58 Comments - Stuff Happens - Wednesday, Mar 27, 19 @ 2:23 pm: Services was my #1. I’m not a big fan of regressive taxes. - Annonin' - Wednesday, Mar 27, 19 @ 2:23 pm: We picked retirement income…we are not retiring but the market has screwed us so many times that sack of beans is almost too small to tax. - Big Joe - Wednesday, Mar 27, 19 @ 2:25 pm: Having never missed a payment into my retirement while working, I don’t feel that I should be taxed as if I did something wrong. - JS Mill - Wednesday, Mar 27, 19 @ 2:25 pm: I cited gas tax. It is already heavily taxed. Not taxing services makes no sense to me. Same with not taxing retirement income. We need to tax those two areas. - Downers Delight - Wednesday, Mar 27, 19 @ 2:27 pm: I agree with JS Mill and voted that way. - Perrid - Wednesday, Mar 27, 19 @ 2:31 pm: Wow, I answered too quick. My vote is basically meaningless because I voted for everything except the first Retirement Income, but I thought the question would be the same as the poll, which do you support. Rich even put it in italics and everything, but I just blew past it. I would oppose either the gambling or the services most, services because it’s regressive, gambling because I’m less comfortable with the State taking money away from people bad at math. I include the lottery in my disdain, as well. - Three Dimensional Checkers - Wednesday, Mar 27, 19 @ 2:32 pm: I picked retirement. I am fine with all the rest really. Sure services can be regressive, but I am good with taxing big law, big accountants, and big consulting. Might as well protect the old since there are better ways to raise money. - Perrid - Wednesday, Mar 27, 19 @ 2:32 pm: “as if I did something”, my dude, not treating retirement income special is not actually punishing you. - Anonymous - Wednesday, Mar 27, 19 @ 2:34 pm: Voted. Gas tax. Until 150 locks in wages for ten years. Not a PLA either. - G'Kar - Wednesday, Mar 27, 19 @ 2:36 pm: I didn’t vote because I don’t really oppose any of them. Sure, I would not like my retirement taxed–but I understand the need for revenue just to balance the books. Sure, I don’t want to pay more at the pump, but I also don’t like driving down pot hole filled roads. I don’t smoke MJ (I have nothing against it, I’d just rather have a good scotch) and I don’t bet on sports, so I don’t oppose taxes on them. - Monarch - Wednesday, Mar 27, 19 @ 2:37 pm: Perrid, I see the service tax as progressive. A person can spend $10 or $100 on a haircut. The money people have the more services they buy. I bet you don’t see a lot of lawn service trucks in low-income neighborhoods. - Honeybear - Wednesday, Mar 27, 19 @ 2:42 pm: I said retirement income. My retirement is going to be tight as it is with my tier II pension. - Justmoi - Wednesday, Mar 27, 19 @ 2:43 pm: I understand the need for more revenue, but I also understand that if you tax retirement income, even more, near-retirement or retired residents will move out of state. - Just Me 2 - Wednesday, Mar 27, 19 @ 2:45 pm: Since you differentiated between “retirement income” and “retirement income over $100k” that was an easy decision. I would also add that you must be at least 63 years old for income to be considered retirement income. - Anonymous - Wednesday, Mar 27, 19 @ 2:45 pm: I do support taxing retirement income, with exemptions available to protect lower income retired folks. It is a twisted system that sacrifices our young for the benefit of the old. When we talk about taxing retirement income we are discussing people with the very state pensions, etc. that the anti-tax crowd screams about incessantly .. not about a struggling widow trying to live off of her meager social security benefits. - Steve Polite - Wednesday, Mar 27, 19 @ 2:47 pm: I voted Retirement. I’m okay with taxing retirement income above a certain level such as $100,000 that is indexed to keep up with inflation. - City Zen - Wednesday, Mar 27, 19 @ 2:48 pm: ==Having never missed a payment into my retirement while working, I don’t feel that I should be taxed as if I did something wrong== It’s called tax deferral, as in, pay later. If you don’t want to pay taxes upon receipt, then don’t take the tax break on your “payments” upfront while you’re working. Do the Feds and the majority of states think all those retirees did something