* Hannah Meisel…
The libertarian-leaning Illinois Policy Institute on Monday filed suit in an effort to derail Gov. JB Pritzker’s signature policy proposal — changing Illinois’ constitution to allow for a graduated income tax — by forcing the state to issue “corrective notices” about the intent of the tax change, or declaring the vote on the amendment “void.” […]
Among other arguments, the suit alleges the explanation and arguments in favor of the amendment could “induce retirees into voting to impose on themselves a tax on retirement income.”
“If approved by voters, the [Progressive Income Tax] Amendment would eliminate important structural safeguards that deter legislators in the General Assembly from imposing new taxes on retirement income and deter legislators from imposing higher taxes on individuals with middle or low incomes,” the suit alleges.
Although Pritzker himself has repeatedly said he would not move to tax retirement income, and the pamphlet also explicitly says “This amendment does not tax retirement income,” opponents to the tax change have fixated on a comment made by Democratic State Treasurer Mike Frerichs this summer, in which he suggested the graduated income tax would open the door to taxing retirement income.
They look like they’re taking a political argument and trying to make it in court.
The suit is here.
*** UPDATE 1 *** Press release…
Vote Yes For Fairness Chairman Quentin Fulks released the following statement in response to the lawsuit the Illinois Policy Institute filed in Cook County today:
“When the facts aren’t on your side, you’re forced to rely on blatant stunts and outright lies, and that’s exactly what we’re seeing from the Illinois Policy Institute today. This is just the latest attempt by an organization bankrolled by the wealthiest people in the state to ensure the burden remains on middle and working-class families, while millionaires and billionaires avoid paying their fair share. IPI is the organization that brought Illinois’ two-year budget impasse and 8 credit downgrades, but won’t support a policy that gives 97% of Illinoisans a tax cut. They can continue to waste their time with frivolous lawsuits – Vote Yes For Fairness remains focused on educating voters on how the Fair Tax will help them, their families, and their communities.”
*** UPDATE 2 *** John Bouman, chairman of Vote Yes for Fair Tax…
“The wealthy few who benefit from the state’s unfair tax system are desperate. They will do anything to prevent paying their fair share, even try to silence the voices of Illinois voters. The frivolous lawsuit filed by an extreme far-right front group is the latest example of their dirty tricks.
“The people of Illinois won’t be denied their right to vote Yes for a tax cut for everyone who makes less than $250,000, Yes for new funding for schools and health care, and Yes to make the very rich finally pay their fair share.”
*** UPDATE 3 *** Jordan Abudayyeh…
Working families in Illinois are used to seeing lies from the billionaires and millionaires who don’t want to pay their fair share, and this latest desperate doozy from the Illinois Policy Institute is just more of the same to protect their wealthy donors and make the middle class pay. The Governor has been abundantly clear that Illinois will remain one of the few states that will not tax retirement income and retirees will get a tax cut under the fair tax plan. The General Assembly passed and the Governor signed into law the tax rates that would go into effect. Illinoisans can go online and see how the fair tax would impact them and the fact is that 97 percent of Illinoisans will see a tax cut.
…Adding… I just realized we are in the midst of Lawsuit Abuse Awareness Week. I was tipped off by IPI’s affiliated news outlet. Such irony.
- @misterjayem - Monday, Oct 5, 20 @ 9:27 am:
“They look like they’re taking a political argument and trying to make it in court.”
That’s EXACTLY what they are attempting.
– MrJM
- TheInvisibleMan - Monday, Oct 5, 20 @ 9:30 am:
The new tactic seems to be to file an absurd court case, then use the claims in that filing as if it is a fact in the later reporting by the same people who filed the case.
I’m just wondering when a judge is going to get tired of having the court system obviously just being used as a cog in the PR machine of the disingenuous.
- Roadrager - Monday, Oct 5, 20 @ 9:32 am:
So I guess they’ve decided Ken Griffin’s $27,000,000 won’t be enough to get them across the line.
- Shytown - Monday, Oct 5, 20 @ 9:32 am:
Frerichs’ handed opponents of the fair tax a gift that just keeps on giving. And giving. Sigh.
- Siualum - Monday, Oct 5, 20 @ 9:33 am:
Let’s not let the voters decide, we rich folks know what’s best for everyone.
