Rauner as Governor (Henry, Sheridan, Mark: 2013, credit card, month-to-month)

[rzzzz]

Originally Posted by awestover89

I think this is the big issue. Under Quinn our expenses skyrocketed somewhere around 25%, even with the increase in tax revenue that was supposed to be a temporary solution that Quinn then wanted to make permanent. I'm not suggesting Rauner immediately drop the tax rate, but the increase really did nothing to help our situation. There are too many other places with more reasonable taxes that are drawing businesses that we have to cut special deals to get large companies to come to Illinois. We need to reign in our spending, and bring taxes down to a more reasonable level to draw in more potential growth. I'm not sure if Rauner is the right guy who will be able/willing to make the changes necessary for Illinois, but I had also lost all confidence in Quinn.

There is really only one place like that, Texas.
There are other places with better tax rates, but only Texas is really growing businesses, jobs, and population significantly more than anywhere else.

[awestover89]

Originally Posted by rzzzz

There is really only one place like that, Texas.
There are other places with better tax rates, but only Texas is really growing businesses, jobs, and population significantly more than anywhere else.

Actually, Texas is where I was thinking of when I made that post. I used to live just north of Austin before coming to Chicago, and Austin is becoming a huge tech sector. There's also a lot of unused land, especially around San Antonio, that's being developed. The cost of living is also much lower, my parent's house cost half of what ours cost, is larger with more bedrooms, and the property tax is less than half of what we pay, so it's really no wonder a lot of businesses are moving there.

Nearby, though, we have both Indiana and Wisconsin with lower tax burdens, and I know of a few companies that have relocated, as well as some employees who move and just commute to get the lower personal and property tax breaks.

[knitgirl]

but then you have to live in Texas.

[Attrill]

Everyone loves to freak out about the tax increases, but there is absolutely no evidence they've hurt Illinois. They also don't put Illinois in a different league that any of it's neighbors. The top income tax rates for neighboring states are:

Iowa - 8.98% (7.92% at $50K)
Wisconsin - 7.75% (6.5% at $50K)
Michigan - 4.25% (flat)
Indiana - 3.4% (flat)
Kentucky - 6.0% (5.8% at $50K)
Missouri - 6.0% (for all income over $9K)

So Michigan and Indiana are lower, but others are higher. Indiana taxes also aren't lower once you take county taxes into account, which brings the average actual tax in Indiana up to 5%.

Corporate tax rates cannot be compared head to head - there are too many important differences in state tax codes, so they can only be compared realistically by calculating it by individual businesses.

One of the advantages that Illinois has over neighboring states is that there is no service tax - which saves businesses millions every year. However Rauner has proposed introducing a new tax on many services, including Advertising, Marketing, Lawyers, Programmers, Warehousing, Printing, and dozens of other services. He omits any financial services from this tax.

So how in the world do Rauner supporters scream bloody murder about current tax rates, and then support a candidate who wants to raise taxes that directly impact some of the largest industries in Illinois?

[chet everett]

Attrill:

You really need to understand the mindset of many folks that whine about "taxes". There are relatively few folks that look at their Illinois W-2 and say "dag nab it, they are taking so much outa my paycheck that I am gonna have to downgrade to chicken salad from the lunch trunk 'cause of these taxes"...

What happens instead is folks open their PROPERTY TAX BILLS (which are supporting their LOCAL UNITS OF GOVERNMENT ...) and say OH F ME, how in the H377 I am supposed to pay THIS... They do whether they have a crummy house that is low priced with bill that is up over 3% of market value OR if they have a certified MANSION in a great town with a property tax rate barely over 1%. In the first case the actual amount might be upwards of $6k on a house worth about $200k (which might translate into an equivlent INCOME tax rate of over 10% based on standard home affordabiity indexes) and the second may be a bill of $15,000 on a mansion that is easily worth well over a million and quarter (and that might work out to something around 5% or so of income given affordability indexes) but both folks are "fed up with their taxes" because those bills are NOT going away, the sums represent quite a lot of money regardless of 'rate' no matter how you slice things and the VALUE that folks get from schools, parks, street maintenance, cops and firefighters is not paramount in their minds compared to their own stagnant income / meager shot at worry-free retirement. Aggravating factors are the relatively nice compensation of folks that work in schools / local governement / public safety AND the guaranteed pensions theoretically waiting for those folks in retirement...

