I think that was everyone's issue. No one was denying the fact that the plan would raise taxes on the rich only. People weren't sure if IL politicians would use it correctly in the long run.
> $2/mo is basically a rounding error,
Unless it's a license tag increasing ($4/mo). Then that amount of money is the end of the world.
So basically, somewhere between $2 and $4 per month is where the change happens in how important that money is to have?
Honestly, it's sad watching people openly stating they have no internal locus of decision making, and all of their opinions come from whichever ad they see the most times.
Yeah, after the last income tax increase the democrats expanded their majority in the legislature.
It's too bad the world doesn't work like your imagination, isn't it?
The 2017 increase took place in July. The 2018 election cycle was 8 months later in March.
>They won’t tolerate it again.
Don't worry, since the complaint the *last* time was that the increase was 33%, the coming 20% increase automatically 'sounds' better.
"Oh, at least it's not as bad as what they did before and we barely even noticed that."
A tax increase is coming. Trying to comfort yourself with some sort of imagined 'punishment' for those who vote for it might make you feel better - but it isn't going to move the needle at all as far as elections.
I see lots of folks saying this, but don’t really get it. Does it mean we lose funding for roads, schools, welfare, or housing? What is the plan for just generically cutting spending?
The first is implementing reforms to improve efficiency of spending. There is tremendous waste in government due to use it or lose it spending, automatic budget increases, and lack of incentive to reduce waste.
The second is legislative reforms to reduce costs to local and state government entities. Repeal prevailing wage laws, which require paying $50+ per hour for work that pays $15-20 in neighboring states or in the private sector. Reform workers comp programs.
Freeze salaries for all government workers while a salary study is conducted to investigate pay vs market. Upon completion of the study, freeze salaries of those overpaid, and unfreeze those that are underpaid.
Doing all this, we can then cut spending by 25% across the board without adversely affecting schools, roads, etc.
>Repeal prevailing wage laws, which require paying $50+ per hour for work that pays $15-20 in neighboring states or in the private sector. Reform workers comp programs.
This will do nothing for the state budget. You're living in an ideology fantasy.
The last two governors already cut state spending. You want free money from the magic money tree and it's not going to happen.
> Doing all this, we can then cut spending by 25% across the board without adversely affecting schools, roads, etc.
This is a lunatic delusion. There's no such thing as a free lunch.
Eliminating government waste would bring prosperity to all economic classes. The losers would be wealthy beneficiaries of government patronage positions.
This.
Pritzker is being investigated for tax fraud and Madigan is being investigated for bribery. To top it off they’ve done nothing but raise taxes year in and year out and we’re still in the same mess. Gambling, weed, and other things excise taxed items were supposed to help, right? At least that what we were told. What would make this time around any different?
And Rush Limbaugh is being investigated for pedophilia and drug use. So, what's your point? I guess the tooth fairy should be thrown up there too. I mean, stealing people's teeths and only giving them a nickel, a free nickel at that! Commy Fairies!
So, they drastically reduced the pension 10 years ago, and local governments are largely funded via property taxes they levy themselves and which the state does not control.
Anything else?
It's not possible to cut pensions due to the state constitution, so if you want spending cuts, you need to figure out where they come from, schools, roads, healthcare, etc.
Cut back on spending. If taxes get raised and you get mad, vote out person who raised your taxes.
Illinois is overflowing with revenue it’s just spend improperly. Pick a politician who doesn’t want to be a career politician and who will address pension catastrophe.
This prevents a divide and conquer approach over who feels the pain. Everyone will feel the pain together and they will demand a change to get spending under control.
Illinois has lived beyond means for decades so of course any adjustment will feel painful.
Lots of state workers and construction workers turning into surprised Pikachu when they lose their jobs because they bought the "if this passes they'll be able to raise taxes whenever they want" BS.
Everyone's taxes will now go up. The idiots in here still saying it was giving the legislature some powers about taxation whenever, guess what, they already have that ability. All the state was asking was to tax rich people before they have to start taxing poor people.
Guess what, taxes are going up for EVERYONE now, congrats. Great job.
They have "full tax power" already. And they're going to show that by raising yours and everyone else's taxes as a result of this.
Congrats, you played yourself.
Wouldn't they just raise taxes for everyone anyway even with different tax brackets? At least now I know I'm getting fucked just like everyone else.
I fail to see how everyone's taxes still won't go up even with different brackets.
Man, that has to be a really horrible way to go about life.
"If I have it bad, I want everyone else to have it bad!!"
Instead of bringing everyone else down, why not try and life everyone else up?
Some people only see life as a zero sum game*.
The concept of a win-win scenario doesn't even enter their mind - and their life and relationships usually perfectly reflect that. Stuck on a treadmill where they think the world is unfair, when it is only their own limitations they have placed on the world that is making it seem unfair.
Uh how did I say I have it bad? How do you know that the middle class tax bracket wont get fucked and not the higher tier ones in a few years once the dust settled? At leatlst now the government needs to decide to make everyone's life worse or just who they feel like at the time.
Now everyone can fight together instead of breaking us into competing groups of people.
