Illinois Allow for Graduated Income Tax Amendment (2020)

Illinois Allow for Graduated Income Tax Amendment
Election date November 3, 2020
Topic Taxes
Status d Defeated
Type Constitutional amendment	Origin State legislature

The Illinois Allow for Graduated Income Tax Amendment was on the ballot in Illinois as a legislatively referred constitutional amendment on November 3, 2020. The ballot measure was defeated.

A "yes" vote supported repealing the state's constitutional requirement that the state personal income tax be a flat rate and instead allow the state to enact legislation for a graduated income tax.

A "no" vote opposed this constitutional amendment, thus continuing to require that the state personal income tax be a flat rate and prohibit a graduated income tax.

Supermajority requirement: The vote requirement for constitutional amendments was either (a) 60 percent of votes cast on the ballot measure itself or (b) a simple majority of all of those voting in the election.

Election results

Illinois Allow for Graduated Income Tax Amendment (2020)
Result		Votes	Percentage
Yes		2,683,490	46.73%
No		3,059,411	53.27%

Results are officially certified.

Source

Overview

What would the ballot measure have changed about the state income tax?

The ballot measure would have repealed the state's constitutional requirement that the state's personal income tax is a flat rate across income. Instead, the ballot measure would have allowed the state to enact legislation for a graduated income tax.

In June 2019, Gov. J.B. Pritzker (D) signed SB 687, which would have enacted a graduated income tax if voters approved the ballot measure. SB 687 would have changed the state's income tax from a flat rate to six graduated rates beginning on January 1, 2021. You can view the proposed tax brackets and rates here.

How would Illinois have compared to other states?

See also: Comparison of state income tax structures

As of 2019, 43 states levied a tax on personal income. Of these 43 states, 11 states, including Illinois, had a flat income tax rate, meaning there is a constant rate across income before deductions and exemptions. In Illinois, income was taxed at a flat rate of 4.95%. The flat income tax rates ranged from 2.00% in Tennessee to 5.25% in North Carolina. Tennessee's income tax was scheduled to be reduced to 1.00% in 2020 and to be repealed entirely in 2021.

Most (32 of 50) states had a graduated income tax, with different rates applied to different levels of income. Under Illinois SB 687, the proposed tax rates would have ranged from 4.75% to 7.99%. Compared to 2019 tax rates, Illinois would have had the sixth-highest top-bracket rate. The state with the highest top-bracket rate—and the largest difference between the bottom and top rates—was California, where the bottom rate was 1.00% and the top rate was 13.30%.

Who was behind the campaigns surrounding the ballot measure?

See also: Campaign finance

Vote Yes For Fairness led the campaign in support of the constitutional amendment. Quentin Fulks, a former campaign staffer for Gov. J.B. Pritzker's (D) 2018 gubernatorial campaign and the leader of the 501(c)(4) nonprofit Think Big Illinois, was the chairperson of the Vote Yes For Fairness PAC. Vote Yes For Fairness, along with allied committees, had raised $62.3 million. Gov. Pritzker contributed $58.0 million to the campaign. During his campaign for governor in 2018, Pritzker advocated for a graduated income tax.

Four PACs—Coalition to Stop the Proposed Tax Hike, Say No to More Taxes, Chambers Against Progressive Income Tax, and Vote No on the Progressive Tax—raised funds to oppose the constitutional amendment. Together, the committees received $61.3 million. Kenneth Griffin, CEO of the investment firm Citadel, contributed $53.75 million to the Coalition to Stop the Proposed Tax Hike.

Text of measure

Ballot title

The ballot title was as follows:

“

Proposed Amendment to the 1970 Illinois Constitution The proposed amendment grants the State authority to impose higher income tax rates on higher income levels, which is how the federal government and a majority of other states do it. The amendment would remove the portion of the Revenue Article of the Illinois Constitution that is sometimes referred to as the "flat tax," that requires all taxes on income to be at the same rate. The amendment does not itself change tax rates. It gives the State the ability to impose higher tax rates on those with higher income levels and lower income tax rates on those with middle or lower income levels. You are asked to decide whether the proposed amendment should become a part of the Illinois Constitution.

”

Constitutional changes

See also: Article IX, Illinois Constitution

The measure would have amended Section 3 of Article IX of the Illinois Constitution. The following underlined text would have been added and struck-through text would have been deleted:

Section 3. Limitations on Income Taxation.