wrong? - RWP - Wednesday, Mar 27, 19 @ 2:51 pm: I cited gas tax. It is the most regressive. I am also not a fan of taxing retirement income under certain levels. We need to be careful there. RWP - illinois_citizen - Wednesday, Mar 27, 19 @ 2:52 pm: if you have been working for several years knowing what your pension will be then it is reduced by taxes i find that punishing - intern - Wednesday, Mar 27, 19 @ 2:54 pm: any of the sales/services taxes are functionally a regressive tax, so those seem like the worst options. - Grandson of Man - Wednesday, Mar 27, 19 @ 2:58 pm: Retirement income. I have supported taxing it progressively in the past, but giving more thought to extreme income disparity, and seeing how right wing business interests and Republicans don’t want to give the copper off a penny more of rich people’s money in taxes, I have to oppose it. - You could say that, I couldn't - Wednesday, Mar 27, 19 @ 2:59 pm: Reluctantly, I voted against taxing all retirement income because it was the most regressive option. I was wavering between that and expanding gambling, but settled on retirement income. A few important notes, though. Some retirement income is deferred income, which means it has never been taxed even when it was earned and put into whatever the investment vehicle was. It seems a bit unfair to me to not tax that — even if we exempt the interest portion of the retirement income. But that aside, of all those taxes, retirement income below $100,000 is most troublesome to me. - Anonymous - Wednesday, Mar 27, 19 @ 3:04 pm: I chose retirement income. Heck, if I thought I’d be losing some of it, I’d have stuck around longer to get a bigger pot of savings. Now that I’m too old to get a job I’d just have to take the hit. If you’re young enough to work, you can make up what you’ve lost. Not so for elderly. - Bogey Golfer - Wednesday, Mar 27, 19 @ 3:07 pm: Voted for services. Assuming services for public sector clients would be waived, I think the revenue generated from the private side would be no where near what is anticipated. - notsosure - Wednesday, Mar 27, 19 @ 3:09 pm: Maybe the retirement income option should be presented this way: would you rather pay tax on income that is set aside for your retirement while you are working, or when you get the $ after you retire? Right now it is NEVER taxed in Illinois. Pick your poison–tax it now or tax it later–but the current situation is just nuts. And, the break is going more and more to younger, higher-income folks. - IllinoisBoi - Wednesday, Mar 27, 19 @ 3:11 pm: I strongly oppose expanding gambling. It’s a dangerous addiction for many people and has destroyed the finances of themselves and their families. Gambling should be discouraged, not expanded. - Annierachel - Wednesday, Mar 27, 19 @ 3:12 pm: Went with the gas tax too - very regressive. Don’t like taxing all retirees income either but taxing income over a certain level I support (could be less than $100,000.) Most retirees have fixed incomes without many opportunities to augment those incomes. - Harvest76 - Wednesday, Mar 27, 19 @ 3:16 pm: I opposed a gas tax the most. Of all taxes, that is by far the most regressive as it affect those that can least afford it the most for a variety of reasons. The poor often have to commute longer distances because businesses are generally located in more affluent areas of town or in other towns all , generally cannot afford more fuel efficient Vehicles, and a gas tax would represent a larger share of income the poorer you get. - Anon - Wednesday, Mar 27, 19 @ 3:21 pm: I’m okay with all of the taxes except for expanding gambling. Gambling revenues are a net social negative and research has repeatedly demonstrated that it’s net effects are negative, we just live in a State where legislators are more apt to pretend that the budget can be solved by Hogwarts revenues. The tax I support the most is the tax on retirement, and I am okay with retirement over 100K. More than half of the benefits to that subtraction go to households earning more than 75K. I don’t understand why I need to pay higher tax rates to help pay down debt and unfunded liabilities for people who didn’t pay for the total cost of the services they received in the 80s, 90s, and 2000s and have now retired and bear no brunt of the cost. Folks over 65 