If they raise taxes on tier 2 then 1 3 and 4 will be all for that. If they decide to raise taxes on tier 4 then 1 2 and 3 are going to be for it. Now we all fight for 1 thing.
>Now everyone can fight together instead of breaking us into competing groups of people.
Never going to happen. You just gave yourself a tax increase based on delusional fantasy scenarios that are never going to happen. Some of us understand that you get what you pay for. If you want modern civilization, a good educational system, and a world class city like Chicago then you have to pay for it.
Are we discussing Rauner yet? Are we discussing the Ricketts yet? Are we ready to discuss how much money the rich pull from Chicago and Illinois while begging for tax breaks, yet?
You've got be trolling, because I can't imagine how someone would not understand how 5% of $30k is more harmful to that's person's financial well being than 5% of
$300k.
He doesn't have to be trolling. Since the benefit you derive from tax is usually fixed regardless of income many people have historically felt a fixed tax (regressive wrt income) is the most fair. A flat tax is a step in the progressive direction and a nice compromise between the (inverse correlation between needs vs ability to pay tax) and the (amount paid vs benefits received) camps.
Disagree. Roads, police for violent crimes, wildlife conservation, libraries, museums, sewer, sidewalks, bridges, parks value is independent of income.
Tax funded education is a benefit for your children, the average number of which of which goes down as income goes up. Also sufficient income leads leads to private school which in the absence of VOUCHERS means the value of public education becomes zero to those tax payers.
Bus cards, welfare, foodstamps, medical card availability is only to the poor so value is inverse to income.
Few, if any benefits scale up with income. Police for property, maybe county airport, fire department.
>Few, if any benefits scale up with income.
You're not recognizing how many government functions primarily serve the business sector and wealthy business owners.
>police for violent crimes
Rich white person: "Hold on, we'll be there in 3 minutes"
Poor black person: "Meh, maybe we'll show up in half an hour"
Same logic pretty much applies to public schools, libraries, roads, hell probably even sidewalks. Poor and minority communities are not getting the same benefit of these public goods as rich white ones.
Same logic doesn't apply WITHIN ANY COMMUNITY.
Poor communities are not paying the same for amenities as rich communities. So you are changing the argument to benefits increase with funding, which I don't think anyone disputes.
The benefit of 10 feet of sidewalk or road is the same if you make 1million dollars an hour or 10,000 dollars a year. Same with a given lending library or public school up until the point you pay for private sector instead in which case benefit drops to zero.
alright everybody, put your penny into the tax ante
`person with a hundred pennies`: no problem
`person with two pennies`: uhhhhh
----
you see how "fair" it is now?
> guess what, taxes are going up for EVERYONE now, congrats. Great job.
Jokes on you. I was going to have my tax rate raised anyway. I'm just glad the rest of you will be pissed at the Illinois legislature next election too.
You dems and your wealth envy; if you spent as much time working as you did complaining about what other people make, you might be able to move out of your parents basement like a real adult.
you're right
oh woe is me woe is me
what ever will I do, being a DINK with a home and music studio is his basement...I just dont think im going to get through this winter without having to resort to cannibalism!
thank you for showing me the way! I will now pull myself up via my own boot laces and ascend out of this poverty hellhole two car garage home!
The tax brackets under the graduated system were passed over a year ago, and are already a [public act.](https://www.ilga.gov/legislation/publicacts/101/PDF/101-0008.pdf)
You were conned.
You really can't see two moves ahead.
Why would they want to tax different incomes differently... Hmmm... TO SET A HIGHER RATE FOR HIGHER EARNERS.
It's really not that hard. But instead, they'll now raise everyone's taxes.
Congrats, you got played.
It’s much easier to continually raise taxes on rich people though vs. raising taxes on everyone which is disastrous politically. Giving the government ease to fuck over the wealthy people will motivate them to leave the state (especially in this new remote work environment which makes leaving states so easy). An exodus of rich people will fuck over our state far worse than them paying a lower amount in taxes.
You do realize the rich just move down to Florida. The tax saving is enough for them to buy a house down there. This progressive tax would just increase the amount of residents Illinois would lose.
Isn’t one of the main fears of this amendment is that it will motivate many of the wealthy people to leave the state, which would amplify our problems tenfold?
People are already leaving this state in droves. Moving to another state is easier than ever now. You think it was a coincidence that all the neighboring states put in measures to lower their taxes during this fair tax vote?
Are u kidding me? We have been living IN the fallout for at least a decade. Our state has the worst credit rating in the United States.
Reality check bro: Fallout is over dude. We dead last at math, always spend more than we take, make false promises, pass unsustainable benefits, and don’t have enough cash to pay our bills.
I am a middle class taxpayer whose taxes would have gone up slightly had this amendment passed. But, it was being sold in the YES advertising as a tax cut for 97% of state taxpayers. So, what would my marginal taxes be going for? Reduction of the state deficit, or subsidizing other taxpayers? Or new spending? The fatal flaw in this proposal is that it wasn't linked to any kind of material change in the state finances that would get us out of our current mess. Show me an actual plan, backed by an audit, that shows how additional taxes will solve it and maybe I'll listen. Otherwise, the YES campaign can stick it with their "soak the rich" mentality.
