Capitol Fax.com - Your Illinois News Radar

Initial reaction from manufacturers: “A typical Illinois solution”

Posted in:

Illinois

* The Illinois Manufacturers Association is not at all pleased with this “grand bargain” in the Senate.

For instance: “You could do anything you want to help us in workers comp, but it would pale in comparison to how bad this is,” was how one IMA member responded when told about the provision that eliminates the foreign and domestic dividend deduction. That’ll apparently cost businesses over $200 million on profits they don’t make in Illinois.

There are a lot of manufacturers involved with the sugar industry in this state, so a new sales tax on pop of $2.88 a case isn’t going down well with them, either. They point out that Cook County’s new sugary drink tax will result in taxes of almost $6 a case of pop in that county with this new state tax.

Then there’s the increase in the minimum wage and the permanent income tax hikes.

The proposal extends the research and development tax credit, “but doesn’t modernize it,” as the IMA leadership has wanted The proposal also doesn’t include manufacturers’ purchase credit and the graphic arts exemption, which have both expired.

The workers comp bill “doesn’t provide any savings,” the IMA claims. And despite the insistence of some, this is not Caterpillar’s proposed language, they say.

* “All they’re doing is trying to find money and not do anything on the business side to help us compete with our Midwestern neighbors,” said the IMA’s Greg Baise, adding saracastically, “This is a typical Illinois solution.”

“They’re putting a horrible marker down,” said Mark Denzler of the group.

posted by Rich Miller
Monday, Jan 9, 17 @ 2:41 pm

Comments

So does this mean you will only pay the additional tax on Coke or Pepsi with sugar and diet Coke and Pepsi will not be taxed?
Or will merchants collect on all drinks?
Could get confusing?

Comment by diet pop Monday, Jan 9, 17 @ 2:47 pm
The elephant in the room on workers compensation is that the number of filings statewide has continued to decrease annually. In 2016 I don’t think 40,000 statewide was cracked. Reforming workers compensation is speck in the universe of Illinois’ problems. I never understood the vehemence of the reform movement.

Comment by Last one left turn off lights Monday, Jan 9, 17 @ 2:48 pm
Generally speaking, it is best to tax things you want less of in society. It might be time to kick the sugar habit if these studies have any merit (and yes, the jury is still out). On the other hand, see also diabetes and Medicaid.

http://www.realclearscience.com/articles/2016/10/17/big_sugar_is_the_new_big_tobacco_109781.html

Comment by 47th Ward Monday, Jan 9, 17 @ 2:50 pm
Same old story! Tax increases, with little reform! no wonder people and business are fleeing the state!

Comment by Anonymous Monday, Jan 9, 17 @ 2:53 pm
The last time the sugary tax was introduced (by Senator Hunter) the coalition against it was quite diverse. An equal number of business and labor entities were opposed.

Comment by Team Sleep Monday, Jan 9, 17 @ 2:56 pm
Silly manufacturers. Rauner doesn’t wear his tie for you. I was wondering when you’d realize that.

But hey, I’d pipe down. You still have all the goodies of enterprise zones. Utility tax exemption is nothing to sneeze at.

Plus you guys need to take up workers comp with the insurance companies who didn’t pass on the cost savings.

You manufacturing piglets sure do squeal loud for your place at the trough. There won’t be much left after EDGE gets extended. Half a billion will be gone by the time you get in.

Poor meals on wheels. Maybe next year.

Comment by Honeybear Monday, Jan 9, 17 @ 2:57 pm
Last One - because like education spending (which impacts every county and almost all communities) worker’s comp touches almost every sector of employment. According to the Illinois Worker’s Compensation Commission approximately 91% of all workers in Illinois are covered by the insurance. A select number of employers (i.e. LLC’s or sole proprietorships) are exempt. This impacts employers and employees alike.

Comment by Team Sleep Monday, Jan 9, 17 @ 3:00 pm
“Why aren’t they balancing the budget with easy, popular, cost-free solutions instead of these?” - the IMA

Comment by The Captain Monday, Jan 9, 17 @ 3:04 pm
I agree with the IMA. Let’s take out everything in the bill that causes someone pain!

