Capitol Fax.com - Your Illinois News Radar » Arguments for and against the ‘mega-projects’ bill
SUBSCRIBE to Capitol Fax      Advertise Here      About     Exclusive Subscriber Content     Updated Posts    Contact Rich Miller
CapitolFax.com
To subscribe to Capitol Fax, click here.
Arguments for and against the ‘mega-projects’ bill

Tuesday, Oct 7, 2025 - Posted by Rich Miller

* An argument for the so-called “mega-projects” bill by Illinois Economic Development Corp. Chair John Atkinson

Currently before the Illinois General Assembly, this legislation would give qualifying megaprojects — those investing at least $100 million and committing to stay for 20 years or more — the ability to negotiate long-term, predictable property tax agreements with local governments. These agreements would provide companies with stable costs as they grow in Illinois, while schools and municipalities would gain a reliable revenue stream they can plan around with confidence.

This is not a one-sided incentive. Built into the legislation is the requirement that agreements must be reviewed and approved by representatives of school districts, park districts and other taxing bodies, ensuring accountability and guaranteeing that communities benefit alongside companies. If no agreement is reached, neither side is obligated to proceed, which builds collaboration and transparency directly into the process.

The proposed legislation would also ensure the jobs created by these projects are held by those affiliated with the local trades, guaranteeing that Illinois workers will be the ones bringing these transformative projects to life. Beyond construction, these projects have the potential to generate a wide range of career opportunities in our state’s workforce pipeline and strengthen local economies even further.

Crucially, there are no state dollars in play and no impact on our balanced budget. Instead, it gives control to local authorities and allows us to unlock investment that might not otherwise be possible.

Without this tool, Illinois is at serious risk of losing out to one of the 37 other states that already offer similar programs. In Ohio, New Albany granted Intel a 30-year, 100% property tax abatement to land a $20 billion semiconductor campus. In Texas, Samsung secured a package of long-term abatements for a massive chip plant. And in South Carolina, state leaders approved a 40-year tax abatement via the state’s FILOT (Fee in Lieu of Tax) Program to secure a new Scout Motors electric vehicle manufacturing plant.

Not mentioned in the piece is that the Chicago Bears are pushing this bill to help build a stadium in Arlington Heights.

* An argument against the mega-projects bill by Americans for Prosperity-Illinois’ deputy state director Brian Costin

Atkinson highlighted a state program in Ohio that allowed the city of New Albany to give a “100% property tax abatement” break for 30 years to land a $20 billion semiconductor campus. Left out of the Pritzker appointee’s pitch: The measure empowers local officials to cruelly dump the corporate tax discount onto working families and Main Street via a property tax shift. The megaproject bill’s crony giveaways are similar.

Here’s how it works. The bill locks in assessed values of designated megaprojects for 23 to 40 years, while the real property values continue to climb. A parcel bought for $200 million but later built into a $5 billion complex would still be taxed on just the $200 million figure. That’s approximately a 96% tax reduction.

A $5 billion development in Arlington Heights would normally owe about $238.5 million per year in property taxes. With its equalized assessed value frozen at $200 million, it would pay only about $9.5 million per year, resulting in a break of $229 million per year. Over a 40-year designation (excluding the seven-year “investment” period), the developer’s break could easily exceed $7.5 billion.

Local governments aren’t complaining about this bill because they are protected by the provision that values megaprojects at full fair cash value for the purpose of calculating tax caps and bond limits. This allows the $7.5 billion property tax break to be shifted onto other property taxpayers in each jurisdiction.

Why would local governments agree to such a raw and unfair deal for residents? Because the bill lets them strike special payment side deals with developers, cash they can tout as new revenue, while sidestepping the voter-approval referendums normally required for higher taxes. These special payments don’t have to match normal taxes, don’t have to fund essential services and can even flow back to the developer in disguised subsidies, such as paying for parking garages and infrastructure that would normally have to be paid for entirely by the developer.

Your thoughts?

       

11 Comments »
  1. - Jerry - Tuesday, Oct 7, 25 @ 2:17 pm:

    How many times does President Warren need to be told m: No Welfare for the Bears. Quit mooching off of taxpayers and pay for your own stadium. Not. A. Dime.


  2. - NobodyAskedMe - Tuesday, Oct 7, 25 @ 2:19 pm:

    Kind of like guns…I may not like them, but if everyone else has one, I better have one too.


  3. - Numbers... - Tuesday, Oct 7, 25 @ 2:24 pm:

    This is the key point in my opinion.

    “Local governments aren’t complaining about this bill because they are protected by the provision that values megaprojects at full fair cash value for the purpose of calculating tax caps and bond limits. This allows the $7.5 billion property tax break to be shifted onto other property taxpayers in each jurisdiction.”