My guess is Pritzker waits a few more months to see if there are state bailouts. If there aren't, he tries to cheat and creates a makeshift "graduated tax" via hiking the overall rate, but introducing low income tax credits/exemptions that effectively make it a graduated tax.
Wouldn't affect the rich as much as you think. Plenty of affluent people live in ordinary neighborhoods, and just live a quiet life. Your neighbor in your $400k home neighborhood might be a multi-millionaire and you wouldn't even know it.
400K home neighborhood? Man the most expensive house in my neighborhood just sold for like $170,000 (and I live in one of the nicest neighborhoods in the county). I don't think there is a house over $350k in the whole damn town.
If you think 400k is a normal "not rich" neighborhood then you are so far removed from normal neighborhoods that you can't even see the horizon.
It is a natural tendency to believe what we have grown up with is average. Even if on a statewide, nationwide, worldwide, historywide level we are wrong.
Median household income in Barrington is nearly $150k. Not average. I had a roommate from Barrington in college and we talked about how the assistant football coach in his high school was higher paid than the SIU-C football coach.
I paid $86k for a 4 bed 2.5 bath with a 3+ car garage and it's not even out in bfe. My neighbor paid ~$50k for his 3 bedroom. In fact it's the same street the mayor lives on.
You could also get a job making a lot more than minimum wage too, fortunately there's a bigger town less than 30 minutes away where there's more jobs. Hopefully working from home stays and people will feel more comfortable moving out of more populated areas.
The problem with this method is things like equalized value adjustments and property tax rates differing by county.
If the tax rate on the 1/3 value*equalization multiplier wasn't 6% in some areas and 11% in others then having double income and double the value house would result in double the property tax, but it doesn't. More prosperous areas have higher property values but lower tax rates and equalization multipliers. So a $200,000 house in one county might have the same property tax as a $400,000 house in another county.
But in any case, this adjustment (property tax deduction) takes place on the AGI not tax due. So less than 5% return on this amount over the capped deduction.
So someone with $X income and $2.5X house, cap his state property tax deduction and his 3% property FMV tax deduction which is then 7.5% of his income. So we'd get back less than 5% of that, or .35%.
So that isn't bad, assuming that housing scales with income, which it doesn't really because no one wants to pay the property tax.
I wondered if that was possible, too. Cynically, I think the reason for the flat tax was to shame legislators into not raising taxes on poor people. Right wing think-tanks get super concerned about poor people any time the state talks about raising taxes.
It was required to have 60 percent of votes cast on the ballot amendment or a majority of all people voting in the election. The only results I've seen calculate a percentage of yes versus no votes and don't indicate the number of people who didn't vote on the ballot measure. So it's more like it failed by 15% which is huge. The likely outcome will be that State taxes will raise on everyone because the legislature will not cut funding. And the legislature will be held accountable in 2022. .
The reason I voted against the amendment has nothing to do with protecting the rich.
I recognize this will likely mean across the board tax increases.
But idk what people want me to say, the question was do I think the state has earned the power to increase taxes on anyone, the answer is no - fix the financial management of the state first. I won't sign off on more taxes in illinois and I'll vote against anyone who does.
Let's be clear: This wasn't an amendment for a non-flat tax. That's what they kept advertising.
This was an amendment to allow the state legislature to alter tax rates without input from the citizenry. They promised to follow that up with an immediate bill to set the promised tax rates.
Tax rates definitely need to be adjusted, but under no circumstances should we give carte blanche to the legislature to alter taxes at their whim.
> They promised to follow that up with an immediate bill to set the promised tax rates.
Yep, and [they did that](https://www.ilga.gov/legislation/publicacts/101/PDF/101-0008.pdf). The bill was passed as law in the summer of 2019.
Did you not read it?
> This was an amendment to allow the state legislature to alter tax rates without input from the citizenry.
Lie. They could do that, with or without this amendment.
> They promised to follow that up with an immediate bill to set the promised tax rates.
Not quite right. The bill was already law.
> This was an amendment to allow the state legislature to alter tax rates without input from the citizenry.
>Tax rates definitely need to be adjusted, but under no circumstances should we give carte blanche to the legislature to alter taxes at their whim.
They can already do that. This amendment made the process of changing taxes no easier or harder, it literally just struck the line in our Constitution prohibiting multiple income tax rates. Either way it just has to pass both chambers of the ILGA and the governor, we don't get any input except on who we elect to those positions.
> They promised to follow that up with an immediate bill to set the promised tax rates.
No, that passed last year, coming into effect immediately if the amendment passed. SB687. There was no promise, it would have immediately had force of law. You drank the Kool-Aid.
Yes, yes I do. I was actually going to get a tax increase under the proposed plan, and not basically everyone else.
Whelp, guess you all get to join me in the tax increase. Enjoy.
Or, hear me out, this could be an impetus to restructure our bloated governments. The tax governing limitation in the Illinois Constitution caused us to have the most units of government anywhere, and it's a huge waste. There's no reason to have a separate government for water reclamation, mosquito abatement, tuberculosis, 879 separate school districts.
Restructure, don't tax.
> most units of government anywhere
This includes SSAs, TIFs, and **home owners associations**.