- Oswego Willy - Monday, Oct 5, 20 @ 9:33 am:
The truly phony, the IPI, whose alums utterly failed when they tried to take over state government by working for Bruce Rauner… lasting mere weeks… highlighted by Diana Rickert explaining that Rauner “as a white male” couldn’t comment on a cartoon, these same IPI folks…
===They look like they’re taking a political argument and trying to make it in court.===
… they lack the integrity and knowledge to grasp that pretending a political argument is a legal argument is only grifting. If Tillman wants to grift off this, it’s on brand, fine, but fleecing those donating to IPI and knowingly making these silly political arguments pretending to be legal arguments highlights the lacking of IPI as an honest broker in Illinois fiscal discussions.
The worst resumes you will see will include both IPI and Rauner Administration in them.
This lawsuit again shows that dishonesty to the discussion, and the same folks grifting on the known phony attempt.
- So_Long_Illinois - Monday, Oct 5, 20 @ 9:35 am:
There’s nothing like living next door to a retired school teacher who insists a yes vote for the fair tax is the right thing to do this November even though their pension they live on isn’t even taxed in Illinois. Talk about ignorace.
- Grandson of Man - Monday, Oct 5, 20 @ 9:40 am:
“induce retirees into voting to impose on themselves a tax on retirement income”
The IPI is trying to “induce” the poor and middle class into voting against a tax cut for themselves.
“The libertarian-leaning Illinois Policy Institute”
Using state goods and services and having the poor and middle class pay the rich’s share of income tax is the opposite of libertarian.
- Oswego Willy - Monday, Oct 5, 20 @ 9:42 am:
To the post,
Hannah, again, knocking it out of the park, and adding a real lens of perspective with Frerichs aiding IPI, because if it isn’t about Frerichs, then it’s not a discussion.
While it’s true, Frerichs is tall, Frerichs is quite small to understanding his undercutting here for his own relevance and it will haunt him and follow him every time Frerichs wants to stand tall.
Seniors should be weary of Frerichs if he decides to move up where he “seemingly” will try to move on taxing retirement income… otherwise his idea of thoughts to the matter are wholly disingenuous.
Which is it;
Frerichs can see retirement income taxed… but Frerichs himself won’t be in favor of what he sees as an inevitable need and move?
Frerichs really “helped“ the governor and the allies trying to look at measures necessities, and scaring seniors in that too.
I hope the love IPI gives Frerichs will be enough when it’s brought up often Frerichs’ feel on taxing retirement income.
- Jocko - Monday, Oct 5, 20 @ 9:45 am:
==Talk about ignorance.==
While Ken Griffin throws ‘couch cushion’ money at defeating the amendment. SLI must be one of those “soon to haves” that Marco Rubio spoke of.
- Nagidam - Monday, Oct 5, 20 @ 9:45 am:
I think Treasurer Frerichs might be dropped from Governor Pritzker’s Christmas Card list.
Of course this is political. Does it have legs? Time will tell but it doesn’t help that the States top money/tax guy opined on this very issue. But, now everyone will cover a lawsuit on how the Fair Tax may open up the ability to tax retirement income. This game is about controlling the message. My bet is a bunch of that Griffin money will be put into paid media talking about this lawsuit. Which will produce earned media about the lawsuit. Which keeps retirement tax up front.
- thoughts matter - Monday, Oct 5, 20 @ 9:50 am:
Yet another example of why I am no longer a registered Republican. Please, stop with the lying and twisting of words. We could tax retirement income now if we wanted. I don’t see these people admitting that relevant fact.
- Norseman - Monday, Oct 5, 20 @ 9:51 am:
=== retired school teacher who insists a yes vote for the fair tax is the right thing to do ===
The teacher’s right, you’re wrong. IPI along with the other opponents continue to play up this angle to bamboozle the folks who would benefit from the Fair Tax and retirees who are not taxed.
Retirement income was taxed before under the flat tax. It can be again if the Fair Tax fails.
- RNUG - Monday, Oct 5, 20 @ 10:01 am:
I see this lawsuit, this late in the process, as a Hail Mary attempt to get the amendment kicked off the November ballot.
- The 5th Deputy Governor - Monday, Oct 5, 20 @ 10:01 am:
Hear that? That’s the sound of this lawsuit getting unceremoniously bounced from circuit court.