(a) A tax on or measured by income shall be at a non-graduated rate. At any one time there may be no more than one such tax imposed by the State for State purposes on individuals and one such tax so imposed on corporations. The General Assembly shall provide by law for the rate or rates of any tax on or measured by income imposed by the State. In any such tax imposed upon corporations the highest rate shall not exceed the highest rate imposed on individuals by more than a ratio of 8 to 5.

(b) Laws imposing taxes on or measured by income may adopt by reference provisions of the laws and regulations of the United States, as they then exist or thereafter may be changed, for the purpose of arriving at the amount of income upon which the tax is imposed.

Readability score

See also: Ballot measure readability scores, 2020

Using the Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL and Flesch Reading Ease (FRE) formulas, Ballotpedia scored the readability of the ballot title and summary for this measure. Readability scores are designed to indicate the reading difficulty of text. The Flesch-Kincaid formulas account for the number of words, syllables, and sentences in a text; they do not account for the difficulty of the ideas in the text. The state legislature wrote the ballot language for this measure. The FKGL for the ballot title is grade level 12, and the FRE is 49. The word count for the ballot title is 121, and the estimated reading time is 32 seconds.

Support

Vote Yes For Fairness led the campaign in support of the constitutional amendment. Quentin Fulks, a former campaign staffer for Gov. J.B. Pritzker's (D) 2018 gubernatorial campaign and the leader of the 501(c)(4) nonprofit Think Big Illinois, was the chairperson of the Vote Yes For Fairness PAC.

Vote Yes for Fair Tax also organized as a political action committee to support the constitutional amendment. John Bouman, president of the Shriver Center on Poverty Law, was the chairperson of Vote Yes for Fair Tax. Julie Sampson, the political director of Citizen Action Illinois, was the treasurer of Vote Yes for Fair Tax.

Supporters

Vote Yes for Fair Tax provides a list of endorsements, which is available here.

Officials

• Governor J.B. Pritzker (D)
• State Senator Christopher Belt (D)
• State Senator Don Harmon (D)
• Speaker of the House Michael Madigan (D)
• State Representative Robert Martwick (D)

Political Parties

• Democratic Party of Illinois

Unions

• AFSCME Illinois Council No. 31
• American Federation of Teachers
• Associated Fire Fighters of Illinois
• Chicago Federation of Labor
• Chicago Teachers Union
• Illinois AFL-CIO
• Illinois Education Association
• Illinois Federation of Teachers
• National Education Association
• SEIU Healthcare Illinois
• SEIU Illinois State Council

Organizations

• AARP
• Chicago Jobs Council
• Democracy for America
• Equality Illinois
• Illinois Alliance for Retired Americans
• Illinois Economic Policy Institute
• Indivisible Chicago Alliance
• Indivisible Illinois
• Latino Policy Forum
• League of Women Voters of Illinois
• Omidyar Network
• Planned Parenthood Illinois Action
• Sierra Club Illinois
• Think Big Illinois