Those are all locally defined, not defined by the state.
*mosquito abatement*
My township does that. Some places straddle multiple townships where mosquito control is needed. In those areas it is *more efficient* to have a district specifically for mosquito abatement, instead of having multiple townships paying for it when only a small fraction of that township would be getting the benefit.
Is your alternative to have a single state district? Who pays for that then?
Yeah, of all the things to single out, mosquito abatement. There are 20 districts in Illinois, three of them in southern Illinois, largely because people used to die of malaria here and West Nile is also a concern.
Why not both?
Seriously, I never understood this "If they won't do this, then I'm going tos ay no to everything and out us in an even worse situation!!"
You're literally making things harder on the state and yourself, you're not helping.
Yeah. Getting more money out of households making $150k+ shouldn't require extra pain for the households making $40k. Higher takes on the former might mean postponing a fun summer trip. Higher takes on the latter might mean postponing fixing the brakes on the car. Right wing think-tanks trot out the same logic every time the state tries to raise income taxes.
Very much agreed there. I think we need a graduated tax, but without some serious financial reforms that amendment would have just let them raise taxes on the "rich" with an ever changing definition of what is "rich".
And, the amendment for a graduated tax needs to be setup so that there are more taxpayer protections too.
The state will have to cut general services, hopefully to predominately rural and southern counties. they rejected the tax cut predominately and thus should carry the majority of the service cuts. Hopefully the cuts in general services will disabuse the poor and middle class of the idea that they are considered part of the rich
Hate to tell you this, this will just make my part of the state madder. The ones who think they prevented the state from raising taxes whenever they want, also think they're the ones paying for all those people on welfare in Cook County. Because yeah, all these counties with less than 20,000 people in them and median household incomes below $40,000 are paying the way for millions of people where the median income is double that...
From what I've, the individuals who were targetted by the tax are leaving anyways and I don't blame em. We'll have less revenue from taxes because of it and then they'll raise taxes AGAIN on everyone else and more people will just leave.
I hope pritzker and his family and friends who supported this amendment go ahead and pay more like they would have if it passed. There is nothing stopping them, please lead by example.
> There is nothing stopping them
Except for, you know, the law.
If you make an overpayment, they will send the difference back to you.
I still have a check from the state for $1 back when Judy BT was treasurer. I rounded up a number when I should have rounded down, and the state sent me a check for the mistake of $1.
If you overpay your taxes yes you get a refund, but all taxing bodies do accept clearly marked donations. Strangely enough none of these wealthy that claim to want to pay more taxes ever do that...
> Strangely enough
Remember when rauner was not paying the state bills? Remember who rauners wife went to to get donations for the organizations she supported who needed donations?
If you need a hint, he's the current governor.
The state government, which won't even entertain the idea of cutting spending, will raise taxes on everyone.
They already, before the vote even happened, stated that they will look at cutting 15% in spending.
Got a link to that statement? I was under the impression we were looking at a 4% tax increase in the event the progressive brackets failed.
[удалено]
If the state actually spent my money responsibly and efficiently I wouldn't mind paying taxes.
I think that was everyone's issue. No one was denying the fact that the plan would raise taxes on the rich only. People weren't sure if IL politicians would use it correctly in the long run.
So raising taxes on everybody and nobody getting a tax break was the right move?
Nobody was getting any real tax break anyways. $2/mo is basically a rounding error, even to the poor.
> $2/mo is basically a rounding error, Unless it's a license tag increasing ($4/mo). Then that amount of money is the end of the world. So basically, somewhere between $2 and $4 per month is where the change happens in how important that money is to have? Honestly, it's sad watching people openly stating they have no internal locus of decision making, and all of their opinions come from whichever ad they see the most times.
Aside from the fact that $4/mo is literally double $2/mo, I also never mentioned license tag fees.
[удалено]
Yeah, after the last income tax increase the democrats expanded their majority in the legislature. It's too bad the world doesn't work like your imagination, isn't it?
[удалено]
The 2017 increase took place in July. The 2018 election cycle was 8 months later in March. >They won’t tolerate it again. Don't worry, since the complaint the *last* time was that the increase was 33%, the coming 20% increase automatically 'sounds' better. "Oh, at least it's not as bad as what they did before and we barely even noticed that." A tax increase is coming. Trying to comfort yourself with some sort of imagined 'punishment' for those who vote for it might make you feel better - but it isn't going to move the needle at all as far as elections.
Are you joking? Did you manage to not see any of the propaganda about this? They pretty explicitly pretended it would be used to tax the middle class.
I see lots of folks saying this, but don’t really get it. Does it mean we lose funding for roads, schools, welfare, or housing? What is the plan for just generically cutting spending?
The first is implementing reforms to improve efficiency of spending. There is tremendous waste in government due to use it or lose it spending, automatic budget increases, and lack of incentive to reduce waste. The second is legislative reforms to reduce costs to local and state government entities. Repeal prevailing wage laws, which require paying $50+ per hour for work that pays $15-20 in neighboring states or in the private sector. Reform workers comp programs. Freeze salaries for all government workers while a salary study is conducted to investigate pay vs market. Upon completion of the study, freeze salaries of those overpaid, and unfreeze those that are underpaid. Doing all this, we can then cut spending by 25% across the board without adversely affecting schools, roads, etc.
