Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: What an improved credit rating could mean for Illinois
Next Post: *** UPDATED x2 - “A purely honorary role” *** Spinning ahead of today’s FEC hearing
Posted in:
* Treasurer Mike Frerichs was on his home turf in Champaign yesterday to talk about grants to small not-for-profits. But he got some off-topic questions as well…
Frerichs says more can be done to strengthen state government’s fiscal health, but it will have to be done without a graduated state income tax, which Illinois voters rejected in a state constitutional amendment referendum in the November 2020 election.
“I think the voters had a chance to weigh in,” said Frerichs. “They weighed in. I think it’s now the job of the General Assembly and the governor to make sure they’re passing balanced budgets, that they’re paying down our deficits, and keeping Illinois on a path of financial security.”
Frerichs sidestepped a question about the role of federal stimulus funding in shoring up the state budget. He also said a tax on retirement income is not needed, and downplayed a suggestion he made last year about how it would be politically easier to enact taxes on retirement income, if voters approved a graduated state income tax.
“I think, comments I made were taken out of context,” said Frerichs, who adds that he has not decided yet if he will seek a third term as state treasurer in 2022. “I think the General Assembly needs to focus on passing balanced budgets. I don’t think we need to tax retirement income.”
My headline last June was “Frerichs steps on third rail.” He shoulda known better. And, by the way, I would be shocked if he doesn’t run again.
posted by Rich Miller
Thursday, Jul 15, 21 @ 3:59 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: What an improved credit rating could mean for Illinois
Next Post: *** UPDATED x2 - “A purely honorary role” *** Spinning ahead of today’s FEC hearing
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
I wanted to revisit my comment on the post Rich had last June;
=== - Oswego Willy - Thursday, Jun 18, 20 @ 10:17 am
Ok, to the post,
…
Let’s look at this;
=== “One thing a progressive tax would do is make clear you can have graduated rates when you are taxing retirement income,” he said. “And, I think that’s something that’s worth discussion.”===
Why would a rational thought to the progressive income tax lead him to this thought with that audience… or *any* audience in this state, given how property taxes are, given how the flat tax is framed as unfair, and given the one saving grace for seniors is that pension aspect of taxing.
Again, he’s tall, so there’s that.
If Mr. Frerichs sides with IPI, fine. Like it or not, IPI will side with Mr. Frerichs, can’t walk away from his own words.
The thing about being so self promoting, making things about yourself makes your gaffes about you too.
The saving grace for Mr. Frerichs is he’s tall, so when those ads with his words come out he can “stand tall” above all the unhelpful words that will be pushed.===
There’s NO mistaking what Mike Frerichs thinks to the “Frerichs’ Tax”, taxing retirement income. Mike Frerichs wants a discussion to it, and trusting Mike Frerichs, how can any senior trust him… I mean, if you couldn’t trust the Fair Tax, you can’t trust Mike Frerichs.
A moderate, well-funded Republican *could* make a whole campaign about the Frerichs Tax, and how dangerous Mike Frerichs is for Illinois seniors. Frerichs own words scared folks from the Fair Tax… and more importantly…
… remember Mike Frerichs was gonna have that Dan Rutherford type implosion press conference… “explaining” the Frerichs Tax… at least he canceled it, it would’ve been an utter disaster… but by canceling, it’s quite clear… Mike Frerichs has nothing to defend his want of a discussion to… the Frerichs Tax.
Mike Frerichs was a mitigating factor to the defeat of the Fair Tax, that is just a fact, because a whole television ad and narrative revolved around… the Frerichs Tax.
We’ll see if a Republican can capture that kind of real danger to seniors that the Frerichs Tax is in a campaign. We’ll see. But Mike Frerichs stepped on that third rail, helped derail the Fair Tax… and while tall… it’s not a stretch to say…
Mike Frerichs stands tall to a Frerichs Tax, taxing retirement income;
“One thing a progressive tax would do is make clear you can have graduated rates when you are taxing retirement income,” he said. “And, I think that’s something that’s worth discussion.”
We can discuss the Frerichs Tax… now that Frerichs helped defeat the Fair Tax already.
Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Jul 15, 21 @ 6:15 am
Frerichs is probably the weakest statewide incumbent. Right now, that probably doesn’t mean much. But if the environment changes, he could find trouble.
