* Relevant response excerpts to a Democratic US Senate debate question on the proposed federal wealth tax…
Q: Next question, let’s turn to taxes. Senators Elizabeth Warren and Ron Wyden in your party have proposed a wealth tax. Do you agree with that idea, and how is your tax plan different and better than the other two on stage?
US Rep. Robin Kelly: As part of my people over profits plan, we do need to tax millionaires, billionaires and corporations at their fair share. I’m not saying more, not saying less. We haven’t done that. We have to close the loopholes that they have to get around, because I’ve actually spoken to some of the corporations, and what they tell me is we’re following the law, and that’s the law. So we have to change some of those laws so those loopholes will go away. And as I said, I feel that if we do these things and we can do more for the American people, we can invest more in Illinois. And usually I agree with Elizabeth Warren. She has a great background in this, and I like what she’s trying to do.
Lt. Gov. Juliana Stratton: Well, my platform is all about giving the people what they want, and that includes making life more affordable, and one of the ways that we do that is by giving a tax break to middle class families, and paying for it with a tax increase on those making a million dollars or more and our corporations.
US Rep. Raja Krishnamoorthi: I would consider any progressive taxation plan and hiking taxes on the wealthiest. But two things have to happen. One, we have to give property tax relief, especially to places like Illinois, where we see property taxes going through the roof, and then secondly, there has to be accountability as well as transparency with regard to any monies raised and spent that additional income.
* Meanwhile…
It’s a topic of discussion Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson raised Monday on WGN’s debut episode of “The Point” – a millionaire’s tax.
On Tuesday, the top Chicago leader spoke more about his push. The union activist turned mayor says it’s the right moment for Illinois to tax millionaires more and create a tax on digital advertising. House Speaker Emanuel “Chris” Welch has indicated he, too, would like to raise revenue, but the votes may not be there yet.
It’s not just Speaker Welch, according to Mayor Johnson. Others in the General Assembly are signaling support. The mayor said he has discussed the ideas with Senate President Don Harmon. […]
“I’ve provoked this conversation for some time – the millionaire’s tax, the digital ad tax, these are progressive tax proposals that could help provide real relief to working people across the city of Chicago and, quite frankly, across the country,” Johnson said. “That’s what’s important in this moment, that we are providing tax relief for working people, critical services for working people, that we’re providing critical services for the city and the state.”
- JB13 - Wednesday, Jan 28, 26 @ 10:45 am:
– my platform is all about giving the people what they want –
And sometimes, giving it to them good and hard, amirite? Mencken would appreciate the honesty.
- Steve - Wednesday, Jan 28, 26 @ 10:51 am:
As unpopular as Mayor Johnson is right now: can’t say the issue of progressive taxation is going away. If Chicago doesn’t want to cut spending, which they don’t: it’s hard to see how progressive income taxation will not be coming in some form even if it means changing the state constitution. If NYC and San Diego have a city income tax: can’t imagine how Chicago will not in the coming years.
- Danamora - Wednesday, Jan 28, 26 @ 10:56 am:
San Diego doesn’t have a city income tax.
- suburban mom - Wednesday, Jan 28, 26 @ 10:56 am:
Doesn’t seem like an evasion by any of the 3 candidates. They all appear open to the idea but also flexible on specifics.
- Siualum - Wednesday, Jan 28, 26 @ 10:56 am:
Re: Raja - Last I knew, property taxes were a locally administered and collected tax. Not sure how a US senator is going to advance legislation for property tax relief.
- Sawyer - Wednesday, Jan 28, 26 @ 11:03 am:
There is a way to actually do these things that would generate real revenue and would probably be politically palatable but they require some thoughtfulness. We don’t have a lot of that going around.
I love the idea of megataxes on YouTube, Meta, TikTok, etc. Anything that makes it harder for them to operate and less people using them.
We tax cigarettes to oblivion. We will one day view these things like we view cigarettes.
- The Farm Grad - Wednesday, Jan 28, 26 @ 11:07 am:
“If Chicago doesn’t want to cut spending, which they don’t”
If I have to choose between (i) Candidate A, who doesn’t want to cut operating expenses, realizes we need more funds, so he wants progressive taxation, and (ii) Candidate B, who also doesn’t want to cut operating expenses, but wants to slap the working class with regressive garbage taxes, that will further gut the city, I will choose Candidate A.
Ideally, we want a candidate for Mayor who will vow to cut 30% of the city’s operating expenses. But no candidate has promised to do so
- suburban mom - Wednesday, Jan 28, 26 @ 11:15 am:
Siualum, The federal part of property taxes would be the SALT (State and Local Tax deduction) which was capped in the initial trump term in office.