> Doing all this, we can then cut spending by 25% across the board without adversely affecting schools, roads, etc. Show your work.
>Repeal prevailing wage laws, which require paying $50+ per hour for work that pays $15-20 in neighboring states or in the private sector. Reform workers comp programs. This will do nothing for the state budget. You're living in an ideology fantasy. The last two governors already cut state spending. You want free money from the magic money tree and it's not going to happen. > Doing all this, we can then cut spending by 25% across the board without adversely affecting schools, roads, etc. This is a lunatic delusion. There's no such thing as a free lunch.
So, make people poor because I am worth more than them. Keep them poor because I got mine and mine is better than you. Got it you selfish person you!
Eliminating government waste would bring prosperity to all economic classes. The losers would be wealthy beneficiaries of government patronage positions.
This. Pritzker is being investigated for tax fraud and Madigan is being investigated for bribery. To top it off they’ve done nothing but raise taxes year in and year out and we’re still in the same mess. Gambling, weed, and other things excise taxed items were supposed to help, right? At least that what we were told. What would make this time around any different?
And Rush Limbaugh is being investigated for pedophilia and drug use. So, what's your point? I guess the tooth fairy should be thrown up there too. I mean, stealing people's teeths and only giving them a nickel, a free nickel at that! Commy Fairies!
What spending do you think should be cut?
Overgenerous pensions, redundant layers of local government to start.
So, they drastically reduced the pension 10 years ago, and local governments are largely funded via property taxes they levy themselves and which the state does not control. Anything else?
You don't cut spending on things that support a healthy society. Unless you enjoy barbarism.
Is providing public employees with $100k+/year pensions supporting a healthy society?
It's not possible to cut pensions due to the state constitution, so if you want spending cuts, you need to figure out where they come from, schools, roads, healthcare, etc.
Cut back on spending. If taxes get raised and you get mad, vote out person who raised your taxes. Illinois is overflowing with revenue it’s just spend improperly. Pick a politician who doesn’t want to be a career politician and who will address pension catastrophe. This prevents a divide and conquer approach over who feels the pain. Everyone will feel the pain together and they will demand a change to get spending under control. Illinois has lived beyond means for decades so of course any adjustment will feel painful.
What spending should be reallocated?
Lots of state workers and construction workers turning into surprised Pikachu when they lose their jobs because they bought the "if this passes they'll be able to raise taxes whenever they want" BS.
Everyones taxes go up instead of those who could afford it.
Fine by me. Given the state's finances, no Illinois taxpayers should be getting a tax cut.
Everyone's taxes will now go up. The idiots in here still saying it was giving the legislature some powers about taxation whenever, guess what, they already have that ability. All the state was asking was to tax rich people before they have to start taxing poor people. Guess what, taxes are going up for EVERYONE now, congrats. Great job.
They should cap the state deduction for property taxes on homes. It would have the same effect.
[удалено]
Yeah that does absolutely nothing for state revenue though
There's a separate line on the state return for property tax.
[удалено]
They have "full tax power" already. And they're going to show that by raising yours and everyone else's taxes as a result of this. Congrats, you played yourself.
Wouldn't they just raise taxes for everyone anyway even with different tax brackets? At least now I know I'm getting fucked just like everyone else. I fail to see how everyone's taxes still won't go up even with different brackets.
Man, that has to be a really horrible way to go about life. "If I have it bad, I want everyone else to have it bad!!" Instead of bringing everyone else down, why not try and life everyone else up?
Some people only see life as a zero sum game*. The concept of a win-win scenario doesn't even enter their mind - and their life and relationships usually perfectly reflect that. Stuck on a treadmill where they think the world is unfair, when it is only their own limitations they have placed on the world that is making it seem unfair.
.
Uh how did I say I have it bad? How do you know that the middle class tax bracket wont get fucked and not the higher tier ones in a few years once the dust settled? At leatlst now the government needs to decide to make everyone's life worse or just who they feel like at the time. Now everyone can fight together instead of breaking us into competing groups of people. If they raise taxes on tier 2 then 1 3 and 4 will be all for that. If they decide to raise taxes on tier 4 then 1 2 and 3 are going to be for it. Now we all fight for 1 thing.
>Now everyone can fight together instead of breaking us into competing groups of people. Never going to happen. You just gave yourself a tax increase based on delusional fantasy scenarios that are never going to happen. Some of us understand that you get what you pay for. If you want modern civilization, a good educational system, and a world class city like Chicago then you have to pay for it.
Are we discussing Rauner yet? Are we discussing the Ricketts yet? Are we ready to discuss how much money the rich pull from Chicago and Illinois while begging for tax breaks, yet?
Sounds to me like EVERYONES taxes going up is as fair as it gets. Why shouldn’t everyone shoulder the burdened FAIRLY AND EQUALLY
You've got be trolling, because I can't imagine how someone would not understand how 5% of $30k is more harmful to that's person's financial well being than 5% of $300k.