    If local governments want to give a property tax break for a large development, they should be able to. However, local governments should not be able to shift the increase in the property tax levy onto all the other homeowners in the taxing district. If this provision were to be eliminated, no problem from me. But as implied in the article, I imagine the local governments would no longer be on board.


  4. - Frida's Boss - Tuesday, Oct 7, 25 @ 2:25 pm:

    I think the Governor and his team really want to pass the bill and help the Bears. I think they can’t say it outright, and neither can DCEO so they have John Atkison doing the legwork.

    If it passes, they’ll applaud and focus on one or two other projects in the state and not mention taxpayer money to the Bears.
    If it doesn’t pass, they’ll say they were never in favor of using taxpayer dollars to help the Bears.


  5. - Wolfy - Tuesday, Oct 7, 25 @ 2:38 pm:

    This is exactly the kind of thing Strong Towns warns about. You geta short-term influx of cash. But long-term the companies won’t stay and your city becomes insolvent.


  6. - Glenn in Glenview - Tuesday, Oct 7, 25 @ 2:46 pm:

    We already have the highest property taxes in the country. The last thing we need is Springfield making it easier for local governments to give away tax breaks to multibillion dollar companies at the expense of homeowners.


  7. - Lefty Lefty - Tuesday, Oct 7, 25 @ 2:58 pm:

    I’m so sick of this. Pay your taxes. I hope one day for fair taxation in IL and the US (and vote accordingly), but I’m not holding my breath.


  8. - Harrison - Tuesday, Oct 7, 25 @ 3:01 pm:

    A 240 million dollar annual property tax bill for an NFL stadium?

    Seems a bit much

    One of the few stadiums that are not owned by a public private partnership is MetLife stadium in New Jersey

    They paid just under 6 million in property tax last year


  9. - Friendly Bob Adams - Tuesday, Oct 7, 25 @ 3:12 pm:

    We’re representing billionaires, but trust us, there’s no way we would take advantage of ordinary taxpayers. Honest.


  10. - fs - Tuesday, Oct 7, 25 @ 3:41 pm:

    I agree with Numbers, I don’t have an issue with it…so long as the section is taken out that allows the full value to be used for tax district purposes to allow them to raise levy’s easier.

    It’s also worth noting that Section 10-990 of the bill specifically excludes sports stadium megaprojects, unless the legislature separately approves that specific project. So, the Bears would still need another separate approval for their stadium property to get this benefit.


  11. - Sue - Tuesday, Oct 7, 25 @ 4:10 pm:

    A couple of recent examples demonstrate why this is bad policy- notably Sears Walgreens and Motorola


TrackBack URI

Anonymous commenters, uncivil comments, rumor-mongering, disinformation and profanity of any kind will be deleted.

(required)

(not required)



* Isabel’s afternoon roundup
* Arguments for and against the 'mega-projects' bill
* SUBSCRIBERS ONLY - Campaign news (Updated)
* Catching up with the federal candidates
* MLB post-season open thread
* Texas National Guard troops arrive in far southwest suburbs (Updated)
* It’s Time To Bring Safer Rides To Illinois
* Color me skeptical
* Protect the 340B Program to Enhance Healthcare Services in Low-Income Communities
* Isabel’s morning briefing
* Good morning!
* Selected press releases (Live updates)
* Live coverage (mostly)
* Yesterday's stories

Support CapitolFax.com
Visit our advertisers...

...............

...............

...............

...............

...............

...............

...............

...............


Loading


Main Menu
Home
Illinois
YouTube
Pundit rankings
Obama
Subscriber Content
Durbin
Burris
Blagojevich Trial
Advertising
Updated Posts
Polls

Archives
October 2025
September 2025
August 2025
July 2025
June 2025
May 2025
April 2025
March 2025
February 2025
January 2025
December 2024
November 2024
October 2024
September 2024
August 2024
July 2024
June 2024
May 2024
April 2024
March 2024
February 2024
January 2024
December 2023
November 2023
October 2023
September 2023
August 2023
July 2023
June 2023
May 2023
April 2023
March 2023
February 2023
January 2023
December 2022
November 2022
October 2022
September 2022
August 2022
July 2022
June 2022
May 2022
April 2022
March 2022
February 2022
January 2022
December 2021
November 2021
October 2021
September 2021
August 2021
July 2021
June 2021
May 2021
April 2021
March 2021
February 2021
January 2021
December 2020
November 2020
October 2020
September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004

Blog*Spot Archives
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005

Syndication

RSS Feed 2.0
Comments RSS 2.0




Hosted by MCS SUBSCRIBE to Capitol Fax Advertise Here Mobile Version Contact Rich Miller