Snark aside, yeah, I get it, Illinois business wants some love. But we’re not getting out of this without everyone taking some sort of hit. They might wanna ponder the business climate sans budget.

Comment by Threepwood Monday, Jan 9, 17 @ 3:04 pm
$2.88 state soda tax, did Bloomberg write this bill?

Comment by Oneman Monday, Jan 9, 17 @ 3:05 pm
– “This is a typical Illinois solution.”–

Baise would know. He’s been in the mix when the deals go down ever since Big Jim was governor.

Hilarious that someone can bad-mouth the Illinois political process when it’s put bread on his table his entire adult life.

Comment by wordslinger Monday, Jan 9, 17 @ 3:06 pm
===Hilarious that someone can bad-mouth the Illinois political process when it’s put bread on his table his entire adult life.===

Not just any bread, cinnamon raisin bread…
He doth protest a bit too much.

Comment by A guy Monday, Jan 9, 17 @ 3:13 pm
I figured this was coming as soon as word of the bills got out.

Not even sure this is really going to be a “bipartisan” framework.

Comment by Arsenal Monday, Jan 9, 17 @ 3:13 pm
Oh, is the IMA waiting for a more pro-business Governor?

Comment by Anonymous Monday, Jan 9, 17 @ 3:13 pm
===“They’re putting a horrible marker down,” said Mark Denzler of the group.===

LOL!

Let’s put up all the tweets Denzler has telling his followers hoe great Rauner is.

Like this one…

“Proud to stand with @GovRauner to celebrate Nat’l Apprenticeship Week and demand reforms to grow the economy & create good jobs. - 11/16/16, 2:37 pm

This is embarrassing, Mr. Denzler. lol

You stand with Rauner.

Indeed - Honeybear -, Rauner isn’t wearing any ties for them.

Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, Jan 9, 17 @ 3:18 pm
Lot’s to digest, but all in all a very large salvo has been tossed into the Governor’s lap. His reaction, inclusive of after-the-bill-passed amendatory veto’s will seal his position on campaign posters to come.

Some of this will be litigated, but now the Governor has to present his positions…no more hiding behind excuses. Time to put up, or…

Comment by Captain Illini Monday, Jan 9, 17 @ 3:20 pm
Whoa! Honey! Let’s not lump the big boys with us small entrepreneurs. No sense in repeating ones self, but unless causation is tackled…..

Comment by blue dog dem Monday, Jan 9, 17 @ 3:23 pm
Yes let’s continue to pile on Illinois manufacturers. Both the right and the left agree Illinois manufacturers are hurting and so are the middle class workers they employ.

http://www.progressillinois.com/posts/content/2014/12/19/manufacturing-wages-decline-experts-say

https://www.illinoispolicy.org/manufacturing/

Comment by Lucky Pierre Monday, Jan 9, 17 @ 3:27 pm
Colorado charges 10% sales tax on marijuana for recreation use. Cook County’s penny-per-ounce soda tax will run 50-60% of purchase price. Just how dangerous is your Dr. Pepper?

Comment by City Zen Monday, Jan 9, 17 @ 3:28 pm
- Lucky Pierre -

lol, wait till Rauner signs on to this.

Your reaction will be priceless.

Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, Jan 9, 17 @ 3:29 pm
@ diet pop

Diet products (diet coke, diet pepsi, coke zero, etc.) are exempt from the tax. It is only a tax on drinks that contain sugar as an ingredient.

Comment by BK Bro Monday, Jan 9, 17 @ 3:29 pm
Unless you wholesale eliminate workers, the IMA won’t be happy.

Comment by Precinct Captain Monday, Jan 9, 17 @ 3:30 pm
Are not the merchants going to cry how much it is going to cost them to keep track of sales?