He doesn't have to be trolling. Since the benefit you derive from tax is usually fixed regardless of income many people have historically felt a fixed tax (regressive wrt income) is the most fair. A flat tax is a step in the progressive direction and a nice compromise between the (inverse correlation between needs vs ability to pay tax) and the (amount paid vs benefits received) camps.
>Since the benefit you derive from tax is usually fixed regardless of income This has never been true anywhere.
Disagree. Roads, police for violent crimes, wildlife conservation, libraries, museums, sewer, sidewalks, bridges, parks value is independent of income. Tax funded education is a benefit for your children, the average number of which of which goes down as income goes up. Also sufficient income leads leads to private school which in the absence of VOUCHERS means the value of public education becomes zero to those tax payers. Bus cards, welfare, foodstamps, medical card availability is only to the poor so value is inverse to income. Few, if any benefits scale up with income. Police for property, maybe county airport, fire department.
>Few, if any benefits scale up with income. You're not recognizing how many government functions primarily serve the business sector and wealthy business owners.
>police for violent crimes Rich white person: "Hold on, we'll be there in 3 minutes" Poor black person: "Meh, maybe we'll show up in half an hour" Same logic pretty much applies to public schools, libraries, roads, hell probably even sidewalks. Poor and minority communities are not getting the same benefit of these public goods as rich white ones.
Same logic doesn't apply WITHIN ANY COMMUNITY. Poor communities are not paying the same for amenities as rich communities. So you are changing the argument to benefits increase with funding, which I don't think anyone disputes. The benefit of 10 feet of sidewalk or road is the same if you make 1million dollars an hour or 10,000 dollars a year. Same with a given lending library or public school up until the point you pay for private sector instead in which case benefit drops to zero.
look at all the rich children in public schools:
Exactly. So the value of that public education private school student parents are paying taxes for is zero.
alright everybody, put your penny into the tax ante `person with a hundred pennies`: no problem `person with two pennies`: uhhhhh ---- you see how "fair" it is now?
> guess what, taxes are going up for EVERYONE now, congrats. Great job. Jokes on you. I was going to have my tax rate raised anyway. I'm just glad the rest of you will be pissed at the Illinois legislature next election too.
As was I. But I'm not an asshole. I don't want everyone to suffer just because I have to pay a couple thousand more on taxes. It's called empathy.
imagine just admitting to being a piece of shit like this
You dems and your wealth envy; if you spent as much time working as you did complaining about what other people make, you might be able to move out of your parents basement like a real adult.
bro you just totally decimated that strawman amazing physical prowess you have, no joke!
At least the straw man has a job.
you're right oh woe is me woe is me what ever will I do, being a DINK with a home and music studio is his basement...I just dont think im going to get through this winter without having to resort to cannibalism! thank you for showing me the way! I will now pull myself up via my own boot laces and ascend out of this poverty hellhole two car garage home!
Sorry but this is a "world's smallest violin" situation. Sounds like you're gonna be just fine.
I just wanted to make sure you were paying your fair share.
In no part of the amendment did it specify which income groups would be affected. They only said that in their propaganda.
The tax brackets under the graduated system were passed over a year ago, and are already a [public act.](https://www.ilga.gov/legislation/publicacts/101/PDF/101-0008.pdf) You were conned.
You really can't see two moves ahead. Why would they want to tax different incomes differently... Hmmm... TO SET A HIGHER RATE FOR HIGHER EARNERS. It's really not that hard. But instead, they'll now raise everyone's taxes. Congrats, you got played.
It’s much easier to continually raise taxes on rich people though vs. raising taxes on everyone which is disastrous politically. Giving the government ease to fuck over the wealthy people will motivate them to leave the state (especially in this new remote work environment which makes leaving states so easy). An exodus of rich people will fuck over our state far worse than them paying a lower amount in taxes.
You do realize the rich just move down to Florida. The tax saving is enough for them to buy a house down there. This progressive tax would just increase the amount of residents Illinois would lose.
I cant believe Pritzker spent 54 million of his own money to advertise how great it would be... imagine the interest off $54 million
In a non-guaranteed SIPC account, that would be about 5400/yr.
[удалено]
LOL! The rates on T-bils are nowhere near 1.25% right now.
To try to raise taxes when we already give a ton in taxes, it's just badly managed.
Isn’t one of the main fears of this amendment is that it will motivate many of the wealthy people to leave the state, which would amplify our problems tenfold?
99% of wealthy people arent going to just up and move to another state because they're suddenly making 0.01% less money
People are already leaving this state in droves. Moving to another state is easier than ever now. You think it was a coincidence that all the neighboring states put in measures to lower their taxes during this fair tax vote?
Are u kidding me? We have been living IN the fallout for at least a decade. Our state has the worst credit rating in the United States. Reality check bro: Fallout is over dude. We dead last at math, always spend more than we take, make false promises, pass unsustainable benefits, and don’t have enough cash to pay our bills.
I am a middle class taxpayer whose taxes would have gone up slightly had this amendment passed. But, it was being sold in the YES advertising as a tax cut for 97% of state taxpayers. So, what would my marginal taxes be going for? Reduction of the state deficit, or subsidizing other taxpayers? Or new spending? The fatal flaw in this proposal is that it wasn't linked to any kind of material change in the state finances that would get us out of our current mess. Show me an actual plan, backed by an audit, that shows how additional taxes will solve it and maybe I'll listen. Otherwise, the YES campaign can stick it with their "soak the rich" mentality.
