85 Comments - Anonymous - Tuesday, Feb 26, 19 @ 1:12 pm: Rodney Davis is a disgrace. - Anonymous - Tuesday, Feb 26, 19 @ 1:14 pm: Pardon Rich’s blocking frenzy today too - Rich Miller - Tuesday, Feb 26, 19 @ 1:16 pm: ===Pardon Rich’s blocking frenzy today=== If you had something original to say other than posting the same comment over and over again, you might eventually be released from moderation. - My Button is Broke... - Tuesday, Feb 26, 19 @ 1:16 pm: His constituents are paying less today in federal income taxes, but people in other states got larger tax cuts because of this SALT deduction limitation. There are plenty of people in his district that are adversely affected by this as well, it isn’t just people that live in the suburbs. - Rich Miller - Tuesday, Feb 26, 19 @ 1:18 pm: ===Rodney Davis is a disgrace=== Meh. I dunno about that. But he appears to have become addicted to drinking Potomac Water and that’s just a huge disappointment. - James Knell - Tuesday, Feb 26, 19 @ 1:19 pm: That’s a right on rant. - 47th Ward - Tuesday, Feb 26, 19 @ 1:19 pm: ===he said his constituents are now paying less to the federal government because of tax changes he said Republicans brought together.=== And thank heavens they also cut federal spending while they had complete control of the government. What’s that? They didn’t cut spending, just taxes? Oh. Nevermind. - Someone you should know - Tuesday, Feb 26, 19 @ 1:19 pm: You know, I knew Davis in college, and I really liked him, decent guy, but as you said, he’s contracted Potomac Fever, and it’s really a shame……… - Rich Miller - Tuesday, Feb 26, 19 @ 1:21 pm: LOL I just accidentally deleted a commenter who was defending my blocking of commenters. Oops [exclamation point] Been one of those days. - City Zen - Tuesday, Feb 26, 19 @ 1:22 pm: ==federal tax exporters== Residents in my school district are state tax exporters. - Pot calling kettle - Tuesday, Feb 26, 19 @ 1:23 pm: ==It never got posted the first time - so what’s that about? == I don’t think you understand how moderation works. - ChicagoVinny - Tuesday, Feb 26, 19 @ 1:24 pm: You know what I’d be ok with the SALT cap being kept in place if that money were being used to fund roads, public transport, education, health care, etc - but not to keen on it funding tax breaks for billionaires like it was. - Almost the weekend - Tuesday, Feb 26, 19 @ 1:26 pm: City Zen, you kind of just gave it away you live in Southern Illinois. Sorry to hear your money goes to Chicago and CPS heavy /s - Rich Miller - Tuesday, Feb 26, 19 @ 1:28 pm: ===Residents in my school district are state tax exporters=== And the SALT deduction ameliorated that. - Not a Superstar - Tuesday, Feb 26, 19 @ 1:32 pm: Davis os going to be *really* angry at the guy who praised Rauner for holding his ground during the budget impasse, and causing many of our current fiscal woes. https://herald-review.com/news/local/govt-and-politics/rauner-vows-to-stay-the-course/article_e1925d09-8b95-5ea6-8562-27198168a247.html Wait, never mind. - City Zen - Tuesday, Feb 26, 19 @ 1:32 pm: If we’re concerned about double taxation, then Illinois can let everyone deduct their federal income taxes paid from their state taxable income. Just like Iowa. - We'll See - Tuesday, Feb 26, 19 @ 1:34 pm: It’s good of Rodney to point out theres a little more bread on the…. sandwich - Almost the weekend - Tuesday, Feb 26, 19 @ 1:35 pm: City Zen I agree. Then we can also tax their retirement income, so we are actually getting more in return. Not /s - Pot calling kettle - Tuesday, Feb 26, 19 @ 1:37 pm: - City Zen - Tuesday, Feb 26, 19 @ 1:22 pm: Residents in my school district are state tax exporters. - Almost the weekend - Tuesday, Feb 26, 19 @ 1:26 pm: City Zen, you kind of just gave it away you live in Southern Illinois. ===== The only “state tax exporters” are folks in the Chicago suburbs. Folks in Southern Illinois are state tax importers. Chi-town pays for itself. - Juice - Tuesday, Feb 26, 19 @ 1:41 pm: On Illinois being a tax exporter, a big driver of that is federal reimbursement for Medicaid. New York, New Jersey and Illinois get reimbursed at a 50% rate. States