also have the lowest rates of poverty in the state and receive Medicare. I think they’d be more prone to support it if it was positioned as “paying for the stuff you got instead of sticking your kids, grandkids, and unborn great grandkids for the bill.” - Anonymous - Wednesday, Mar 27, 19 @ 3:27 pm: Gas tax is incredibly regressive, maybe even more than services, so that’s an easy pick. Graduated tax and retirement income tax should happen yesterday. Marijuana and gambling expansion are obvious wins too. - SSL - Wednesday, Mar 27, 19 @ 3:33 pm: I would choose all of the above if it were an option, but since it wasn’t I went with graduated income tax. There seems to be an insatiable appetite to soak anyone who achieves anything in life. JB claimed that people like himself and Rauner needed to pay more. Households earning $250,000 a year aren’t anywhere in the Pritzker and Rauner neighborhood, but they got lumped right in there. That isn’t much of a graduated tax. Is a big step up at the $250,000 level, then pretty flat. - Anonymous - Wednesday, Mar 27, 19 @ 3:40 pm: Gas tax - Anon - Wednesday, Mar 27, 19 @ 3:41 pm: Looks like the respondents to this poll don’t believe in generational equity. It’s going to be neat to ask folks under the age of 30 or 40 to not only pay for their own services, but to also pay for the pension debts for the teachers that educated their parents while also trying to deal with climate change. - Anyone Remember - Wednesday, Mar 27, 19 @ 3:58 pm: Retirement income. No problem starting it $50,000 (and indexing it to the CPI). - Robert the Bruce - Wednesday, Mar 27, 19 @ 3:58 pm: Gas tax because (1) it is the most regressive option and (2) folks living near our borders can escape it. - downstate hack - Wednesday, Mar 27, 19 @ 4:00 pm: I voted service tax. It is by far the most regressive tax. Reitemrnt income over 50,000 should be taxed. - lincoln's beard - Wednesday, Mar 27, 19 @ 4:11 pm: I voted against “expand gambling”, for the reasons Anon @3:21 gave above. It’s a net negative, it’s ugly, and it’s regressive. I was _shocked_ to learn in this thread that if I stay in Illinois after retirement, I’ll _never_ pay state taxes on any of the money in my retirement accounts, not as it goes in, and not as it goes out. It’s not just tax-deferred, it’s tax free. That’s frankly incredible. - PublicServant - Wednesday, Mar 27, 19 @ 4:20 pm: Voted don’t tax retirement income. When I was working, I gladly paid for those retired while I was working. I expect the same from those working now. And I certainly expect the rich to pay their fair share before we start taxing grandma and grandpa. - Amalia - Wednesday, Mar 27, 19 @ 4:28 pm: retirement. don’t want to drive those folks out of the state to Florida. - foster brooks - Wednesday, Mar 27, 19 @ 4:42 pm: if you tax retirement that means everything not just state pensions - Demoralized - Wednesday, Mar 27, 19 @ 5:16 pm: I voted retirement income. I’m ok with taxing above a certain amount and $100K seems reasonable. I’d like to know who the 39 people are who are absolutely against a millionaires tax. Apparently we have millionaires reading the Cap Fax. - Anon - Wednesday, Mar 27, 19 @ 5:17 pm: ===When I was working, I gladly paid for those retired while I was working.=== LOL, except “the working” historically in this state have not paid enough taxes to pay for everything they’re receiving in terms of state spending and obligations. ===don’t want to drive those folks out of the state to Florida.=== There’s very little data that supports this is a thing. Would you move to a new state where you don’t know anybody and cost of living is higher for a 3 or 4% raise? - simple mind - Wednesday, Mar 27, 19 @ 5:19 pm: Gas tax …Most regressive - Original Rambler - Wednesday, Mar 27, 19 @ 5:19 pm: Expand gambling. It’s just another tax that disproportionately impacts the poor like the cigarette tax. I get the whole sin tax thing but we just end up taking more from the poor and less from those who are more readily able to pay. I’m okay with taxing all the rest to raise the needed revenue. - DuPage Moderate - Wednesday, Mar 27, 19 @ 5:26 pm: The fundamental problem is that we want a level of services that costs more than we are willing to pay. It all comes out of the taxpayer’s pocket. Doesn’t really matter