Comment by Arsenal Thursday, Jul 15, 21 @ 6:57 am
I am so sick of this “taken out of context” garbage.
If you don’t have the backbone to admit you made a mistake, like most were taught as a child, you have no business in elected office.
Comment by Flyin' Elvis'-Utah Chapter Thursday, Jul 15, 21 @ 7:11 am
What mistake did he make?
Comment by Blue Dog Thursday, Jul 15, 21 @ 7:36 am
“What mistake did he make?”
Apparently he believes he did because he’s backpeddling now with that “taken out of context” garbage.
Troll elsewhere. I ain’t the one.
Comment by Flyin' Elvis'-Utah Chapter Thursday, Jul 15, 21 @ 7:45 am
Frerichs was certainly helpful in defeating the tax.
Comment by Downstate Thursday, Jul 15, 21 @ 8:37 am
“What mistake did he make?”
He spoke the obvious truth that people don’t want to hear. You breathe a word about thinking retirees that make 75k or 100k (pick a number, whatever) should probably be paying taxes and all the idiots in the state will scream that you want to throw little old ladies out on the street, because we aren’t a serious people in any way, shape, or form. Income is income, and if I hear one more time about how hard “fixed incomes” are I’ll scream. As if I can snap my fingers and get a raise whenever I want one. The problem with retirees’ pensions or Social Security isn’t that it’s “fixed”, it’s that it’s too little. They’re poor. So treat them the same as you treat the rest of the poor, give the tax credits and whatnot. Or like I suggested earlier, treat them BETTER if you want, just don’t give them a free ride.
Comment by Perrid Thursday, Jul 15, 21 @ 8:38 am
Certainly the Frerichs mistake was very bad (opponents pounce on these), as was the slowness of the Fair Tax campaign (would we spend millions for that performance?). However, voters were also responsible. They were told repeatedly via ads, ad nauseam, that their taxes would be cut and no retirement tax, but they chose to not believe it. Now they’re paying the same higher state income and property taxes.
It’s hard to have sympathy for this fate. It’s comical in a way, people fearing a nonexistent retirement income tax and giving more of their money to Springfield politicians under the Fair Tax are paying more right now. Certain folks might want to put a think on before complaining about high taxes.
Comment by Grandson of Man Thursday, Jul 15, 21 @ 9:09 am
“…steps on 3rd rail… I would be shocked if he doesn’t run again”
Love it.
Comment by Stu Thursday, Jul 15, 21 @ 9:10 am
From the 2019 Simon poll 59% supported taxing retirement income over $100K.
Lot of tall people in Illinois apparently
Denying the certainty of the bait and switch and blaming this trial ballon of taxing wealthy retirees for the failure is comical.
Voters didn’t trust Springfield to not raise middle class brackets higher if the flat tax was repealed
Comment by Lucky Pierre Thursday, Jul 15, 21 @ 9:20 am
=== were taken out of context ===
Puh-lease, Mike. You messed up. Big. You showed profound lack of message discipline - handing IPI and their ilk a window to more easily pound your fellow Democrats attempting to win passage of the fair tax.
Past time to own it, big guy.
Comment by Bud's Bar Stool Thursday, Jul 15, 21 @ 9:35 am
=It’s hard to have sympathy for this fate. It’s comical in a way, people fearing a nonexistent retirement income tax and giving more of their money to Springfield politicians under the Fair Tax are paying more right now.=
Your comment made me chuckle a little because it is so completely spot on. Those folks who howl the most about taxes being too high were the ones leading the charge against the Fair Tax and now they have…wait for it…higher taxes than they would have under the Fair Tax.
Nothing like carrying the flag for a billionaire who’s life wouldn’t change if he lost a billion dollars.
Comment by JS Mill Thursday, Jul 15, 21 @ 9:53 am
(Sigh)
=== From the 2019 Simon poll 59% supported taxing retirement income over $100K.
Lot of tall people in Illinois apparently===
This is a yes or no, - Lucky Pierre -… do you support taxing retirement income.
Keep in mind, you write a great deal about the Fair Tax, so I’m sure I can help you if you’re confused.