like Indiana (65.84%), Michigan (64.06%), and Wisconsin (59.36%) get reimburse at far higher rates that would be billions of dollars more for Illinois if we were at a similar rate. And Rodney voted to block grant Medicaid dollars which would have frozen those unfair reimbursement rates in perpetuity. But the bottom line is, one of the reasons why some states have to have higher state taxes is because the federal government requires some states to have a higher local match to participate in Medicaid than other states, and then they complain about some states have taxes that they deem to be too high. It would be nice if a single congresscritter from Illinois who voted for either the ACA repeal or the tax cuts had any actual understanding of the policies that they have chosen to support. But maybe that’s just asking to much of these guys. - Donnie Elgin - Tuesday, Feb 26, 19 @ 1:42 pm: The SALT cap is designed to punish states that voted blue in the presidential race. The Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center said in a report last year that the states where the greatest number of households will see a tax increase for 2018 are several Northeastern states and California. - d. p. gumby - Tuesday, Feb 26, 19 @ 1:45 pm: I second the SALT rant! Not only does it’s elimination hurt me (and I am far from wealthy) but it is a pure political act by Red Staters to hurt Blue states. Particularly egregious since most Red States are net federal budget takers!! - Just Observing - Tuesday, Feb 26, 19 @ 1:47 pm: From the linked article: “You’ve got this weird situation where New York is out there trying to preserve a tax preference where probably your archetypal individual who’d be claiming this would be a single guy in midtown Manhattan earning $600,000 a year,” Walczak said. “You sort of wonder ‘why is their goal?’ ” Ummm… what a ridiculous statement. The SALT rescission affects my family… and we are a two parent working household, in a relatively modest house, making nowhere remotely close to $600,000, just trying to piece together a middle class lifestyle. - Annonin' - Tuesday, Feb 26, 19 @ 1:52 pm: 1. Rodney’s gonna find out how many are not paying less. Same for RepGoofyGrin (aka Darrin LaHood) 2. Doubt the word “subsidy” applies. State and local taxes are higher for a variety of reasons including the fed does not spend enough. 3. another side result is folks paying tax on tax are also likely to pay more for all segments of medicare, supplment and RX coverage which have an income index . - Bemused - Tuesday, Feb 26, 19 @ 1:53 pm: Personal opinion, Rodney was immersed in the Potomac water before being hand picked to run for his present seat. He has always talked a better bipartisan shtick than I feel he performs. Much more often than not he is ready to parrot the party line. - Steve - Tuesday, Feb 26, 19 @ 1:54 pm: The Trump tax code change had its’ enemies in mind , the high tax blue states. This makes raising taxes on the rich more difficult at the state and local level. The university endowment tax had the same logic. Once in place, hard to remove. - Not It - Tuesday, Feb 26, 19 @ 1:54 pm: While we are ranting I am curious what those who are against infrastructure revenues think about our state’s infrastructure. There is an ad on today’s blog that is against a pilot program — A PILOT PROGRAM — to look into ways to fund our state’s roads. What is their solution? Eliminating waste and abuse?! - Sue - Tuesday, Feb 26, 19 @ 1:58 pm: Illinois is too busy being a jobs exporter to worry about being a taxexporter as well - OneMan - Tuesday, Feb 26, 19 @ 2:00 pm: I do wonder what the impact is with the higher standard deduction. Like most folks, I want to pay as little tax as possible under the law, so getting a full deduction for property and income taxes would be cool. - JS Mill - Tuesday, Feb 26, 19 @ 2:03 pm: =Just like Iowa.= Iowa has a statewide 1% facilities sales tax for schools. Iowa, education paradise. Who knew? =Residents in my school district are state tax exporters.