Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: “What I said is 3% compounded annually is a tough climb”
Next Post: Question of the day
Posted in:
* This might possibly help the prospects of a trailer bill during veto. But lowering taxes on the Chicago operator will mean less money for the state and/or the city. The state needs that dough for vertical infrastructure projects and the city needs it for police and fire pensions. And as far as I can tell, there’s no agreement yet about how to do it or even if they will do it. Some folks in high places say Lightfoot should just put the casino license out to bid as-is to see if she gets any takers before fiddling with the tax structure. But the clock is ticking and veto session is approaching fast…
Illinois Gaming Board keeps its poker face, passing resolution asking lawmakers to modify gaming bill in response to Las Vegas feasibility report that portayed Chicago casino tax structure as a losing hand. Motion passed with no debate. @mitchtrout is there.
— Scott Fornek (@sfornek) September 16, 2019
No specific recommendations on that tax structure — they just say it needs modifying.
— Mitchell Armentrout (@mitchtrout) September 16, 2019
posted by Rich Miller
Monday, Sep 16, 19 @ 2:59 pm
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: “What I said is 3% compounded annually is a tough climb”
Next Post: Question of the day
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
Maybe a casino co-owned by Chicago and the state, with a gaming company hired to run the place? The city and state would assume more risk and have to front money to build the place, but would keep all the profits.
Comment by Telly Monday, Sep 16, 19 @ 3:05 pm
I doubt the State is changing their tax rate. They can eliminate the City’s extra tax and let her go cut a deal with a developer
Comment by Wow Monday, Sep 16, 19 @ 3:05 pm
When did the Gaming Board become an advocacy group? Are they registered as lobbyists?
Comment by Michelle Flaherty Monday, Sep 16, 19 @ 3:24 pm
===When did the Gaming Board become an advocacy group?===
Not certain here, but I think the new law requires this step after the consultant issued its analysis.
Comment by Rich Miller Monday, Sep 16, 19 @ 3:28 pm
Ok well good luck. Politically this should go over well.
Property taxes going through the roof, income taxes about to be changed, new gas tax and other fees but we want to help business so let’s cut the taxes of a casino owner?
Comment by Frank talks Monday, Sep 16, 19 @ 4:47 pm
How likely other parties will want less taxes too…sounds like song sung before…remember melody of Movin’ to Rosemont?
Comment by Annonin' Monday, Sep 16, 19 @ 4:48 pm