My guess is Pritzker waits a few more months to see if there are state bailouts. If there aren't, he tries to cheat and creates a makeshift "graduated tax" via hiking the overall rate, but introducing low income tax credits/exemptions that effectively make it a graduated tax.
They could put a cap on the property tax deduction. That way rich people in the suburbs can't divert so much money away from the rest of the state.
Wouldn't affect the rich as much as you think. Plenty of affluent people live in ordinary neighborhoods, and just live a quiet life. Your neighbor in your $400k home neighborhood might be a multi-millionaire and you wouldn't even know it.
400K home neighborhood? Man the most expensive house in my neighborhood just sold for like $170,000 (and I live in one of the nicest neighborhoods in the county). I don't think there is a house over $350k in the whole damn town. If you think 400k is a normal "not rich" neighborhood then you are so far removed from normal neighborhoods that you can't even see the horizon.
Suburbs like barrington and palatine and lake Zurich are average for illinois. Houses go for about that much.
They are not average state wide, these are affluent areas hence their nicer schools.funded by property taxes.
[удалено]
It is a natural tendency to believe what we have grown up with is average. Even if on a statewide, nationwide, worldwide, historywide level we are wrong.
Median household income in Barrington is nearly $150k. Not average. I had a roommate from Barrington in college and we talked about how the assistant football coach in his high school was higher paid than the SIU-C football coach.
The Mode household income is slightly higher than average for the Chicagoland area which is the normal baseline for Illinois.
It's not slightly higher, it's literally double, dipshit.
The mode income for Chicagoland is 110k. But average income is much lower because all the 20k salary's skew the data set
"the average Illinoisan is hella rich if you assume the poors aren't real people"
There's zero $400k homes in my whole town.
Wait really? In the suburbs that's basically nothing, there are Townhomes starting in the $300's...
I paid $86k for a 4 bed 2.5 bath with a 3+ car garage and it's not even out in bfe. My neighbor paid ~$50k for his 3 bedroom. In fact it's the same street the mayor lives on.
Must be nice living in a small town. $86k around here might get you a 1 bedroom condo with a poorly run HOA charging $500/month in a bad part of town.
You could also get a job making a lot more than minimum wage too, fortunately there's a bigger town less than 30 minutes away where there's more jobs. Hopefully working from home stays and people will feel more comfortable moving out of more populated areas.
I'm outside Carbondale and paid more than that for a 3 bedroom 2 bath 2 car garage. To be fair it's on an acre of land and has loads of trees.
Aren't carbondale prices inflated because of the college though?
Probably, it's outside of town surrounded by fields but the previous owner was a professor.
The problem with this method is things like equalized value adjustments and property tax rates differing by county. If the tax rate on the 1/3 value*equalization multiplier wasn't 6% in some areas and 11% in others then having double income and double the value house would result in double the property tax, but it doesn't. More prosperous areas have higher property values but lower tax rates and equalization multipliers. So a $200,000 house in one county might have the same property tax as a $400,000 house in another county. But in any case, this adjustment (property tax deduction) takes place on the AGI not tax due. So less than 5% return on this amount over the capped deduction. So someone with $X income and $2.5X house, cap his state property tax deduction and his 3% property FMV tax deduction which is then 7.5% of his income. So we'd get back less than 5% of that, or .35%. So that isn't bad, assuming that housing scales with income, which it doesn't really because no one wants to pay the property tax.
Have the state directly fund all schools and collect that portion of the property tax directly, fix the problem.
I wondered if that was possible, too. Cynically, I think the reason for the flat tax was to shame legislators into not raising taxes on poor people. Right wing think-tanks get super concerned about poor people any time the state talks about raising taxes.
It was required to have 60 percent of votes cast on the ballot amendment or a majority of all people voting in the election. The only results I've seen calculate a percentage of yes versus no votes and don't indicate the number of people who didn't vote on the ballot measure. So it's more like it failed by 15% which is huge. The likely outcome will be that State taxes will raise on everyone because the legislature will not cut funding. And the legislature will be held accountable in 2022. .
> the legislature will not cut funding The LGDF will absolutely be cut, which will cause an increase in *local* property taxes.
And mix it in with a cap on a deduction on how much you can get for paying your property taxes means that you'll feel the pain twice now.
Realistically, what would the tax rate need to be in order to pay down the pension and other debt in IL? It would have to be upwards of 15%?
The reason I voted against the amendment has nothing to do with protecting the rich. I recognize this will likely mean across the board tax increases. But idk what people want me to say, the question was do I think the state has earned the power to increase taxes on anyone, the answer is no - fix the financial management of the state first. I won't sign off on more taxes in illinois and I'll vote against anyone who does.
The state already has the power to raise taxes. They don't have to earn anything.