= Would it make you feel better if you got a thank you letter from southern Illinois? - PJ - Tuesday, Feb 26, 19 @ 2:04 pm: Personally, I’m ecstatic about Republicans getting on board with higher taxes for the wealthy. When is Rodney Davis signing on the 70% marginal tax rate over $10 million proposal? I can assure him it won’t hurt his constituents. - Downstate - Tuesday, Feb 26, 19 @ 2:06 pm: Without the change, high tax areas (like NYC) could continually increase property and income taxes to the direct detriment of the federal government. Imagine two people earning the same amount of money, but one lives in a high property tax area and the other lives in a low property tax area. Under the old rules, they each pay the same federal and property taxes, even though one gets to enjoy much greater services and benefits (simply because of higher property taxes). - 61820 - Tuesday, Feb 26, 19 @ 2:08 pm: A lot of high earners were getting hit by the AMT and losing the SALT deduction, anyway. I haven’t seen the data, but it is not out of the realm of possibility that those feeling the impact of the SALT cap are more toward the upper-middle of the income distribution. - Marty Funkhouser - Tuesday, Feb 26, 19 @ 2:09 pm: Everything Bemused just said. He’s been Potomac Rodney from the start. - Big Jer - Tuesday, Feb 26, 19 @ 2:11 pm: ===Just like Iowa==== Your free to move there. But before you do the rest of the story. Iowa does allow residents to deduct their federal income taxes paid from their state taxable income BUT: Iowa imposes taxes on net state income of individuals, estates, and trusts. There are nine income tax brackets, ranging from 0.36% to 8.98%, as well as four corporate income tax brackets ranging from 6–12%, giving Iowa the country’s highest marginal corporate tax rate.[143] A progressive income tax AND progressive corporate tax!!! Wow! And it seems Iowa has an excellent and diverse economy with a strong manufacturing sector. Their property taxes seem lower with only 2,000 taxing authorities as opposed to Illinois’ ungodly 6900 local taxing bodies. I am all for reducing property taxes and Illinois high amount of taxing bodies. But there is never a free lunch. - Steve - Tuesday, Feb 26, 19 @ 2:12 pm: - Downstate - New York can try but they might not bring in anymore revenue. It’s a concern of late , by Governor Cuomo. - Norseman - Tuesday, Feb 26, 19 @ 2:14 pm: Davis ties the party line regardless of the adverse impact on his constituents and community. Glad he’s now in the minority where he can do less harm. - Da Big Bad Wolf - Tuesday, Feb 26, 19 @ 2:14 pm: I think the SALT cap might go away soon. There is a bipartisan bill to remove it. (Salt Deductibilty Act P.L. 115-97) 1. Trump has indicated that he might sign it. So a Republican senator is going to go home and explain to his base , “well I want the cap gone, Trump wants the cap gone but I can’t upset Senator Grassley.” That’s not going to go over well. 2. In 2020 Republican senators defending their seats outnumber Democratic senators defending their seats. In less than two years, control of the Senate could change. McConnell, whatever you think of him, isn’t stupid. 3. The SALT cap is unpopular. Senate office interns are getting deluged with phone calls with people screaming at them. And it’s only February. 4. The SALT cap affects seniors, the demographic that votes most often. And seniors are less likely to benefit from the child tax credit or the mortgage interest deduction, that might offset the loss of the SALT deduction. Senators and congressmen know this. - Feeder pig - Tuesday, Feb 26, 19 @ 2:16 pm: “Same for RepGoofyGrin (aka Darrin LaHood)” Wait what? Mr. Moderator: as a new commentor, isn’t that an example of “gratuitous insults and ‘rumors’ [that] will be deleted? - Downstate - Tuesday, Feb 26, 19 @ 2:17 pm: Steve, The point is that the new laws take away the local taxes from reducing your federal tax obligations. If you want to pay high taxes (via state income and property taxes), you can. Now, it’s just not done to the detriment of the federal government. - Rich Miller - Tuesday, Feb 26, 19 @ 2:18 pm: ===as a new commentor=== I’d advise you to worry about your own comments at this point, some of which have not been particularly great. - regnaD kciN - Tuesday, Feb 26, 19 @ 2:19 pm: “What is their solution? Eliminating waste and abuse?!” Just once I’d like to see someone who spouts this line produce a list of waste and abuse they’d like to see cut. After all, there is a tax expenditure list put out each year by the Comptroller. Surely if one feels strongly about cutting waste and abuse, they could put together a similar list. - City Zen - Tuesday, Feb 26, 19 @ 2:20 pm: ==Iowa has a statewide 1% facilities sales tax for schools. Iowa, education paradise. Who knew?