what amazing servicesillniois gets for that 5th highest state and local tax burden? - Anonymous - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 5:39 pm: Blue Dog, to people that love Pritzker an income tax rate of 6% of all income over $9k is progress. - blue dog dem - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 5:42 pm: Anony. I got the over/under at 7% for incomes over $75k under JB. - Ron - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 5:44 pm: Probably right, no way to avoid sticking it to the middle class families. - MyTwoCents - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 5:45 pm: I have yet to hear any explanation from opponents on why voters should not have a say on the taxation system in Illinois and why the General Assembly should unilaterally deny the ability to fully have that debate. That would only truly start when the amendment is on the ballot and there’s a campaign over its passage. To the question, I think it’s time to change the taxation system in Illinois because it’s obvious it hasn’t worked for decades. That includes graduated income, service tax, property tax swap, etc. Ron, just think the level of service Illinois citizens could be receiving if the State was only paying the normal cost of pensions instead of the billions of debt service and schools weren’t overly reliant on property taxes? For way too long the General Assembly kept the revenue artificially low and compensated for it by shorting pensions and forcing school districts to survive mainly on property taxes. Hence why we have the problems we have and it has little to do with Tier 1 pensions. - Ron - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 5:51 pm: How high do you want the tax burden on us to be 1st? Instead of 5th highest? - Ron - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 5:53 pm: My two cents, what should a median income family pay? 6% like in Missouri? - Ron - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 5:56 pm: Tier 1 pensions and the kleptocracy are precisely why illinois is a fiscal basket case. - Anonna - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 6:19 pm: Against it. I don’t think it’s fair. - Taxed out west - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 6:28 pm: ONCE, JUST ONCE, I want someone to explain to me what “am their fair share” is. The rich make $1000 pay $100, the lesser make $100 pay $10. I don’t get it? Isn’t that “fair”. Not to mention, the majority of businesses in this state are Subchapter S corps with money flowing thru to the owner…this is not their income, this is the money they pump back into the business. - McLincoln - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 6:28 pm: Wholeheartedly support progressive income tax with the lowest bracket at the current 4.95% rate. In exchange, fund schools at a higher level (with the new formula) to allow counties and school districts to become whole. This is where we can apply the proprty tax freeze. While we’re at it, let’s lower the state portion of the sales tax 2% or so and give the LGDF its fair share. - Anonymous - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 6:30 pm: I’m in favor, as long as taxes go up for Sue and Ron and they leave the state as a result. - wordslinger - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 6:32 pm: –I’m in favor, as long as taxes go up for Sue and Ron and they leave the state as a result.– You think Ron is in the United States? - wordslinger - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 6:38 pm: –I want someone to explain to me what “am their fair share” is.– No idea. Can you explain what “reading before posting” is? - anon2 - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 6:44 pm: === Get the schools off our property tax bills=== That can’t be done, not unless the income tax rate were well into double digits. Too much is raised via property taxes to replace the whole enchilada. A portion could and should be reduced. - Union Thug Gramma - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 6:51 pm: Although I am one of those that have a 6 figure income between my husband and I, I know that our flat tax has meant hardship for our children and grandchildren. Since we have a home, we are allowed to take property tax off of our “flat” tax…we ended up with a couple of hundred dollars back…my son, who made about $15,000, had to pay $SIXTY DOLLARS IN—where is THAT fair???? The other problem with our regressive system is that since we can’t change the tax system to something that is progressive, we rely on fees for services, licenses, etc…which I feel may have more to do with the issues of business in Illinois than our so-called high tax structure. Almost all of the states that surround us have a progressive tax structure, all of them end up with a higher income tax than we do…except Indiana (which has a whole bunch of other issues that we don’t have) and Michigan (one word: Flint). A progressive tax would allow Illinois to give relief to those that need it the most, make those that use the commons to their advantage to pay more, and possibly lessen the burdens on those that need annual license renewal. - Ron - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 6:51 pm: Taxed out what, maybe exempt the extreme poor from paying income tax? But I get your point other than that. - Anonymous - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 6:53 pm: Illinois has the 5th highest state and local tax burden in the nation. Right now Union Granmma - Ron - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 6:58 pm: Word, I’m at the lakefront waiting for my kids soccer practice to end. Pure Chicago - Anonna - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 7:01 pm: Taxed out west - I totally agree. If we all pay the same rate, then that’s fair. I do think there’s an argument that the super rich like JB and Rauner don’t pay their fair share because, as a result of offshore tax shelters, tax code loopholes, aggressive advisors and the like, their effective rate is low, but that’s a tax code problem, not a tax rate problem. - Grandson of Man - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 7:04 pm: Rauner is pulling it out of his backside, calling a progressive income tax a calculated killer. No way is it that. This guy just flat out refuses to pay more. Why doesn’t he have the same disdain for yanking it out of workers who make so much less money than he does? Rauner made $188 million in 2015. Rauner made $91 million in 2016. Tax his behind more. - Back door pension reform - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 7:06 pm: They are using this progressive tax as a smoke screen to get people to vote to change the constitution so once it is opened they can change the law covering pensions and Enron the state employees.once the constitution is open anything g can be changed. - Anonymous - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 7:07 pm: How much to old Jay pay last year? - Ron - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 7:08 pm: That’s exactly what we need back door.bthe kleptocracy must be broken - Ron - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 7:11 pm: GOM, what should the income tax rate on a family making the state median income of $77,900 be? - wordslinger - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 7:13 pm: –They are using this progressive tax as a smoke screen to get people to vote to change the constitution so once it is opened they can change the law covering pensions and Enron the state employees.once the constitution is open anything g can be changed.