Some details of Illinois Gov. Pritzker’s graduated income tax proposal have emerged. The Chicago Tribune reports:
If voters approve an amendment, Pritzker proposes lowering the tax rate to 4.75 percent for the first $10,000 of income for single and joint filers. Income between $10,000 and $100,000 would be taxed at 4.9 percent, and the rate would remain 4.95 percent for income between $100,000 and $250,000.
From there, the top rates would be 7.75 percent for income up to $500,000, 7.85 percent for income between $500,000 and $1 million, and 7.95 percent for all income if someone earns more than $1 million.
The governor also proposes increasing the current property tax credit by 1 percentage point, from 5 percent to 6 percent. He also would create a per-child tax credit of up to $100 for individuals earning less than $80,000 and joint filers earning less than $100,000.
Similar measures have been proposed in the past. None has ever gotten as far as the ballot because they’ve failed to garner the required three-fifths vote of each house in the legislature. I’m still waiting, as I have since the subject was first broached, for Gov. Pritzker to release the names of legislators who’ve committed their votes to the required amendment. I don’t think he has any.
Meanwhile, here’s a proposal that I do not believe would require an amendment to the state’s constitution. End the exemption to the state’s income tax for public employees receiving more than $150,000 in pensions from the state. That doesn’t run afoul of either the flat tax provision or the enforceability clause in the state’s constitution.
C’mon, governor. Put a down payment on your proposed reforms.
Are those rates supposed to be placed in the Constitution? I’ve been confused by this discussion, because somebody wants him to be specific about rates, which means somebody wants to know how it impacts him. But I imagine most Constitutions don’t set rates in virtual perpetuity? Maybe they allow progressiveness, but have a cap?
OT: I am schocked that my former Congressman escaped any jail-time with multiple theories having being thrown at him. He came to public attention because his expensive Downtown-Abbey taste in decorating his Congressional office. His plea admits padding mileage for reimbursements and reselling tickets and not reporting the income, but he will have no criminal record if her complies with the agreement. There appears to have been prosecutorial and judicial misconduct involved, which forced the plea.