Support builds for
controversial tariff on seniors. But the burden is on the governor and
lawmakers to forge a comprehensive budget plan. A BGA Rescuing Illinois
report.
Illinois is one of only three states that has an income tax but exempts all retirement income. Politicians, along with advocacy groups, have long pushed to keep it that way.
But amid the spiraling state budget and public pension crisis, even some anti-tax groups are open to giving the idea a closer look, provided, they say, it is weaved into a comprehensive and acceptable spending and taxing plan, a BGA Rescuing Illinois report finds.
Yet for Illinois’ dysfunctional government, drafting that blueprint is a very tall order, especially now. The budget stalemate between Republican Gov. Bruce Rauner and the Democratic leadership of the General Assembly has been going on nearly a year.
And even if lightning strikes and the budget logjam snaps, odds are that imposing a retirement tax would still face heavy grassroots hostility and some key lawmaker opposition. A bipartisan group of House lawmakers have already introduced a nonbinding resolution expressing opposition to taxing retirement income, to counter growing support for the concept.
“It’s being pushed – there’s no doubt about it,” says Republican State Rep. David McSweeney, the lead sponsor of the antiretirement income tax resolution. “There have been discussions of secret working groups, and outside groups are calling for a retirement tax. I wanted to get ahead of it. I think it’s a real threat. We need a budget in the state; I’ve been one of the most vocal proponents of a budget. But we do not, repeat not, need to raise taxes. A retirement tax would be a disaster.”
By some estimates a retirement tax could generate $2 billion or more annually. The money would likely land in the state’s general revenue fund and could be tapped for any number of needs, including helping to pay for the state’s major pension funds, which are hugely underfunded by $111 billion and counting.
Backing retirement tax Influential budget experts are forging ahead with their ideas.
For example, the Chicago-based Civic Federation, a 122-year-old nonpartisan think tank representing corporate and professional leaders, in its 2017 state budget roadmap called for taxing retirement income but exempting Social Security and income under $50,000.
The civic organization estimated this would raise an additional $1.72 billion in FY2017.
At the conservative Illinois Policy Institute, policy chief Ted Dabrowski said taxing retirement income would be conceivable as part of larger reforms including pension overhauls, spending cuts and reductions in other taxes.
“Overall the Institute would not be against retirement income being taxed as it is everywhere – but only if it was part of an overall tax-neutral plan to reduce the overall income tax rate,” he said. “I don’t believe this is a time we should be giving the legislature even more money to mismanage and misspend.”
Even the AARP Illinois, one of the most influential lobbying forces in the county and state and a strident opponent of taxing retirement income, does not give a hard “no” on the issue.
Robert Gallo, state
director of AARP, told the BGA that his group remains staunchly opposed
to the idea as an isolated tax solution to the budget crisis.
However,
Gallo would not say that AARP Illinois opposes taxing retirement income
completely. He appeared to leave the door open to that possibility if
it is part of a larger package of needed budget reforms.
“Our
position is that everything really needs to be put on the table,” Gallo
said. “The state shouldn’t solve its budget situation by targeting just
one group of individuals. And that seems to be how this is discussed –
‘Oh we don’t tax retirement income, so let’s just do that.’
“That
seems to be the low-hanging fruit out there...we need a comprehensive
solution, not a one-off, which seems to be what’s happening in
Springfield on a daily basis,” Gallo added.
Like
the Civic Federation, the more liberal Center for Tax and Budget
Accountability is calling for a tax on retirement income above $50,000.
A
budget reform proposal put forth by the group in September calls for
taxing retirement income between $50,000 and $150,000 at a graduated
rate, and retirement income above $150,000 at Illinois’ regular flat
rate, currently 3.75 percent for individuals.
A
temporary income tax increase to 5 percent expired in January 2015. The
CTBA proposes increasing the overall rate to 4.75 or 5 percent. The
Civic Federation also calls for a retroactive increase to 5 percent
stretching back to Jan. 1, 2016.
The
CTBA report describes its plan to tax some retirement income as a
graduated tax, with retirement income between $50,000- $75,000 taxed at
25 percent of whatever the regular income tax rate is at the time;
income $75,000-$100,000 at 50 percent and income $100,000-$150,000 at 75
percent. The center estimates this structure at a 5 percent tax rate
would mean $1.1 billion in extra revenue annually.