which pocket, it’s all the same pair of pants. - Nick - Wednesday, Mar 27, 19 @ 5:30 pm: I said retirement income. I would consider it above $100K, services is regressive but a good source of revenue, the gas tax needs to be increased anyway, and every think else seems OK. But taxing all retirement income is just a huge kick in the shin and shouldn’t be done. - Whatever - Wednesday, Mar 27, 19 @ 5:48 pm: Voted millionaire’s 3% surcharge. This was a constitutional proposal, not just a statutory application of a graduated tax amendment, and constitutions should not have that kind of detail. - Anonymous - Wednesday, Mar 27, 19 @ 6:16 pm: retirement income…..mine was less than 100,000. Wife passed away after only 4 years retired so now I get 1/2 of her’s which puts me over 100,000. Seems like the death tax Republicans carp about. 50 years working and only now do people want to tax retirement…sheesh. - anonymous - Wednesday, Mar 27, 19 @ 6:29 pm: Having worked as many as four jobs at a time to stay out of debt and position myself - and my organization for success - I’m not sure why that hard work and success should be taxed at higher rate because legislators and those who voted for their programs couldn’t honor the obligations they’ve supposed to be for the last few decades. - Tim - Wednesday, Mar 27, 19 @ 6:42 pm: I agree with Anonymous posting from 2:34. Gas tax. We completely overpay for the 150 labor to do road work. We could get some much more done if we opened up the bidding to outside contractors and got rid of prevailing wage requirements. We are clearly overpaying the 150 folks if their union has so much of their members money to buy ads and billboards about bridges and roads to buy their members more work. Maybe if they let their members keep a little bit more of their own money we wouldn’t have to pay so much to get the work done. - Shrimp gumbo - Wednesday, Mar 27, 19 @ 6:50 pm: With one of the highest overall tax burdens in the nation already, I’m against any new taxes on anyone, at any age, or any income level. Illinois can’t manage the abundance of revenues that it already has. Never has, and never will. - Hickory - Wednesday, Mar 27, 19 @ 7:31 pm: Retirement income above 2X the poverty level should be taxed. - DeseDemDose - Wednesday, Mar 27, 19 @ 7:52 pm: You can smell who the shills are when they have a problem with taxing folks making over 250,000 but want retirement income taxed. - Hieronymus - Wednesday, Mar 27, 19 @ 11:49 pm: Service tax for all the reasons stated above Second is any form of gambling expansion for the same reasons stated above I’d support retirement income above a threshold (50-75K per spouse), again for most of the reasons stated above. - NoGifts - Thursday, Mar 28, 19 @ 7:18 am: “millionaires tax” because I think it is more a populist slogan than problem solver. And I’m not a millionaire. I wouldn’t mind having some or all of my retirement taxed too, because we should all support the system we live in. - Late to the Party - Thursday, Mar 28, 19 @ 8:25 am: Graduated Income tax. They say the “plan” is to only increase the tax rate on the wealthy. But that phrase will not be in the amendment to the State Constitution. At some point, the “plan” will change to increase income taxes on me, you, almost all of us. Taxing retirement income. ALL of it would have to be taxed. Soc Sec, IRA, pension, etc. That’s a big game changer for most folks; upsets a lot of plans. Combined multiple tax brackets and taxing retirement income and who knows what will happen. - the Patriot - Thursday, Mar 28, 19 @ 8:52 am: The on anchor to the IL economy is the high number of State Retirees. Yea, the pensions cost us, but a lot of that money is staying here. Only because they don’t want to move to a state where they will be taxed. I suspect if you tax retirement income the outflow of residents doubles for the next 5 to 10 years and those are all people with middle class pensions. - Cook County Commoner - Thursday, Mar 28, 19 @ 9:12 am: Stay away from my retirement income. The feds are now taxing more and more of our SSA benefit if we try to make a bit extra. Exemption of my retirement income from state income tax is one of a few benefits that keeps me here. I, like many others, thankfully have choices. Sorry, comments for this post are now closed.