== You are more than welcome to take 0.25% of the state’s 6.25% sales tax rate (Iowa is 6%) and 0.75% of Cook County’s 1.75% sales tax rate (Iowa counties charge 1% or less) for facilities. I’ll connect you to Ms. Preckwinke now. She might be busy. =Would it make you feel better if you got a thank you letter from southern Illinois?= And Maywood, Berwyn, Harvey, Rockford, Joliet. You know, all those “takers”. - Steve - Tuesday, Feb 26, 19 @ 2:21 pm: - Downstate - I’m not defending anything. I’m just stating the fact that the Trump tax code change was aimed at its’ enemies. - Anon - Tuesday, Feb 26, 19 @ 2:24 pm: It would cost the federal government $700 billion over the next 10 years to repeal the Salt cap. It is not happening, since the benefits are almost exclusively to households with incomes $100K and above. That was the evil genius aspect of capping Salt. Republicans used the massive savings to partially “pay” for their tax cut, knowing that it would be almost impossible politically to restore as Democrats would have to in the future find $700 billion in the budget (over the 10 year budget window) to repeal the cap that disproportionately helps 100K and above households. Quite frankly capping Salt (it was originally proposed to be eliminated entirely) is one of the most progressive tax developments we have seen at the federal level. - wordslinger - Tuesday, Feb 26, 19 @ 2:29 pm: –32.34% of Illinois returns deducted state and local taxes paid in 2014. The average SALT deduction on those Illinois returns was $12,877.51.– That’s the 32%, not the 1%. Thirty-two percent was the meat of the of middle-class: two paycheck earning, public-school supporting, kids-raising, mortgage-paying, house-poor Illinois filers getting on that Schedule A with their state and local tax deductions. They’re the ones that got slammed by the likes of Rodney. I take it Rodney won’t be doing any town hall meetings, again. - Ridgelander - Tuesday, Feb 26, 19 @ 2:31 pm: One of the architects of the SALT change in the 2017 revision was Wheaton’s own Representative Peter Roskam. Do you think many of his constituents are having a good look at their 2018 returns right about now? - Ridgelander - Tuesday, Feb 26, 19 @ 2:33 pm: Sorry, meant to say former constituents… - Red Ranger - Tuesday, Feb 26, 19 @ 2:42 pm: I love how people argue without proof that the SALT issue was “aimed” at states that didn’t vote for Trump. Sorry to bring the silliness of DC into this blog, but something tells me the residents of Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania (the states that truly put Trump in office, and he’ll need if he wants to be reelected) are feeling the effects of the SALT cap too. - A Jack - Tuesday, Feb 26, 19 @ 2:42 pm: The National Debt is 22 trillion. Clinton, a Democrat, was the last President to lower the National Debt. Perhaps its the Republicans who need to live within their means, Rep Davis. - City Zen - Tuesday, Feb 26, 19 @ 2:43 pm: ==Do you think many of his constituents are having a good look at their 2018 returns right about now?== Do you think a higher progressive tax on Wheaton residents will help them feel better? - Jocko - Tuesday, Feb 26, 19 @ 2:49 pm: ==Illinois Democrats need to learn to live within their means.