Arguments

• House Speaker Michael Madigan (D-22): "Middle-class families bear too much of the burden under the current tax system, and a Fair Tax will enable us to make the wealthy pay their fair share to balance the budget and invest in critical resources like education and health care — all while providing relief for 97% of taxpayers."
• Rev. Alan Taylor, senior minister of the Unity Temple Unitarian Universalist Congregation: "While overt racism seeks to prevent poor (often Brown and Black) people from voting in other states, here in Illinois, racism quietly masquerades as tax fairness. Worse, our state constitution ties the hands of legislators when it comes to revenue, allowing millionaires and billionaires to pay less in taxes as a share of their income than middle- and lower-income families. A flat tax appears fair on the face of it — everyone pays the same percentage to the state on their declared income. But drill down and look what families pay toward other kinds of taxes. The poor end up paying twice the percentage of their income in taxes — and are struggling just to make ends meet. Here in Illinois, there's a huge gulf between the average Black family's income and the average white family. Black people typically bear."
• Sen. Christopher Belt (D-57): "We are one of the few states in the country to still have a flat tax. We’re losing residents every year and they’re going to neighboring states that have a fair tax system. If we want to keep our residents in Illinois, we must adopt a fair tax or they are going to move to Minnesota, which is a leader in job creation because they have fair tax. It’s time for the wealthy in Illinois start paying their fair share and taxes be cut for working families."
• Sen. Don Harmon (D-39): "If you’re saying the flat tax is a good idea, you are protecting the uber-rich, not the middle class. Because we can’t raise taxes on anyone without raising taxes on everyone, and that’s a protection for the richest among us."
• Trisha Crowley, president of the League of Women Voters of Champaign County: "In Illinois, the bottom 20 percent of wage earners currently pay almost twice as much of their total income for state and local taxes as the top 20 percent. This is an unjust burden on our poorest residents. As the income gap between rich and poor in the United States continues to grow, taxing our highest earners at a rate proportionate to their increasing concentration of income growth could also make a real difference in addressing the state’s well-known fiscal crisis. The proposed amendment will not itself change the current rates, but it will allow for them to be graduated."
• Bob Gallo, AARP Illinois State Director: "Illinois needs a plan to get out of the budget mess it has created, without shifting the burden to our older and middle-class residents. The Graduated Income Tax Amendment does not allow the state to tax retirement income, and it does not make it easier to tax retirement income in the future."
• Ralph Martire, executive director of the Center for Tax and Budget Accountability: "In what can only be described as piling on, the flat-rate income tax Illinois is constitutionally required to impose makes matters worse. Here's why. All other taxes available to fund public services are "regressive," meaning they take a greater portion of the earnings of low- and middle-income workers than affluent folks. The income tax is the sole tax that can be designed to offset the natural regressivity of every other tax, but only when levied using a graduated rate structure that comports with ability to pay, by imposing higher tax rates on higher levels of income, and lower rates on lower levels of income. ... That sticks it to low and middle income workers in two key ways. First, it actually worsens the significant growth in income inequality that's occurred over the last 40 years. Second, it exacerbates the economic harm wreaked by the pandemic."

Official arguments

The following is the argument in support of the constitutional amendment that appeared in the official voter pamphlet:

“

Illinois' current tax system unfairly benefits millionaires and billionaires and this amendment will set things right for middle-class and working people. Currently, it is unfair that billionaires pay the same tax rate as regular people. Voting "yes" on the amendment means that the State will enact a new tax structure where only those making above $250,000 a year will see their taxes go up. This amendment is simply upgrading Illinois' old tax system to a graduated system which is how the federal government and the majority of other states do it. This Amendment Would Make Illinois' Tax System Fair. Approval of this amendment would enact a fair system that allows the state to tax wealthy people at higher rates and lower income people at lower rates, replacing Illinois' current unfair tax system, in which wealthy people pay the exact same tax rate as lower and middle income people. Illinois' current tax system unfairly benefits millionaires and billionaires, and approval of this amendment will set things right for the middle class and working people. This amendment will help small business owners by creating a stable economic environment for their businesses to thrive. While others try to mislead you, under the current tax system in Illinois, policymakers already have the authority to set any tax rate and to change tax rates at their will. The current system forces policymakers to charge the same tax rate to everyone, regardless of how much money they make. If this amendment passes, the State will have the ability to tax higher income earners at a different rate. In fact, upon passage of this Amendment, a new tax structure will go into effect where 97% of taxpayers will pay the same or less, while only those making more than $250,000 a year will see a tax increase. This amendment does not tax retirement income. The Federal Government and Most States Use the Graduated Tax System Proposed in this Amendment, Not the Unfair System Currently Used in Illinois. Illinois is among a minority of states that do not utilize graduated tax rates because the Illinois Constitution requires a "flat tax" that penalizes middle-class and working people and benefits higher income individuals. A majority of states and the federal government already use the kind of graduated income tax system proposed in this amendment to ensure that wealthy people pay their fair share of taxes. Nearby states including Iowa, Minnesota, Missouri, Ohio, and Wisconsin are among the majority of states that have graduated tax systems. Illinois' Current Income Tax System Relies on Taxes from Middle and Lower Income Earners, While a Graduated System Would Lower that Burden and Fund Critical Programs such as Education and Human Services. While some states have fair tax rates in which the highest income earners pay the highest tax rate, Illinois' "flat tax" rate continues to rely unfairly on taxes from middle and lower income earners. Under Illinois' "flat tax" structure, a nurse making $50,000 per year pays the same tax rate as an executive making $4 million per year. A graduated tax rate would have the executive pay more. Because of the way our current tax system is set up, the bottom fifth of Illinois taxpayers (those making below $21,800) contribute 14.4% of their income to state and local taxes, compared to 7.4% for the top 1 percent of Illinois taxpayers. If this Amendment passes, the State has already enacted a new graduated tax structure where 97% of taxpayers will pay the same or less. Under the new tax structure, only the top 3% of Illinois income earners would pay more in income taxes. Everyone who makes $250,000 or less a year would pay the same or less. Over 95% of small businesses earn $250,000 or less a year in profits, and their owners will not see a tax increase under the new tax structure. This change will generate additional revenue each year that can help address Illinois' budget deficit and fund critical programs, including the State's education system, public safety, and social services like mental health and substance abuse treatment and domestic violence shelters. After the COVID-19 Pandemic, We Need to Do All We Can to Help the Economy and Middle-Class and Working People. Working people and essential workers like nurses, first responders, and grocery store clerks should not pay the same tax rate as the wealthy. Nurses making $50,000 a year should not pay the same tax rate as an executive making $4,000,000 a year. Having wealthy people pay more would reduce the burden on working families. This is money that middle and lower income people need for housing, groceries, medicine, and essentials. When the wealthiest people pay more, middle and lower income earners can pay less while the State funds critical services that our essential workers rely on.