- Grandson of Man - Monday, Oct 5, 20 @ 10:02 am:
Any Democrat who fears what Frerichs said about taxing retirement income has to stop playing into right wing and Republican talking points. Every single Republican GA member voted against a graduated income tax. That’s talking points platinum for Democrats in this state. Work it.
- Perrid - Monday, Oct 5, 20 @ 10:03 am:
Arguements for or against the amendment, almost by definition, have to be subjective.
Their first argument that the explanation of the amendment is “misleading” takes issue with the favorable argument saying the amendment will allow the GA to tax rich people more, and poor people less. Which is true, that will be allowed if the amendment passess. IPI puts words in the explanation’s mouth, and insists that, because the amendment lets the GA tax any income level at any amount, the explanation is false. That just isn’t true.
They are fundamentally incapable of divorcing their opinions from reality, and are demanding the court accept their opinions as fact.
- JS Mill - Monday, Oct 5, 20 @ 10:17 am:
The IPI is against taxation, the wealthy that pay their freight are also against taxation. I get it.
=Among other arguments, the suit alleges the explanation and arguments in favor of the amendment could “induce retirees into voting to impose on themselves a tax on retirement income.”=
My take on that is “so what?” These are supposed to be adults casting ballots.
I don’t think it is a goal of the graduated state income tax. Taxing retirement income is the political third rail of all time. Legislators get all kinds of squeamish if you simply ask the question.
- City Zen - Monday, Oct 5, 20 @ 10:24 am:
==organization bankrolled by the wealthiest people in the state==
Leave East Jackson Street LLC out of this, Quentin.
- Oswego Willy - Monday, Oct 5, 20 @ 10:27 am:
=== who insists a yes vote for the fair tax is the right thing to do this November even though their pension they live on isn’t even taxed in Illinois.===
This is a correct take. It doesn’t effect her.
- Montrose - Monday, Oct 5, 20 @ 10:28 am:
I want to be the one to write responses to the ridiculous things that IPI does. It must feel very satisfying.
- Grimlock - Monday, Oct 5, 20 @ 10:42 am:
Maybe proponents of the Fair Tax should start putting out ads saying that if the voters reject the amendment, retirement income will need to be taxed to make up for it.
- Oswego Willy - Monday, Oct 5, 20 @ 10:42 am:
===IPI is the organization that brought Illinois’ two-year budget impasse and 8 credit downgrades, but won’t support a policy that gives 97% of Illinoisans a tax cut.===
The worst resume around, having both IPI and Rauner administration on it.
This is top shelf honesty to IPI
- Publius - Monday, Oct 5, 20 @ 10:42 am:
If this fails then will everyone be ok when hours are cut at the secretary of state offices, unemployemnt offices? Will the sheriffs be ok when the state closes prisons and work camps and tells them they have to house priosners? How about when the state stops mantaining some roads and gives them back to the county. How about when the state closes Choate in Anna and the veterans homes. Why does the state still support the DuQuoin state fair? These cuts never happen. Edgar tried all these things 30 years ago and everyone complaned and here we are again.
- RNUG - Monday, Oct 5, 20 @ 10:59 am:
I still think the GA made a political mistake on the graduated income tax. They passed a bill that sets the tax rates if the CA passes. They should have also passed a bill raising the flat income tax to between 6% and 7% if the CA fails … because the State needs the revenue and will get it one way or the other.
That way the choice would have been clearly laid out for the voters.
- Sue - Monday, Oct 5, 20 @ 11:16 am:
Easy fix- amend the proposal so the constitution prohibits taxing retirement income. If they plan on exempting retirement income why isn’t it in the Amendment?
- RNUG - Monday, Oct 5, 20 @ 11:21 am:
== If they plan on exempting retirement income why isn’t it in the Amendment? ==
It isn’t in the current State Constitution. Simply a Illinois State Statute.
- Oswego Willy - Monday, Oct 5, 20 @ 11:22 am:
- Sue -
You back again? Huh.
=== Maybe proponents of the Fair Tax should start putting out ads saying that if the voters reject the amendment, retirement income will need to be taxed to make up for it.===
Yeah, no… No
There’s no 71, 36, and no one will touch that.
Well, except for Mike Frerichs.
Mike Frerichs stands tall to tax retirement income.
Ask him.
- Dotnonymous - Monday, Oct 5, 20 @ 11:27 am:
Desperation…is the bouquet.