== So WE need to bite the bullet while Trump re-distributes $8 billion to build a wall? - Birdseed - Tuesday, Feb 26, 19 @ 2:50 pm: === - Downstate - Tuesday, Feb 26, 19 @ 2:17 pm: Steve, The point is that the new laws take away the local taxes from reducing your federal tax obligations. If you want to pay high taxes (via state income and property taxes), you can. Now, it’s just not done to the detriment of the federal government. === Exactly. The Feds saw that high tax states were increasing state revenue, while reducing federal revenue. - Perrid - Tuesday, Feb 26, 19 @ 2:54 pm: Birdseed, how is that any different from any other exemption? Because it’s going to a state, instead of a charity or anything else that counts as an exemption? This was Republicans wanting to punish their political opponents. - Downstate - Tuesday, Feb 26, 19 @ 2:54 pm: The SALT change brings into clear focus the taxes that people are supporting in their own states and communities. From a federal tax standpoint, the wealthiest communities were shortchanging the poorest because they were deducting their sky high property taxes. If you are seeing a higher tax bill this year (or lower tax refund), then it’s possible you are earning above the average household income and/or your employer did not withhold as much from your taxes. - Anotherretiree - Tuesday, Feb 26, 19 @ 2:56 pm: IN addition to capping the SALT deduction that middle class Illinoisans use(I know of many whose taxes have gone up,I feel guitly enjoying when they are Trump types), Rodney also voted to eliminate the casualty loss deduction that Taylorville residents could use now. - Grandson of Man - Tuesday, Feb 26, 19 @ 3:06 pm: It’s sabatoogie (sabotage), as Curly Howard would have said. The SALT cap was purposely put in to hurt blue states, like ours. I mean really, when would the GOP not keep taxes lower on higher-income households, unless it’s to hurt opponents? - Steve - Tuesday, Feb 26, 19 @ 3:06 pm: The reason that the SALT tax issue is a big deal is many upper middle class folks will feel the hit. JB does have a right to be concerned because it could affect a coming progressive income tax table. That’s why until the tax returns come in this year no one really knows how the SALT cap affects things. - Hamlet's Ghost - Tuesday, Feb 26, 19 @ 3:11 pm: We cannot ascertain who is hurt most by SALT limits without taking into account the Alternative Minimum Tax. People earning high six figure or seven figures incomes had already lost much of the benefit of property tax or state income tax deductions prior to the recent change. People previously subject to Alt Min did not see a tax increase with the cap on SALT deductions. Those who see the largest tax increase from the SALT caps are those earning in the lower six figure range, like most residents of DuPage County IL. - Downstate hack - Tuesday, Feb 26, 19 @ 3:11 pm: Wouldn’t it be great if both the state and the federal government spent within there means. Tax more spend more eventually runs out of money - Anon - Tuesday, Feb 26, 19 @ 3:16 pm: There is some rich irony to the fact jb is railing against the removal of a tax deduction that makes the tax code far more progressive (benefits almost exclusively the top 15% of earners in this country) while simultaneously basing his entire administration on making the Illinois state tax more progressive. He is essentially arguing that the federal government needs to lower taxes on that top 15% of earners so he can raise them easier in his home state on the same group he thinks needs to pay more. There is a cognitive dissonance there. - PJ - Tuesday, Feb 26, 19 @ 3:23 pm: ==There is a cognitive dissonance there.== Speaking of cognitive dissonance, I’m waiting for a Republican supporter to explain why they support higher taxes for upper-income people in this one precise instance that happens to harm New York and California disproportionately and absolutely no others. - SSL - Tuesday, Feb 26, 19 @ 3:26 pm: I find it interesting that JB said that the SALT deduction helps lower income people, then referenced that 85% of those negatively impacted by the cap made less than $200,000. Is $200,000 considered lower income in the Pritzker household? Maybe those progressive income tax rates will be okay after all. - Al - Tuesday, Feb 26, 19 @ 3:29 pm: Look, the SALT Deduction had to go because if we kept it we could not simultaneously eliminate the Estate Tax AND balance the budget. Just a little snark today as the death