”

Opposition

Two PACs—Coalition to Stop the Proposed Tax Hike and Say No to More Taxes—registered to oppose the constitutional amendment.

Opponents

Officials

• State Senator Bill Brady (R)
• State Senator Dale Righter (R)
• State Senator Paul Schimpf (R)
• State Representative Jim Durkin (R)
• State Representative Margo McDermed (R)
• State Representative David McSweeney (R)
• State Representative Lindsay Parkhurst (R)
• State Representative Steven Reick (R)

Organizations

• Americans for Tax Reform
• Civic Committee of the Commercial Club of Chicago
• Ideas Illinois
• Illinois Chamber of Commerce
• Illinois Farm Bureau
• Illinois Opportunity Project
• Illinois State Black Chamber of Commerce
• National Federation Of Independent Business Federal Political Action Committee
• Technology and Manufacturing Association

Individuals

• Greg Baise - Former President of the Illinois Manufacturers’ Association
• Jay Bergman - CEO of Petco Petroleum Corporation
• Craig Duchossois - Executive Chair of the The Duchossois Group, Inc.
• Kenneth Griffin - CEO of Citadel
• Muneer Satter - Founder of Satter Investment Management
• Timothy Schneider (R) - Chairperson of Illinois Republican Party
• Richard Uihlein - CEO of Uline Corporation
• Donald Wilson - CEO of DRW

Arguments

• Sen. Dale Righter (R-55): "There are a handful who believe that the answer to government’s problems is simply to raise taxes. This will make it easier for those who believe that to reach into your constituents’ pockets and get more money."
• Sen. Paul Schimpf (R-58): "Today’s Senate action continues to ignore the reality that Illinois politicians have an insatiable desire to spend more money and expand the size of government. Changing our taxing structure, without providing a means to limit spending or make it more difficult to raise taxes in the future, solves nothing. In fact, this plan will most likely only lead to more tax increases and higher spending in the future."
• Rep. Steven Reick (R-63): "This plan will not work. Do we need tax reform? You bet we do. This isn’t the way to do it. We need a global review of our entire tax system ... with an operating system that tracks our economy, that doesn’t create class envy and class warfare and take money from those who are the most productive in our society."
• Mark Grant, Illinois State Director for the National Federation of Independent Business: "If approved by voters in the November election, Governor Pritzker’s progressive tax is going to harm small businesses and their employees. It would eliminate the state constitution’s flat tax protection and create multiple tax brackets and rates. That means the more you earn, the higher your tax rate. And unlike our current tax law, the income brackets and tax rates could be changed by a simple majority any time lawmakers feel the need to increase revenue. Based on past experience, there’s a real concern that the General Assembly will continue to pass tax increases in the coming years so they can keep spending on new programs without fixing the deficit. Small business owners understand that the General Assembly has to address Illinois’ financial calamity but raising taxes without making major spending reforms won’t make things better."
• Illinois Chamber of Commerce: The Illinois Chamber of Commerce released a statement opposing the graduated income tax amendment, which included, "Illinois’ current flat rate income tax is inherently more fair than a graduated income tax since everyone pays the same rate and tax increases uniformly impact everyone. A flat rate tax does not promote divisive class warfare rhetoric or purposefully attempt to re-distribute income according to a subjective fairness standard. A flat rate tax requires all taxpayers to vigilantly stand guard against excessive government spending."