– It doesn’t work that way. I think you’re confusing a Constitutional convention with a Constitutional amendment. See Article XIV of the Illinois Constitution. - Anonymous - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 7:21 pm: A constitutional convention would be great. First order of business is elimination of the obscene public worker protection. - Grandson of Man - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 7:37 pm: You won’t get a dispute from me, that public employees should make reasonable concessions when the state is in such dire fiscal shape. But Rauner wanting to gouge them on different levels while his income skyrockets and Pritzker pays nothing? I didn’t vote for Pritzker and think it’s very wrong that he paid no state income tax. However I am very encouraged that Pritzker is looking to raise taxes on people like himself and cut them on many others. He’s on the right track, but he has to come up with a plan and push it boldly. Illinoisans have indicated they’d support it. - wordslinger - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 7:40 pm: –Word, I’m at the lakefront waiting for my kids soccer practice to end.– LOL, you should watch them play. You’ve repeated the same four statements, over and over, every day for months. - Generic Drone - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 7:44 pm: Some rediculous statements today. I might as well make mine. 50% tax rate on millionaires should fix it. - AnonymousOne - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 7:44 pm: Hard to decide about a progressive tax. If the point is to collect more from wealthier earners, then we’d better make sure the wealthier earners are being taxed more, not people earning, say less than 200k. There’s a huge difference between the wealth of people like Pritzker and Rauner and your middle management earner making 120k. People in the upper earningbracket-over 1 million wouldn’t even notice if they had to pay a few percentage points more——-oh—-they’d definitely notice but they wouldn’t be hurt by it, I meant. IF the median income in Illinois is 61k–or even 71k, please do not tell me that anything over this is wealthy. - Anonymous - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 8:20 pm: Having read a previous post about public workers making concessions I take umbrage. DO you really feel that someone earning a living wage even if it’s upwards of 100k is living a lifestyle of the rich and famous, like Rauner, Pritzker and the likes? Really? People like these uber-rich love it when we working folks scrabble amongst ourselves and worry about 10k more or 40k more when they’re paying little or no taxes on millions. If you want to get more money you have to go to where the money is. Ask me? I’d take the 188 milion at 3% tax over 100k at 3%. Math is hard, isn’t it? - XDNR - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 8:21 pm: Tier 1 pensions and the kleptocratic GA that failed to fund the pensions adequately and timely are precisely in part why illinois is a fiscal basket case. There fixed it for you Ron. And yes to Mr. Durkin’s and paraphrase his words, I find the unfunded pension liability a repugnant affront to Illinois families and an act of utter insult to Illinois taxpayers and a dereliction of duty by members of the legislative branch of government, a body that is supposed to improve the general welfare and protect the best interests of all Illinoisans. To the post, Illinois is only one of nine states with flat-rate income tax (with some of those (i.e. Indiana impose additional local and county taxes as mentioned above), while 34 states use a graduated income tax system. So yes if bracketed equitably based on IL residents income I’m in favor of it. - Honeybear - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 9:34 pm: –They are using this progressive tax as a smoke screen to get people to vote to change the constitution so once it is opened they can change the law covering pensions and Enron the state employees.once the constitution is open anything g can be changed.– Absolutely incorrect. The referendum only pertains to the progressive income tax. It does not open the door to anything else. I’m totally for a progressive income tax. - Anonymous - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 9:38 pm: Honeybear, what should the various rates be? - Generic Drone - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 9:53 pm: What? My 50% rate on millionaires not clear enough? - Just Me - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 9:53 pm: I would rather we spend that time and energy on growing the tax base instead of finding creative ways to squeeze more tax revenue out of the tax base we have now. - Just Me - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 9:54 pm: Here is something to think about: we have fewer people in Illinois now than we used to, so it makes sense we would collect fewer taxes from the remaining people who have stayed. - Anonymous - Tuesday, Apr 10, 18 @ 10:00 pm: Flat tax 7% and create enough exemptions for those under 250k to decrease their effective tax rate to less than 5%. Seems simple enough. - Ihatepolitics - Wednesday, Apr 11, 18 @ 12:04 am: Ron, go away. You say the same thing over and over without saying anything. - Rabid - Wednesday, Apr 11, 18 @ 7:12 am: Republicans like the status quo and 9 Rauner downgrades - springfield cesspool - Wednesday, Apr 11, 18 @ 7:41 am: Be careful what you wish for, I have a relative in Oregon, their state income tax has a progressive 5-bracket system. For single taxpayers and married couples filing separate returns: 5% on the first $3,350 of taxable income. 7% on taxable income between $3,351 and $8,400. 9% on taxable income between $8,401 and $125,000 9.9% on taxable income of $125,001 and above. Granted, they have no state sales tax, but those brackets don’t help working folks. - Too funny - Wednesday, Apr 11, 18 @ 8:35 am: That Durkin, he knows words, big words, the best words, spectacular words, I tell ya he uses the best words - Radio Flyer - Wednesday, Apr 11, 18 @ 8:36 am: What is considered “taxable income” in Oregon? - Al - Wednesday, Apr 11, 18 @ 9:06 am: Radio flyer: Oregon exempts the first $15k of retirement income. - Anonymous - Wednesday, Apr 11, 18 @ 9:28 am: Oregon has a median family income of $69,900 - Streamwood Retiree - Wednesday, Apr 11, 18 @ 9:43 am: ” returns with an AGI of less than $50,000 make up 52% of all returns, but only make up 13% of the total income tax. ” So .. under existing law, the personal exemption could be raised to $50,000 and the tax rate doubled to 10%. Half the people would get a big tax cut and revenues would increase by 76%. The property tax could drop drastically to what other states pay and the middle class would still benefit. Only the Scrooge McDucks would suffer and not by very much. In many cases their business would increase as their customers have more money. win-win. Pritzger started to talk about this in the second debate then snapped shut abruptly. Sorry, comments for this post are now closed.