Comment by diet pop Monday, Jan 9, 17 @ 3:33 pm
Blue dog. I’m all about mainstreet not Wall Street. I’m about local folks like you. I would say that the ima is not doing the local folks any favors. Ima doesn’t wear ties for you. Just my opinion. But there again I honestly don’t know. It just what I perceive in the interest of fair disclosure. I still think fault lies more with insurance companies.

Comment by Honeybear Monday, Jan 9, 17 @ 3:36 pm
And now will the stooges at ILGOP and IPies launch their attacks on Baiser and IMA etc.????

Comment by Annonin' Monday, Jan 9, 17 @ 3:37 pm
Honeybear

AFSCME and IMA Seem to have the same draft and outline when it comes to press releases describing their current situation and both overwhelmingly supportered the current Governor! Two more years or six years

Comment by Almost the Weekend Monday, Jan 9, 17 @ 3:42 pm
OW. I’m right there too. Lucky Pierre and Deft Wing will be apoplectic when their anti-Madigan hero forces his Raunerites to vote yes on all the items and then he signs the bills. Otherwise his state of the state and budget messages can be written on the back of a postage stamp.

Comment by don the legend Monday, Jan 9, 17 @ 3:43 pm
The fault lies with the over 300 insurance companies who you accuse of colluding on prices? Pretty serious charge with zero evidence.

The States Attorney or US Attorney would have quite a career maker on their hands if a scurrilous charge like that had an ounce of truth to it.

The rise of Trump can be traced in some measure to the hostility of democrats to blue collar, middle class workers employed by industries like manufacturing.

Comment by Lucky Pierre Monday, Jan 9, 17 @ 3:44 pm
BK Bro - Monday, Jan 9, 17 @ 3:29 pm:@ diet pop
Diet products (diet coke, diet pepsi, coke zero, etc.) are exempt from the tax. It is only a tax on drinks that contain sugar as an ingredient.

I doubt that that is true for a couple of reasons. 1) It would make enforcement of the tax a nightmare and 2) Cook County’s tax applies to every soft drink except for milk, 100 % fruit juice and water.

Comment by TominChicago Monday, Jan 9, 17 @ 3:47 pm
If the intent is to punish unhealthy choices hard to believe diet drinks would be exempt as they are not healthy choice either.

Also, how can they tax soft drinks and not beer, wine and liquor to this degree? Seems like a perverse incentive

Comment by Lucky Pierre Monday, Jan 9, 17 @ 3:56 pm
===…anti-Madigan hero forces his Raunerites to vote yes on all the items and then he signs the bills.===

Same as Rauner has done when it gets to the end.

Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, Jan 9, 17 @ 4:04 pm
- TominChicago -

Just saw that the Cook County one applies to both regular AND diet (artificially flavored) sodas. In Berkley, it only applies to drinks that have actual added sugar. That was supposed to be the purpose of the tax.

I stand corrected if the IL state tax on drinks will include diet sodas. Interesting that a diet soda will be taxed, but a 100% fruit juice drink with tons of sugar will not be taxed.

Comment by BK Bro Monday, Jan 9, 17 @ 4:07 pm
LP - Beer, wine and liquor are already taxed.

Beer 23.1¢/gal.; Wine $1.39/gal.; Spirits $8.55/gal. - 235 ILCS 5/8-1

Comment by illini97 Monday, Jan 9, 17 @ 4:21 pm
of course they are but not a penny an ounce!

Comment by Lucky Pierre Monday, Jan 9, 17 @ 4:22 pm
–If the intent is to punish unhealthy choices hard to believe diet drinks would be exempt as they are not healthy choice either.–

I will not chase this rabbit hole further than this, but curiosity forced my hand to ask: Could you elaborate?

Comment by Threepwood Monday, Jan 9, 17 @ 4:24 pm
They should have included clarification to the law to allow the construction of the Rock Island Clean Line power line project, to bring in cheap Iowa wind power. That would allow Illinois manufacturers to save a substantial amount on their power bills. COMED has it tied up in court and is trying to kill the project. Rauner could have had it included in that COMED law he signed recently, but he was too busy campaigning to be bothered.