The SALT deduction cap hurt many suburban and otherwise upper middle class folks. I assume that was what Raja referred to there.
- Excitable Boy - Wednesday, Jan 28, 26 @ 11:22 am:
- Doesn’t seem like an evasion by any of the 3 candidates. They all appear open to the idea but also flexible on specifics. -
That’s what being evasive is in this context.
How can you not have a clear, defined answer for this at this stage of the game?
- Rich Miller - Wednesday, Jan 28, 26 @ 11:30 am:
===we want a candidate for Mayor who will vow to cut 30% of the city’s operating expenses.===
LOL
Who is “we”?
This isn’t Facebook. Speak for yourself.
- suburban mom - Wednesday, Jan 28, 26 @ 11:31 am:
excitable boy:
==How can you not have a clear, defined answer for this at this stage of the game?
Because they are vying for a legislative position, I think all of these candidates have flexibility on specifics but broad agreement on the goals. The specifics tend to happen in a deliberative process and in committee before that. This did not surprise me.
SIUalumn–I think what raja referred to as property tax relief should have more properly been called eliminating the cap on the SALT deduction. The SALT deduction was so important to middle and upper middle class Illinoisans (as well as other mostly blue states). It was capped in the first Trump term.
- Steve - Wednesday, Jan 28, 26 @ 11:31 am:
-San Diego doesn’t have a city income tax.-
My mistake. Philadephia , Baltimore , and Portland have one.
- Rich Miller - Wednesday, Jan 28, 26 @ 11:33 am:
=== I assume that was what Raja referred to there.===
If that’s true, what he said was no more taxes on the wealthy until SALT for higher income households is restored.
- GoneFishing - Wednesday, Jan 28, 26 @ 11:37 am:
Let change this sentence from “If Chicago doesn’t want to cut spending, which they don’t” to “If Chicago voters doesn’t want to cut spending, which they don’t”. The issue isn’t the Mayor/City Council not cutting spending it’s the voters don’t want it cut. It happens everywere no matter how big or small a place.
- City Zen - Wednesday, Jan 28, 26 @ 11:40 am:
==places like Illinois, where we see property taxes going through the roof==
I’m enjoying Raja’s passive-agressive digs on Stratton.
- Anyone Remember - Wednesday, Jan 28, 26 @ 11:55 am:
“One, we have to give property tax relief … .
Step one would be if the State exempts someone / some class from property taxes, the State has to make the local taxing authorities whole. Not holding my breath.
- Steve - Wednesday, Jan 28, 26 @ 12:03 pm:
- it’s the voters don’t want it cut.-
This is a very true statement. The Chicago voters like the level of taxation on sales taxes, property taxes, gas taxes, and fees. If they didn’t they’d vote for something different. That’s the beauty of federalism. Chicago wants to be a high tax place.
- Excitable Boy - Wednesday, Jan 28, 26 @ 12:04 pm:
- Because they are vying for a legislative position, I think all of these candidates have flexibility on specifics but broad agreement on the goals. -
With all due respect, I know what they are doing, I don’t like it. Some candidates have the fortitude to take a stand on things, I like those types of candidates.
- Lurker - Wednesday, Jan 28, 26 @ 12:22 pm:
I agree with Robin Kelly. My first job with the State was at dept of revenue and I worked corporate and individual taxes. The rich, and especially the uber-rich, know how to pay little to no taxes. Some do it properly by using every loophole while others are nefarious and just try to see what they can get away with.
So, the one thing I’d add to her answer is, when the super rich are obviously and unethically avoiding paying taxes (and here I’d give the example of our president writing “other” as tax write-offs of $100,000’s) the punishment must be severe as well as truly applied.
- lake county democrat - Wednesday, Jan 28, 26 @ 12:33 pm:
All Democrats want the federal income tax to be more progressive, the exact mechanism aside. My suggested response: “For starters, we should return to the Clinton taxes that turned budget deficits into budget surpluses and produced the best sustained economy of the modern era. George Bush’s changes brought the worst recession of our lives and Donald Trump’s will do the same.”
- suburban mom - Wednesday, Jan 28, 26 @ 12:55 pm:
Good call by Lake County.