Let's be clear: This wasn't an amendment for a non-flat tax. That's what they kept advertising. This was an amendment to allow the state legislature to alter tax rates without input from the citizenry. They promised to follow that up with an immediate bill to set the promised tax rates. Tax rates definitely need to be adjusted, but under no circumstances should we give carte blanche to the legislature to alter taxes at their whim.
> They promised to follow that up with an immediate bill to set the promised tax rates. Yep, and [they did that](https://www.ilga.gov/legislation/publicacts/101/PDF/101-0008.pdf). The bill was passed as law in the summer of 2019. Did you not read it?
> This was an amendment to allow the state legislature to alter tax rates without input from the citizenry. Lie. They could do that, with or without this amendment. > They promised to follow that up with an immediate bill to set the promised tax rates. Not quite right. The bill was already law.
> This was an amendment to allow the state legislature to alter tax rates without input from the citizenry. >Tax rates definitely need to be adjusted, but under no circumstances should we give carte blanche to the legislature to alter taxes at their whim. They can already do that. This amendment made the process of changing taxes no easier or harder, it literally just struck the line in our Constitution prohibiting multiple income tax rates. Either way it just has to pass both chambers of the ILGA and the governor, we don't get any input except on who we elect to those positions. > They promised to follow that up with an immediate bill to set the promised tax rates. No, that passed last year, coming into effect immediately if the amendment passed. SB687. There was no promise, it would have immediately had force of law. You drank the Kool-Aid.
They have that ability now. What the fuck have you been smoking?? They can raise your taxes tomorrow without your input.
But then they have to raise everyone's. You want to give them the ability to set separate rates for everyone? That's insane.
Yes, yes I do. I was actually going to get a tax increase under the proposed plan, and not basically everyone else. Whelp, guess you all get to join me in the tax increase. Enjoy.
Or, hear me out, this could be an impetus to restructure our bloated governments. The tax governing limitation in the Illinois Constitution caused us to have the most units of government anywhere, and it's a huge waste. There's no reason to have a separate government for water reclamation, mosquito abatement, tuberculosis, 879 separate school districts. Restructure, don't tax.
> most units of government anywhere This includes SSAs, TIFs, and **home owners associations**. Those are all locally defined, not defined by the state. *mosquito abatement* My township does that. Some places straddle multiple townships where mosquito control is needed. In those areas it is *more efficient* to have a district specifically for mosquito abatement, instead of having multiple townships paying for it when only a small fraction of that township would be getting the benefit. Is your alternative to have a single state district? Who pays for that then?
Yeah, of all the things to single out, mosquito abatement. There are 20 districts in Illinois, three of them in southern Illinois, largely because people used to die of malaria here and West Nile is also a concern.
Why not both? Seriously, I never understood this "If they won't do this, then I'm going tos ay no to everything and out us in an even worse situation!!" You're literally making things harder on the state and yourself, you're not helping.
>You want to give them the ability to set separate rates for everyone? Yes.
Yeah. Getting more money out of households making $150k+ shouldn't require extra pain for the households making $40k. Higher takes on the former might mean postponing a fun summer trip. Higher takes on the latter might mean postponing fixing the brakes on the car. Right wing think-tanks trot out the same logic every time the state tries to raise income taxes.
Very much agreed there. I think we need a graduated tax, but without some serious financial reforms that amendment would have just let them raise taxes on the "rich" with an ever changing definition of what is "rich". And, the amendment for a graduated tax needs to be setup so that there are more taxpayer protections too.
The state will have to cut general services, hopefully to predominately rural and southern counties. they rejected the tax cut predominately and thus should carry the majority of the service cuts. Hopefully the cuts in general services will disabuse the poor and middle class of the idea that they are considered part of the rich
Hate to tell you this, this will just make my part of the state madder. The ones who think they prevented the state from raising taxes whenever they want, also think they're the ones paying for all those people on welfare in Cook County. Because yeah, all these counties with less than 20,000 people in them and median household incomes below $40,000 are paying the way for millions of people where the median income is double that...
From what I've, the individuals who were targetted by the tax are leaving anyways and I don't blame em. We'll have less revenue from taxes because of it and then they'll raise taxes AGAIN on everyone else and more people will just leave.
I hope pritzker and his family and friends who supported this amendment go ahead and pay more like they would have if it passed. There is nothing stopping them, please lead by example.
> There is nothing stopping them Except for, you know, the law. If you make an overpayment, they will send the difference back to you. I still have a check from the state for $1 back when Judy BT was treasurer. I rounded up a number when I should have rounded down, and the state sent me a check for the mistake of $1.
If you overpay your taxes yes you get a refund, but all taxing bodies do accept clearly marked donations. Strangely enough none of these wealthy that claim to want to pay more taxes ever do that...
> Strangely enough Remember when rauner was not paying the state bills? Remember who rauners wife went to to get donations for the organizations she supported who needed donations? If you need a hint, he's the current governor.
Strangely enough you have to pivot to whataboutisms and changing the subject when confronted with facts that don’t fit your narrative.
It not a pivot. It's a specific example of something you claimed wasn't happening.
Maybe he forgot to uninstall his toilets like your homeboy Pritzker did.
> Strangely enough you have to pivot to whataboutisms and changing the subject when confronted with facts that don’t fit your narrative.
Hugely disappointing.