Comment by DuPage Monday, Jan 9, 17 @ 4:31 pm
@ Threepwood

Rabbit hole opened. Solid argument can be made that the diet coke is actually a healthier choice vs. a 100% orange juice. The artificial sweetener in the diet coke will not add significant calories, nor will it spike glucose levels. The orange juice absolutely will.

The tax that cook county imposes seems to be a sales tax that simply exempts milk, 100% juice, and water. For them to advertise that it’s for “health reasons” is misleading. It’s for revenue reasons.

Comment by BK Bro Monday, Jan 9, 17 @ 4:42 pm
I feel all junk food (the kind of stuff sold in gas stations), not just sugary soda pop should be taxed.

Comment by MAMA Monday, Jan 9, 17 @ 4:46 pm
**of course they are but not a penny an ounce!**

You’re right on beer, but…
Wine: 1.08 pennies/ounce
Spirits: 6.7 pennies/ounce

Comment by JoeMaddon Monday, Jan 9, 17 @ 4:47 pm
Why are they complaining? We all know they will just pass the extra cost onto the consumers.

Comment by MAMA Monday, Jan 9, 17 @ 4:48 pm
Keep writing press releases Greg. The Daily News in Effingham needs an editorial.

Comment by Anonymous Monday, Jan 9, 17 @ 4:51 pm
I guess we should be more like Indiana by offering tax incentives so manufacturers can automate more jobs… table scraps… We’re arguing about table scraps.

Comment by Triple fat Monday, Jan 9, 17 @ 4:57 pm
Diet drinks are as bad or worse than the sugary drinks. Both will raise one’s glycemic index and cause people to gain weight. The chemicals in the diet drinks are poison.

They should both be subject to the tax….

Comment by JDuc Monday, Jan 9, 17 @ 5:00 pm
@ JDuc

I’d be interested to see your source on a controlled study where diet soda “poison” raised someones glucose levels.

Not saying diet soda is the answer, just pointing out that the so-called health-minded tax really isn’t based on reality or science. It’s based on encouraging people to support the tax by leading them to believe that it’s “for the kids.”

Comment by BK Bro Monday, Jan 9, 17 @ 5:08 pm
If soda is so bad for you, why do the Feds cover it under SNAP benefits?

https://www.fns.usda.gov/snap/eligible-food-items

Comment by City Zen Monday, Jan 9, 17 @ 5:23 pm
How about we add a tax to everyone who cannot prove they had a gym membership during the year? And another for those who didn’t work out 4 times a week. Shouldn’t there also be a higher tax on beef? Cheese, too.

Comment by Anony Monday, Jan 9, 17 @ 6:02 pm
How do I know when an idea is realistic? Greg Baise sarcastically disses it.

Sorry Greg, I don’t take seriously people that lose elections to Pat Quinn. /s

Comment by Ducky LaMoore Monday, Jan 9, 17 @ 7:41 pm
== Diet products (diet coke, diet pepsi, coke zero, etc.) are exempt from the tax. It is only a tax on drinks that contain sugar as an ingredient. ==

So how will you enforce this at Mc’Ds where you could order a diet and then fill your cups with regular? Will they have to move the sugar drinks back behind the counter and check you receipt before you get a refill? Will they have to tax you on your free refills? Who knew regular Coke with sugar would become a controlled substance?

Comment by RNUG Monday, Jan 9, 17 @ 8:57 pm
So beer is taxed at 23 cents a gallon and Diet Coke will be at $1.24? A diet soda is five times a greater health risk than a beer?

Comment by up2now Monday, Jan 9, 17 @ 10:32 pm
1) I think Rauner and the GOP are gonna have a hard time explaining why we had to wait two years to lower the income tax from 5% to 4.95%;

2) the bill has almost everything in it, which means the real story is what is NOT in it. The big stuff that is off the table? Redistricting and the Millionaire tax.

Comment by Juvenal Monday, Jan 9, 17 @ 10:52 pm