Also, find a governor willing to back taxing retirement income, you think the Raunerites are gonna run on… taxing retirement income. If memory serves, being against taxing retirement income was a staple in 2020 election talking points.
So… you with the 59%… yes or no.
=== Denying the certainty of the bait and switch and blaming this trial ballon of taxing wealthy retirees for the failure is comical.===
… and yet, in your dishonesty here, there were TV ads, radio ads, pointing directly and specifically to not only Frerichs, but his embracing IPI’s trap of ignorance. I can cite the ads if you’d like.
===Voters didn’t trust Springfield to not raise middle class brackets higher if the flat tax was repealed===
Keep up, please…
=== === “One thing a progressive tax would do is make clear you can have graduated rates when you are taxing retirement income,” he said.===
So voters will trust the brackets not being raised for retirement income… magically?
You go think on all this… I’m sure your bot talking points are already confused by your initial comment, so take your time.
Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Jul 15, 21 @ 10:07 am
Talking points like Frerichs is tall?
I would support tying the vote on the inevitable future income tax increase or change in flat tax once the Federal spigot turns off to pension reform for future earnings of government workers.
Another reasonable and moderate position opposed by the government union special interest groups
For Cook County property tax payers, check Maria Pappas Cook County Treasurers website to see how much your property is potentially on the hook for to pay for what they have borrowed and promised.
Comment by Lucky Pierre Thursday, Jul 15, 21 @ 10:18 am
=== Talking points like Frerichs is tall?===
That’s a mocking of a foolish bliss that Frerichs thinks makes him relatable as he wants discussions on taxing retirement income.
=== I would support tying the vote on the inevitable future income tax increase or change in flat tax once the Federal spigot turns off to pension reform for future earnings of government workers.===
The polling was a yes or no.
I’ll put you down as a no.
The gibberish, and let’s count the bot words..
“Federal spigot”, “turns off” , “pension reform”, “government workers.”
Looks like I broke the super computer, lol
You don’t support taxing retirement income. Thanks.
Question…
=== For Cook County property tax payers, check Maria Pappas Cook County Treasurers website to see how much your property is potentially on the hook for to pay for what they have borrowed and promised.===
Did I break the super computer so badly your default got thrown back to… Maria Pappas?
If you’d like, next time I’ll point out where you agree on the bad taxing retirement income.
Up to you.
Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Jul 15, 21 @ 10:28 am
“But he got some off-topic questions as well…”
He is a public official, the question is related to statements he made in his official capacity. I get it that he wanted to talk about grants but the question was totally fair game.
Comment by Donnie Elgin Thursday, Jul 15, 21 @ 10:29 am
No one but you cares about one citizen’s opinion on taxing retirement income for wealthy retirees.
Even Speaker Welch in February said he would welcome a conversation about tying the two.
He is tall as well and also muscular.
The 59% from the Simon polled clearly support.
Try mocking a clear majority and the Speaker with your bot foolishness defense of protecting your sacred cows
Comment by Lucky Pierre Thursday, Jul 15, 21 @ 10:46 am
=== No one but you cares===
Your phony hypocrisy is fodder to your bot talking points.
If you’d like to double down…
=== The 59% from the Simon polled clearly support.===
Why won’t Raunerites write a bill to tax retirement income?
You should lead it.
That’s right, you’re against… taxing retirement income.
=== Try mocking a clear majority and the Speaker with your bot foolishness defense of protecting your sacred cows===
Glad to see you got the Ad-Libs machine working again. Good for you.
You oppose taxing retirement income, embrace it.
Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Jul 15, 21 @ 11:33 am
“The 59% from the Simon polled clearly support.”
More than 70% supported the Fair Tax before the campaign. So not exactly compelling numbers there. I want to tax wealthy retirees and think it’s necessary but the position is politically toxic at the moment. I wish is wasn’t but it is what it is.
Comment by Chicago Cynic Thursday, Jul 15, 21 @ 11:41 am
I used to say if you want to see the least needy group of seniors, just stand at the train station and watch the folks from Lake Forest, Winnetka etc. get off the North Line train. I am not sure they are riding the train anymore. But as for retirement income perhaps you recall when Mitch Romney was called out for having put private equity in an IRA so that when he ran for president I had about $100 million in his IRA. I am sure that there are a whole bunch of wealthy Illinois seniors who have done the same. We would probably recognize their names.