My intuition is that folks kind of understand that Rauner (nor anyone else...) cannot really make the property tax "zero" but hopefully can do SOMETHING to flatten the rise in taxes ESPECIALLY in relation to FLAT income growth...

The fact that Quinn had to no answers about the BILLIONS raised by the TEMPORARY INCOME TAX HIKE that seem to have completely VANISHED and left the pension systems in just as terrible a condition as they were without the hike is really the impetus of most voters desires to undo the tax NOT any desire to really keep more cash in the pockets of "lunch bucket" type workers...

Personally I would be happier if more LOGIC drove voters instead of EMOTIONS but as we have seen with months of campaign ads feature such stellar rational arguments as "my guy has a better list to put on the door mat than the other guy" or "I may have zero experience accomplishing anything but my dad was a decent guy that wore bow ties" it is not exactly as though campaigns have much respect for voters' deep analytic skills...

[rzzzz]

Getting punched in the balls with your property tax bill is exactly how Texas pays for stuff in lieu of state income tax. However, it seems like property tax is not something Rauner can do much about. If he really wanted the state to make money fast he could change the taxation on financial services and commodities traders but I have this hunch that he is not going to do that.

[MassVt]

Originally Posted by rzzzz

Getting punched in the balls with your property tax bill is exactly how Texas pays for stuff in lieu of state income tax. However, it seems like property tax is not something Rauner can do much about. If he really wanted the state to make money fast he could change the taxation on financial services and commodities traders but I have this hunch that he is not going to do that.

New Hampshire operates on much the same principle--not exactly the "Live Free or Die" exclamation that their liscense plates shout out..

[williepotatoes]

Originally Posted by Attrill

Everyone loves to freak out about the tax increases, but there is absolutely no evidence they've hurt Illinois. They also don't put Illinois in a different league that any of it's neighbors. The top income tax rates for neighboring states are:

Iowa - 8.98% (7.92% at $50K)
Wisconsin - 7.75% (6.5% at $50K)
Michigan - 4.25% (flat)
Indiana - 3.4% (flat)
Kentucky - 6.0% (5.8% at $50K)
Missouri - 6.0% (for all income over $9K)

So Michigan and Indiana are lower, but others are higher. Indiana taxes also aren't lower once you take county taxes into account, which brings the average actual tax in Indiana up to 5%.

Corporate tax rates cannot be compared head to head - there are too many important differences in state tax codes, so they can only be compared realistically by calculating it by individual businesses.

One of the advantages that Illinois has over neighboring states is that there is no service tax - which saves businesses millions every year. However Rauner has proposed introducing a new tax on many services, including Advertising, Marketing, Lawyers, Programmers, Warehousing, Printing, and dozens of other services. He omits any financial services from this tax.

So how in the world do Rauner supporters scream bloody murder about current tax rates, and then support a candidate who wants to raise taxes that directly impact some of the largest industries in Illinois?

I don't think the service tax will fly at all. Rauner would wear that albatross for a lifetime and beyond. His epitaph would someday read "here lies the man who taught the tax and fee happy state of Illinois a whole new way to grab some cash." It opens the door to a future of never-ending taxes on any service imaginable just to bailout bad budget policies.

[williepotatoes]

Originally Posted by knitgirl

but then you have to live in Texas.

“If I owned Texas and Hell, I would rent out Texas and live in Hell”


― Philip Henry Sheridan, U.S. general

[MSchemist80]

Originally Posted by rzzzz

Getting punched in the balls with your property tax bill is exactly how Texas pays for stuff in lieu of state income tax. However, it seems like property tax is not something Rauner can do much about. If he really wanted the state to make money fast he could change the taxation on financial services and commodities traders but I have this hunch that he is not going to do that.

Except in Illinois we are getting punched in the balls, gut, and nose simultaneously by all the governing bodies with property, sales, income, tolls, and fees. We can't take much more.