- Lucky Pierre - Monday, Oct 5, 20 @ 11:29 am:
No one will touch that?
What is plan B if the 6 billion from the Feds to balance this year’s budget doesn’t come through?
- Anonymous - Monday, Oct 5, 20 @ 11:39 am:
=== No one will touch that?===
Name your sponsor(s) and the 71 and 36
You and Rauner, lol, can’t count noses, like realizing he needed an override of *his* veto, but was “confused” to what that number needed to be.
=== What is plan B===
Show *your* cuts.
Ok, but let’s be honest… Rauner’s administration refused to show their cuts, and show your revenue stream too.
- Oswego Willy - Monday, Oct 5, 20 @ 11:40 am:
Sorry, above is me.
- City Zen - Monday, Oct 5, 20 @ 11:58 am:
==retired school teacher who insists a yes vote for the fair tax is the right thing to do==
I’m still trying to understand how the Fair Tax can brag that exempting retirement income is somehow fair.
“See that retired principal you pass up every morning on the way to work? Not only is his pension larger than yours and your wife’s combined salaries, but he’ll also pay nothing in state income taxes under our Fair Tax.
Vote yes for fairness.”
- Rich Miller - Monday, Oct 5, 20 @ 12:02 pm:
===I’m still trying to understand how the Fair Tax can brag that exempting retirement income is somehow fair.===
Did you miss the other story today about how spectacularly awful it polls? Try living in the real world for a change.
- Pro Bono - Monday, Oct 5, 20 @ 12:05 pm:
Watch for the sanctions motion to be filed against Jack Vrett and Honigman for this frivolous case. Will the firm reimburse him? Or will IPI?
- 1st Ward - Monday, Oct 5, 20 @ 12:11 pm:
” Illinoisans can go online and see how the fair tax would impact them and the fact is that 97 percent of Illinoisans will see a tax cut.”
Illinoisans can also see that every level of government is asking for more money and therefore will not receive a tax cut. Even at the state level, Moody’s now says tax hikes will occur regardless of passage.
https://www.chicagobusiness.com/greg-hinz-politics/other-hikes-likely-even-if-fair-tax-passes-moodys
- Oswego Willy - Monday, Oct 5, 20 @ 12:13 pm:
=== Illinoisans can also see…===
So you admit 97% won’t see an increase.
Good on you.
- Oswego Willy - Monday, Oct 5, 20 @ 12:17 pm:
=== therefore will not receive a tax cut.===
LOL… but you admit… 97% won’t see an income tax increase… which is what’s on the ballot.
You’re not good at this.
- Oswego Willy - Monday, Oct 5, 20 @ 12:20 pm:
=== therefore will not receive a tax cut.===
“The one thing we *don’t* want is to prevent 97% of people getting tax relief or not raising their income taxes… to own the libs”
lol
“With higher taxes everywhere, I’m voting no to save everyone from income tax relief”
This is comedy gold.
- 1st Ward - Monday, Oct 5, 20 @ 12:28 pm:
“So you admit 97% won’t see an increase.”
If you don’t want to look at the other levers of taxation that the state can and will pull as reported by Moody’s. Not to mention local units of government raising taxes as well. the 97% will undoubtedly pay more in taxes in the coming years regardless of passage. Not to mention payroll taxes at the federal level and potentially healthcare.
- Oswego Willy - Monday, Oct 5, 20 @ 12:30 pm:
=== If you don’t want to look…===
We’re looking at the income tax, keep up.
It’s not that hard.
- Oswego Willy - Monday, Oct 5, 20 @ 12:33 pm:
=== Not to mention local units of government raising taxes as well. the 97% will undoubtedly pay more in taxes===
Not in income tax.
You want to deny 97% tax relief?
That’s an odd argument.
Like I said, your argument here, you’re not good at picking what the argument is.
You’re admitting 97% will get relief, “but… “
LOL
- Lucky Pierre - Monday, Oct 5, 20 @ 12:41 pm:
Since when does the legislature pay attention to polls?
Term limits, pension reform, fair maps all enjoy majority bipartisan support but the Mike Madigan’s legislature ignores the people’s will consistently
- City Zen - Monday, Oct 5, 20 @ 12:45 pm:
==97 percent of Illinoisans will see a tax cut==
Any chance I can get those tax credits this year?