It’s taxable federally, it would be taxable in Illinois. Just pick the appropriate level and do it.
Comment by Banish Misfortune Thursday, Jul 15, 21 @ 11:43 am
===The 59% from the Simon polled clearly support===
lol
You can poll nuance, but you can’t really campaign on it. Look what Pritzker did to Biss and Kennedy when they came out for a graduated tax on retirement income.
Comment by Rich Miller Thursday, Jul 15, 21 @ 11:43 am
==and now they have…wait for it…higher taxes than they would have under the Fair Tax.==
Funny how that child tax credit and larger property tax credit just vanished, even though neither requires a constitutional amendment.
Comment by City Zen Thursday, Jul 15, 21 @ 11:47 am
===It’s taxable federally, it would be taxable in Illinois. Just pick the appropriate level and do it.===
Politically untenable.
What members of the GA would support it? What governor?
Sure Frerichs wants the Frerichs Tax, but will he campaign on it?
He won’t.
IPI caught him napping. It’s going to follow him in 2022
Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Jul 15, 21 @ 11:47 am
==You breathe a word about thinking retirees==
Heck, we tried to have big earners (>250K annually) pay a little more and look what happened. Heaven forbid Ken Griffin or Bruce Rauner have one less vacation home.
Comment by Jocko Thursday, Jul 15, 21 @ 12:36 pm
==Another reasonable and moderate position==
It’s neither reasonable nor moderate to the people who you are trying to take pensions away from - which has been the number one goal of people like you. It’s not reform you want - it’s stealing.
==What mistake did he make?==
The King of Ignorance strikes again.
Comment by Demoralized Thursday, Jul 15, 21 @ 1:00 pm
Ignorance is denying pensions,at some level, shoukd be taxed.
Comment by Blue Dog Thursday, Jul 15, 21 @ 1:07 pm
===Ignorance is denying pensions,at some level, shoukd be taxed.===
… says the guy who was opposed to the Fair Tax?
…and you pretend you’re confused to boot?
“Sure, Jan”
Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Jul 15, 21 @ 1:09 pm
==pensions,at some level, should be taxed==
That’s right up there with “Pritzker’s executive order violated “my constitutional right to work, to travel, to exist.”
Comment by Jocko Thursday, Jul 15, 21 @ 1:22 pm
==Ignorance is denying pensions,at some level, shoukd be taxed.==
No, ignorance is someone who is so clueless as to the politics of it to realize that taxing retirement isn’t gonna happen.
Comment by Demoralized Thursday, Jul 15, 21 @ 1:23 pm
We can thank kindly Uncle Joe for that child tax credit, which will benefit millions of low income/middle class people. Who did not vote for that? But per one sub-topic of this discussion, the vast majority of Illinoisans would have got state income/property tax cuts under the Fair Tax (has nothing to do with federal taxes).
In agreement with those who slam Frerichs and Fair Tax campaign for their mistakes and failures, but voters were bombarded with pro-Fair Tax ads, including challenging the retirement income lie, and chose otherwise. They are ultimately responsible for their current higher taxes (elections have consequences).
Comment by Grandson of Man Thursday, Jul 15, 21 @ 1:26 pm
==Even Speaker Welch in February said he would welcome a conversation about tying the two.==
Has ILGOP’s taken a stance on this? Has IPI endorsed it? Do you support it?
You constantly mention all the Democrats who have tried (and failed) to solve this problem. As much as their failure is good fodder, at least they tried SOMETHING. They provided a plan that allowed us to raise the money needed to pay down pensions and provide some property tax relief.
What is the other side’s solution? I still haven’t seen a Republican proposal to handle the pension problem. Rauner must keep it in the cabinet with the GOP’s Obamacare replacement.
Comment by supplied_demand Thursday, Jul 15, 21 @ 2:08 pm
This whole “Frerichs’ Tax” thing is such an inside baseball issue. I bet you cannot find one person in Illinois (no, I’m not being literal here) who is not a reader of Cap Fax who has any idea what this is about. The way OW constantly harps on it feels like he is the campaign manager for Frerichs’ opponent. (Although he is spot on with his comments about the advantages of being tall) With respect.