- Sue - Wednesday, Jan 28, 26 @ 12:58 pm:
What I always find amusing is why all the D’s who cry out for more taxes on the wealthy- why couldn’t they implement the cancellation of the carried interest when they ran DC- there is no excuse for the partners in hedge funds and private equity to pay cap gains rates on what for them is ordinary earned income- they even get to convert the 2 percent management fees into the carried interest portion of their ownership stakes- and the insult is it has always been Chuck Schumer protecting his wall street donors- taxing carried interest at ordinary rates might only generate 10 Billion a year but if would bd nice to eliminate this windfall abuse before raising taxes on so called millionsires
- Google is Your Friend - Wednesday, Jan 28, 26 @ 1:02 pm:
==- The Farm Grad - Wednesday, Jan 28, 26 @ 11:07 am:==
Nice to see a right-winger support defunding the police since they are the largest part of Chicago’s budget. Welcome aboard the defund and abolish train, friend!
- Excitable Boy - Wednesday, Jan 28, 26 @ 1:06 pm:
I can hardly believe for once I am in agreement with Sue. I think I need a drink.
- Three Dimensional Checkers - Wednesday, Jan 28, 26 @ 1:35 pm:
Three non-answers, but Stratton’s “give the people what they want” frame annoys me the most. Do not think society’s problems are coming from an overabundance of self-discipline.
- Harrison - Wednesday, Jan 28, 26 @ 1:58 pm:
Unlike the wealth tax proposed in California that taxed unrealized capital gains and total wealth of billionaires, the carried interest tax would be constitutional
- RNUG - Wednesday, Jan 28, 26 @ 2:05 pm:
I realize these candidates are running for federal office, not state, but a number of their statements come back to state and local level taxes.
So if all politics are local, these are the questions I have:
1) at the State level, how do they plan to get around the Illinois Constitution’s flat income tax provision? Or are they just going to try to change things at the federal level?
2) the largest portion of Illinois property taxes is for the local school districts. Eliminating that would provide huge property tax relief to homeowners. Does anyone have a workable plan for either the federal government or the state to provide enough funding to K-12 schools to permit (I would say mandate) property tax relief?
- Remember the Alamo II - Wednesday, Jan 28, 26 @ 2:08 pm:
=== My suggested response: “For starters, we should return to the Clinton taxes that turned budget deficits into budget surpluses and produced the best sustained economy of the modern era. George Bush’s changes brought the worst recession of our lives and Donald Trump’s will do the same.”
Just a not for nothing, but the Clinton administration used budget games, such as borrowing money from the Social Security trust fund, to balance the budget. Not a recommended approach as the solvency of Social Security is becoming an increasingly important issue.
- we should return to the Clinton taxes - Wednesday, Jan 28, 26 @ 2:14 pm:
==we should return to the Clinton taxes==
Not sure a tax hike on folks making $50,000 would go over too well.
- Proud Sucker - Wednesday, Jan 28, 26 @ 2:29 pm:
“-San Diego doesn’t have a city income tax.-
My mistake. Philadelphia , Baltimore , and Portland have one.”
I thought the original LGDF bargain prohibited municipal income taxes. Has a ‘population over 500,000′ clause been thrown in somewhere since 1970?
- Sue - Wednesday, Jan 28, 26 @ 3:25 pm:
And the argument that taxing carried interest at ordinary rates would impact investment is total BS- it only impacts the General Partner owners of these large private funds- for the most part- the actual investor LP’s are public pension funds and endowments who do not pay any tax on their gains-
- thechampaignlife - Wednesday, Jan 28, 26 @ 3:29 pm:
===we should return to the Clinton taxes===
Heck, we could probably return to the Reagan taxes (inflation-adjusted) and collect more.
- thechampaignlife - Wednesday, Jan 28, 26 @ 3:39 pm:
===Unlike the wealth tax proposed in California …, the carried interest tax would be constitutional===
What is unconstitutional about taxing wealth? Is that any different than taxing property? And what is wealth but the sum of income over multiple years, minus expenses?
- Rich Miller - Wednesday, Jan 28, 26 @ 4:10 pm:
===What is unconstitutional about taxing wealth? Is that any different than taxing property? ===
If you’re speaking about Illinois it is unconstitutional.
“On or before January 1, 1979, the General Assembly by law shall abolish all ad valorem personal property taxes”
It took a federal constitutional amendment to tax income, so it’s probably not ok at the federal level either, but I don’t really know.
- thechampaignlife - Wednesday, Jan 28, 26 @ 6:50 pm:
===If you’re speaking about Illinois===
I was questioning the assertion that a California wealth tax was unconstitutional, presumably violating the federal constitution. I don’t think that is true, or property taxes would also be an issue. It may violate California’s constitution, but that seems irrelevant here. It certainly would take an amendment here, but so would most other progressive and millionaire tax proposals.