Illinois’
Constitution forbids a graduated (or progressive) tax, so it could be
argued that the CTBA’s proposed retirement income tax would require a
constitutional amendment, according to Dabrowski and others.
However CTBA budget director Bobby Otter counters that the tax could be implemented without an amendment.
“Our
proposal would be structured so that our most vulnerable retirees would
receive a tax credit based upon their income,” after paying the full
tax rate, Otter said – hence the tax would not technically be a
graduated one.
Who
pays? How much? One nagging question about implementing a retirement
tax, especially if it exempts those making under $50,000, is: Who ends
up paying?
Last year, the Taxpayers’ Federation of Illinois, a nonpartisan fiscal watchdog group focused on efficiency and
stability, published a report showing that in 2012, one quarter of
Illinois filers claimed a retirement income tax exemption, worth a total
of $2.3 billion.
And
many of those people were below age 65, according to the analysis by
former Illinois Revenue Department research director Natalie Davila.
That’s because people can begin drawing income from 401Ks, IRAs and other retirement sources before they hit 65.
“Poor
seniors who have to work pay income tax on their wages. Retirees who do
not have to work because they have sufficient retirement income do not
pay income tax,” Davila wrote.
She
found that 45 percent of the tax exemptions for retirement income went
to people with adjusted gross incomes of more than $100,000.
"The state shouldn’t solve its budget situation by targeting just one group of individuals.”
-AARP
Retirement tax opponents
All this conversation is rallying the hardcore anti-retirement tax forces.
At the forefront of that effort is State Rep.
McSweeney,
R-Barrington Hills, who in December proposed the resolution opposing an
amendment of the Illinois Income Tax Act to allow taxing retirement
income. The resolution (HR 890) is a bipartisan effort also led by
Democratic State Rep. Brandon Phelps, D- Harrisburg, with 61 other
cosponsors.
House
Speaker Michael Madigan’s spokesman said the speaker would not comment
on the issue, and Senate President John J. Cullerton’s office did not
return messages. Republican Senate Leader Christine Radogno, R-Lemont,
has said lawmakers will likely consider taxing retirement income before
increasing the sales tax or taxing other services. House minority leader
Jim Durkin, R-Western Springs, states that no tax hike would be
“tolerated by taxpayers” unless accompanied by significant
across-the-board tax and spending reforms.
McSweeney
said the resolution was necessary in light of backroom discussions
among supporters of taxing retirement income. He declined to say who
those supporters might be.
McSweeney thinks that many retirees would leave the state if their income is taxed.
“I’ve
spoken to a lot of people in my district and statewide,” he said.
“Illinois is a place they still want to stay, but if their retirement
income is taxed – my biggest concern is that people will leave the state
and that will be a negative development for economic growth.”
Gallo
noted that Florida – a popular destination for Midwestern retirees
because of the weather – is among the states with no income tax at all.
Pennsylvania
and Mississippi, like Illinois, do not tax any retirement income. Other
states exempt portions of retirement income, like Social Security
benefits.
“Illinois has already lost population; this would be just another reason for people to say, ‘I give up’” and leave, Gallo said.
Otter
counters that most retirees have family nearby or other strong reasons
to live in Illinois, and would not leave because of taxes.
“Considering
the average pension doesn’t even hit the $50,000 threshold at this
point, most pensioners wouldn’t be hit” under the CTBA and Civic
Federation plans, Otter added.
“And
public pensions being in the state they’re in, the state needs more
revenue to continue funding the pensions at the level they’re at while
still funding services.”
As
debate around taxing retirement income heated up last fall, AARP
Illinois surveyed 1,000 residents age 50 and up on the concept.
Eighty-nine
percent of the respondents said they would oppose proposals to tax
retirement income, and 72 percent said a tax would have a “major impact”
on their ability to plan for a secure retirement.
However
40 percent were not aware that retirement income is not currently
taxed; 60 percent said they would consider moving to a more tax-friendly
state, according to the survey.
Kari
Lydersen is a Chicago-based author and freelance writer who writes
about government, criminal justice and public policy issues for the
Better Government Association and other media outlets. She can be
reached at info@ bettergov.org.