Comment by filmmaker prof Thursday, Jul 15, 21 @ 2:13 pm
===such an inside baseball issue===
It was used extensively in TV ads last year.
Comment by Rich Miller Thursday, Jul 15, 21 @ 2:17 pm
=== This whole “Frerichs’ Tax” thing is such an inside baseball issue.===
But it’s not, actually, considering the ads against the Fair Tax.
Just insert Frerich’s name, the damage could be the same… for Frerichs.
=== (no, I’m not being literal here)===
So you’re using hyperbole?
=== The way … constantly harps on it feels like he is the campaign manager for Frerichs’ opponent.===
If I said this once…
Any credible and functioning campaign that exists would never, in any thought, consider me in any way. Aren’t you all but saying I’m a gadfly of inside baseball silly?
I bring nothing to a campaign. Thinking that way is a campaign that’s not serious about winning.
Ignoring what will be (should be) a seriously big target on Frerichs that could be used as proficiently as it was used against the Fair Tax would be a foolish thing.
It’s all good. Odds are you’re the only one reading my stuff anyway. Be well.
Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Jul 15, 21 @ 2:20 pm
We’ll probably have to bite the bullet and tax it eventually.
But until that day, and until there’s a political reality severe enough to require it, he would have been smart to stay well away.
Comment by Nick Thursday, Jul 15, 21 @ 2:26 pm
It’s unfathomable to me that there isn’t a genuine push to tax retirement income. This should be easy, low hanging fruit to help the state’s fiscal outlook for the future.
I recognize the politics of this, but what prevents a thoughtful compromise like only taxing retirement income for those whose primary residence is outside of Illinois? Let’s face it, those retirees in Florida and Arizona are not contributing a thing to Illinois, and in fact are just sucking us dry. Something like this would incentivize people to stay here (remaining contributors to our state), while also generating income for those who choose to flee.
Comment by Matty Thursday, Jul 15, 21 @ 2:35 pm
===a thoughtful compromise like only taxing retirement income for those whose primary residence is outside of Illinois?===
I don’t think you can do that.
Comment by Rich Miller Thursday, Jul 15, 21 @ 2:36 pm
===Let’s face it, those retirees in Florida and Arizona are not contributing a thing to Illinois, and in fact are just sucking us dry.===
So… hold them hostage, get a pension, required to stay in Illinois, or… try to make it you pay taxes back to a state you no longer live?
It’s sounds as odd as it looks typed.
It’d be like the reverse… taxing “second homes” 2 to 3 times higher than in-state residents, but you want to tax folks with no tethering to Illinois… because they earned a pension here?
Hmm.
Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Jul 15, 21 @ 2:42 pm
Taxing pension income is the fair thing to do. I have a small union pension. It should be taxed just like the person whose only retirement income is generated from farm or rental property income.
Comment by Blue Dog Thursday, Jul 15, 21 @ 3:31 pm
Is anyone out there exploring a run for treasurer? Seems odd no names have been floated.
Comment by Anonymous Thursday, Jul 15, 21 @ 3:58 pm
==We can thank kindly Uncle Joe for that child tax credit==
At the federal level, not state. No constitutional amendment required. What are they waiting for?
==the vast majority of Illinoisans would have got state income/property tax cuts under the Fair Tax ==
Property tax credit can be increased anytime. No constitutional amendment required. What are they waiting for?
Comment by City Zen Thursday, Jul 15, 21 @ 4:14 pm
City Zen - you know that the money for the property tax credit was to come from the revenue gained by approving the fair tax. So why are you acting surprised that after the fair tax did not pass we also did not get the credit?
Comment by Advocate Thursday, Jul 15, 21 @ 5:55 pm
I am not sure if anyone really understands the point Frerichs was making. He did not say that the so-called Fair Tax Amendment would have made it possible to tax retirement income. That was already allowed. What he said was the passage of the amendment would make it possible to tax retirement income in a graduated manner such as only taxing retirement income above $100,000.
This may have been poor politics given that it was misunderstood and used against him, but it is a legitimate point.
Comment by Devil His Due Thursday, Jul 15, 21 @ 10:20 pm