- Oswego Willy - Monday, Oct 5, 20 @ 12:46 pm:
=== Any chance I can get those tax credits this year?===
Explain how that would work first
- Last Bull Moose - Monday, Oct 5, 20 @ 1:47 pm:
Does the Fair Tax Amendment make it easier to single out a group for tax increases? Yes.
Does that mean that retirement income will be taxed anytime soon? No. It is more likely but still very unlikely.
- SSL - Monday, Oct 5, 20 @ 2:41 pm:
Illinois didn’t get to be the worst fiscal state in the nation by being brave. Taxing retirement income, at some level, makes a lot of sense, but fear not, it won’t happen. Politicians in these parts do one thing real well, and that is to protect themselves. They won’t make granny angry by taxing her retirement. No way.
The “fair” tax vote sure has gotten a lot more interesting since Griffin took his big fat wallet out. Fun to watch.
- Common Sense 171 - Monday, Oct 5, 20 @ 3:39 pm:
All of the arguments in favor of the tax are based on the premise that politicians are honorable and will keep their word. As the Chicago Tribune pointed out so clearly that is far from the truth. Had they put those protections about what would be taxed and at what rate in the amendment that would have been one thing. They didn’t for a reason. They have no intention of keeping their word. History over 30 years shows what will happen.
- Oswego Willy - Monday, Oct 5, 20 @ 3:43 pm:
=== As the Chicago Tribune pointed out===
Narrator: It was the Editorial Board, in an opinion piece.
=== Had they put those protections about what would be taxed and at what rate in the amendment that would have been one thing.===
The bill setting the rates, passed and signed, is no different that today, and the General Assembly, today, can raise taxes at any level, to what can pass and be signed into law.
So there’s that.
=== History over 30 years shows what will happen.===
How many times in 30 years has the income tax gone up? Has it ever gone down.
- Common Sense 171 - Monday, Oct 5, 20 @ 3:50 pm:
It may be an opinion piece but the historic facts are accurate. they are not selling the tax on the argument we can raise your taxes either way. they make it sound like you can always count on lower taxes than now and that is false. And they are not being honest about taxing seniors. If they were honest about what could happen it wouold be 90% against.
- Oswego Willy - Monday, Oct 5, 20 @ 3:55 pm:
===… but the historic facts are accurate.===
LOL, really, which ones?
=== they are not selling the tax on the argument we can raise your taxes either way. they make it sound like you can always count on lower taxes than now and that is false.===
No they’re not, lol.
They are saying if passed, 97% will see no increase. That’s true.
What’s also true is they (the GA) can raise your taxes NOW at any time, at any level… now. That’s not changing at all.
=== And they are not being honest about taxing seniors.===
Retirement income is not being taxed.
If you’d like to cite in either the legislation on rates or the CA where retirement income is taxed, do so. Otherwise, it’s another myth (it’s a myth)
=== If they were honest about what could happen it wouold be 90% against===
Is that your opinion, or another one of those facts I keep hearing about?
- Oswego Willy - Monday, Oct 5, 20 @ 3:56 pm:
Here’s the real silly to this;
You’re voting no because “all they are gonna do is raise taxes” and even if you’re not effected, you’re voting to stop the raising of taxes, maybe.
If I believe you, and then it fails, they *will* according to your logic to vote no… will raise taxes on you.
You’re voting no… to raise your own taxes… because voting for a freeze or a tax reduction for 97% isn’t owning the libs.
It’s like The Onion has infected the thinking to create tasty mis-knowledge.
Voting because they might raise my taxes so they raise my taxes because I won’t take a win.
I’d laugh too if I was Ken Griffin
- Demoralized - Monday, Oct 5, 20 @ 4:26 pm:
==And they are not being honest about taxing seniors.==
Really? You really, truly, genuinely think there is a chance in heck of a tax on retirement? Please. I’ll bet you my entire year’s salary that isn’t going to happen any time in the near (or distant for that matter) future.
Some of you need to be realistic instead of latching on to these ridiculous talking points that are out there.
- Huh? - Monday, Oct 5, 20 @ 4:28 pm:
“attempt to get the amendment kicked off the November ballot.”
Too late for that to occur. Early voting and has started. Absentee ballots have been mailed.
How would new ballots be printed in time for 11/3? What happens to the absentee ballots and early votes?
This lawsuit is 6 months too late.