13.4 F
Chicago
Friday, January 27, 2023
HomeIllinois NewsIllinois Dems aim to raise taxes on the state's richest 1 percent

Illinois Dems aim to raise taxes on the state’s richest 1 percent

Date:

spot_img

IStock_000004700542XSmall

SPRINGFIELD – He stands in for House Speaker Mike Madigan often as one of Madigan's top lieutenants, and it's pretty clear he has the Speaker's nod to push forward legislation that would tax the state's richest 1 percent.  

State Rep. Lou Lang (D-Chicago) is calling his proposal the "Fair Tax." We don't know how much Lang wants to raise taxes for the state's richest – we just know they're who will get hit the hardest.

Lang says it will raise a badly-needed $1.9 billion for a badly-unbalanced state budget and 99 percent of the state's tax filers will get a cut – that's anyone in Illinois that makes under $413,000 annually.

Now, we can only take Rep. Lang's word for all this, as he has yet to file the actual bill for Illinoisans to review, but it's up for a hearing next Tuesday in the Executive Committee, where it will pass along party lines. The it will go to the floor, where Speaker Madigan holds a super-majority. Then it will go to the Illinois Senate, where the Democrats hold a super-majority.

Then it will go to Governor Rauner, who will veto it because the Democrats have not and will not consider any of the items on Rauner's Turnaround Agenda, which the governor says must be included before he considers signing such a dramatic tax hike.

Human services agencies such as Voices for Illinois Children support Lang's HB 689, and put together this meme to answer lawmakers' questions, including saying a "Fair Tax" has lower rates for lower incomes and higher rates for higher incomes.

Certainly Rep. Lang read this week's IR piece reporting over 3000 millionaires left Chicago last year. Perhaps he's shooting at doubling that number in 2016?

CgGakWHVIAABh3M

 

Subscribe

- Never miss a story with notifications

- Gain full access to our premium content

- Browse free from up to 5 devices at once

Latest stories

8 COMMENTS

  1. All those implied negative signs in front of the CUTs will magically turn into positives as the “rich” continue to flee Ill-annoy. That won’t stop the tax-and-spend Democrats though from taxing even more. Far be it from them to cut their budget. They are drunk on spending, and it NEVER occurs to them to scale back on government spending.
    I can’t wait to get out of this sinking ship of state ~

  2. Madigan is consistent in ignoring the Illinois Constitution. First Madigan refuses to have a balance budget and obey the clause that says “Appropriations for a fiscal year shall not exceed funds estimated by the General Assembly to be available during that year” as required by Article 8 Section 2(b) Now Madigan refused to follow Article 9 Section 3(a) that says “A tax on or measured by income shall be at a non-graduated rate.”

  3. **We don’t know how much Lang wants to raise taxes for the state’s richest**
    Huh? You link to the legislation and the fact sheet, yet you still seem confused?
    The language is pretty clear, and tells us exactly how much Lang wants to raise those taxes.

  4. Hey Lang, just what is your fair share of what someone else worked for? You communists make me sick….
    Lang, here is a novel idea, cut the budget to balance it and stop raising taxes. Stop giving our tax dollars who don’t deserve it… like to illegal aliens! All able bodied welfare recipients should have to earn their welfare.

  5. **Now Madigan refused to follow Article 9 Section 3(a) that says “A tax on or measured by income shall be at a non-graduated rate.”**
    Did you even read the legislation, that is linked directly in the above post?
    This rate structure is directly tied to a constitutional amendment passing. If said amendment doesn’t pass, this rate structure does not become law.

  6. Actually the DEMS know this will not pass Constitutional muster so they have alternative legislation that would strip the present Constitutional tax language and would allow for proposals such as Lang’s. This would of course need the voter approval to change the Constitution.
    The danger of all of this, in my opinion, is that any proposed Constitutional language will be quite vague and would allow the state to RADICALLY change the amounts of taxation at any time they could get a simple majority vote.
    The implications of this are enormous. Far more enormous than simply putting Lang’s proposed language for voter approval in the Constitution.
    Virtually anything the GA wants to do to change taxes could be done quite QUICKLY at ANYTIME- of course with Governor approval.
    So this bill and its companion pieced is far more dangerous than it appears.
    Rauner will Veto all of this and I doubt if he can be overridden by the GA- but one never knows.
    And even if nothing comes of it now this is Trojan Horse for the future.