of the Estate Tax has been little discussed and the federal budget is major out of whack thanks to a Republican trifecta of balanced budget lovers, ha ha. A trillion dollar deficit and no major war, that is professional mismanagement. Just wait until the next recession. - CEA - Tuesday, Feb 26, 19 @ 3:39 pm: Thank you, Congressman Davis, for telling Illinois Democrats to live within their means. Please pass the same sentiment along to your fellow Washington Republicans, who elected to blow up the deficit in order to hand the wealthiest Americans a whopping tax cut. - anon - Tuesday, Feb 26, 19 @ 3:47 pm: think about all the property tax exempt property in his district–public universities, huge hospitals, property tax breaks for veterans and seniors–the rest of us pick up that tab and not being able to write off state and local on the federal tax form punishes the real taxpayers– - Steve - Tuesday, Feb 26, 19 @ 3:49 pm: - PJ - You ask a good question. Why would Republicans be for higher taxes in the Blue States? Because it weakens them relative to the low tax red states. After this next census New York, Illinois, New Jersey, and possibly California could all lose a house seat. That’s less power in the House of Representatives. - wordslinger - Tuesday, Feb 26, 19 @ 3:51 pm: –From a federal tax standpoint, the wealthiest communities were shortchanging the poorest because they were deducting their sky high property taxes.– Except here on Planet Earth where high tax states were and are continuing to subsidize states that don’t tax themselves. –Quite frankly capping Salt (it was originally proposed to be eliminated entirely) is one of the most progressive tax developments we have seen at the federal level.– Yeah, the benefits really trickled down. Are you two doing a Fox and Friends audition or something? - anon - Tuesday, Feb 26, 19 @ 4:07 pm: To clarify, the cap on SALT is only responsible for increased federal tax levies if SALT and other itemized deductions would have exceeded the vastly increased standard deduction. In my case, our property and state income taxes, mortgage interest, and other itemized deductions would still have been below $24,000 without a cap. Our federal tax bill increased because of the elimination of the exemptions that used to be added onto itemized deductions. - City Zen - Tuesday, Feb 26, 19 @ 4:08 pm: ==Except here on Planet Earth where high tax states were and are continuing to subsidize states that don’t tax themselves.== I’m shocked you haven’t moved to a state that doesn’t tax itself. Isn’t that what you say those with money do all the time — just move, because of taxes? Did you not know about the states that don’t tax themselves when you moved here? What possible reasons could you have for staying in a state that taxes itself? Could it be…. the taxes? - California Guy - Tuesday, Feb 26, 19 @ 4:28 pm: - Steve - Those States have a higher cost of living even if you account for the loss of SALT. At least in California and Illinois, those migrating out of the State are on the low end of income- not ones benefiting from SALT. In Illinois, the biggest demographics to leave are those making under 25k and those making 25k to 50k. I highly doubt they were benefiting significantly from SALT. - wordslinger - Tuesday, Feb 26, 19 @ 4:37 pm: –I’m shocked you haven’t moved to a state that doesn’t tax itself. Isn’t that what you say those with money do all the time — just move, because of taxes?– Never have said that, actually. Just the opposite. But keep swinging, slugger. You’re bound to foul one off, eventually. https://www.theguardian.com/inequality/2017/nov/20/if-you-tax-the-rich-they-wont-leave-us-data-contradicts-millionaires-threats - Grandson of Man - Tuesday, Feb 26, 19 @ 4:51 pm: “Never have said that, actually.” The real phonies are those who cry about taxes and how bad it’s here in Illinois, yet they live and make good or great money here and have been paying low state income taxes for decades. Those who are at the top of this class either seek to or benefit tremendously from government and the people they despise, like the former governor and pension profits. - Todd - Tuesday, Feb 26, 19 @ 5:08 pm: Could JB’s complaint mean that it interfers with his progressive tax increase since those won’t be deductible? - Joe Bidenopolous - Tuesday, Feb 26, 19 @ 5:12 pm: ===We cannot ascertain who is hurt most by SALT limits without taking into account the Alternative Minimum Tax. People earning high six figure or seven figures incomes had already lost much of the benefit of property tax or state income tax deductions=== Just to clarify - I don’t earn anywhere near the upper six figures, more like lower, and I’ve paid the AMT for years. When it was enacted, it was intended for high earners, but it wasn’t indexed with inflation. That was in 1982. Congress has raised the threshold here and there but it still reaches down and gets upper middle class taxpayers at this point. The Republican tax scheme of 2017 actually raised it again and indexed it with inflation. Long story short - I have no idea how that god forsaken tax bill is going to affect me until I file. - Suburbanon - Tuesday, Feb 26, 19 @ 5:22 pm: Perhaps we need a federal tax multiplier. States that are federal tax donors get a multiplier less than 1 based on their percentage of federal revenues. State that are federal tax benefactors get a multiplier of more than 1, based on how much extra they get. - lollinois - Tuesday, Feb 26, 19 @ 6:10 pm: Davis barely squeaked by re-election and is now parroting the party line with the best of them. Maybe this latest talk is his audition for a Fox News gig in case he draws a serious Dem opponent in a presidential election year. - Ridgelander - Tuesday, Feb 26, 19 @ 6:44 pm: —Long story short - I have no idea how that god forsaken tax bill is going to affect me until I file.— Let us know when you do file. I hope you come out better than I did. In my case, my wife and I owe Uncle Sam about $5,000.00 more this year than in 2017. Nearly same income, same deductions. The two big changes, pro and con: no AMT for the first time in years, a good thing that was more than offset by losing nearly $17,000.00 in deductible property taxes. The 10K limit on SALT was salt in a wound for us. - Eastside - Tuesday, Feb 26, 19 @ 6:52 pm: I am guessing the Governor’s interpretation of “middle class” will change when he finally comes out with his progressive income tax structure. And I never hear anyone in IL complain about the double taxation of the personal property tax replacement tax that is paid on business income and the same income is taxed by the state as personal income tax when it is paid to individuals. As a business owner, why can’t I deduct PPRT from my state income for tax purposes if people want to deduct state and local tax from federal taxes? I am paying two state taxes on the same income. - Anonymous - Tuesday, Feb 26, 19 @ 7:05 pm: A review: This exchange may have set the record for record for misinformation and ignorance regarding tax policy. - wordslinger - Tuesday, Feb 26, 19 @ 7:11 pm: –A trillion dollar deficit and no major war,– …plus a growing, full-employment economy. It was robbery in broad daylight by the GOP for the corporate donor class. - Hickory - Tuesday, Feb 26, 19 @ 9:16 pm: Please give me a break. First you complain about the wealthier not paying enough Federal Income tax and now you complain they are going to pay to much. You can’t have it both ways. - Harry - Wednesday, Feb 27, 19 @ 12:40 am: SALT definitely favors high-income people, people with big property tax and income or sales tax payments. It was a somewhat offset by increasing the standard deduction, which benefits lower income people. There is no good counter-argument to that. - truthteller - Wednesday, Feb 27, 19 @ 5:48 am: sure hope Londrigan runs against davis in 2020, next time the outcome will be different. Davis is a disgrace. Nothing new. - JS Mill - Wednesday, Feb 27, 19 @ 7:54 am: =Iowa counties charge 1% or less= Yeah, they love that 1% and I couldn’t find one taking less than 1%. https://wcfcourier.com/news/local/education/iowa-school-districts-count-on-legislature-to-extend-sales-tax/article_fb5c336b-ee84-5438-b3fe-807cc58af483.html Sorry, comments for this post are now closed.