Official arguments

The following is the argument in opposition to the constitutional amendment that appeared in the official voter pamphlet:

“

1) The Amendment gives the Legislature power to increase taxes on any group of taxpayers with no limits and no accountability and without any requirement to use the additional revenue to fund essential needs such as healthcare, education, or public safety. 2) Taxes and spending are out of control. The Legislature should not be allowed to keep raising taxes until they get their spending under control. 3) In the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic, now is the worst possible time for a massive tax increase. The Amendment gives the Legislature power to increase taxes on any group of taxpayers with no limits and no accountability and without any requirement to use the additional revenue to fund essential needs such as healthcare, education, or public safety. The proposed amendment would give the Legislature unlimited new authority to increase income tax rates on any group of taxpayers at will, including low-income and middle-income families and small business owners. There would be no limit on the number of tax brackets that could be created and no limit on how high tax rates could be increased on individual taxpayers. In addition, this proposed change will pave the way for a tax on retirement income. Nothing in the amendment requires the Legislature to do anything to control spending. Nor does it require funds to be spent on essential needs such as healthcare, education, or public safety. It would simply give the Legislature a blank check to spend billions of dollars however they want, with no accountability. Taxes and spending are out of control. The Legislature should not be allowed to keep raising taxes until they get their spending under control. Illinois already has some of the highest property taxes and sales taxes in the nation. And the Legislature has increased Illinois income tax rates twice in the past decade to try to deal with the out-of-control spending in Springfield. Even before the COVID-19 pandemic, our state had a huge and growing multi-billion-dollar budget deficit, and the unfunded pension liability skyrocketed to over $137 billion. That’s because the Legislature has continued to increase state spending instead of eliminating government waste, corruption, and abuse. Because they refuse to control spending or pass major reforms, the Legislature will just continue to raise taxes on everyone in Illinois, and middle-class families will be their next target. In the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic, now is the worst possible time for a massive tax increase. The COVID-19 pandemic caused layoffs, unemployment, bankruptcies, and closures. As small businesses and local employers struggle to rebuild, this is the worst possible time to impose huge new tax increases. Even before the COVID-19 crisis, many residents and businesses were leaving the state because of the high tax burden. If the Amendment passes, it would be the last straw for thousands of small businesses, causing more jobs to leave the state, and making Illinois lose out on investments to rebuild our economy. This would mean fewer jobs and less opportunity for Illinois families.

”

Campaign finance

See also: Campaign finance requirements for Illinois ballot measures

The Vote Yes For Fairness, Vote Yes for Fair Tax, and Yes to a Financially Responsible Illinois PACs were registered to support the constitutional amendment. Together, the committees had raised $62.3 million. Gov. J.B. Pritzker (D) contributed 93 percent of the PACs' total combined funds.

The Vote No On The Blank Check Amendment, Coalition To Stop The Proposed Tax Hike, Chambers Against Progressive Income Tax, and Vote No on the Progressive Tax PACs were registered to oppose the constitutional amendment. Together, the committees had raised $61.3 million. Ken Griffin, the founder and CEO of Citadel, contributed 88 percent of the PACs' total combined funds.

	Cash Contributions	In-Kind Contributions	Total Contributions	Cash Expenditures	Total Expenditures
Support	$61,211,599.29	$1,061,902.85	$62,273,502.14	$59,436,298.13	$60,498,200.98
Oppose	$60,963,571.51	$344,144.65	$61,307,716.16	$60,198,912.93	$60,543,057.58
Total	$122,175,170.80	$1,406,047.50	$123,581,218.30	$119,635,211.06	$121,041,258.56

Support

The following table includes contribution and expenditure totals for the committees in support of the initiative.

Committees in support of Illinois Allow for Graduated Income Tax Amendment (2020)
Committee	Cash Contributions	In-Kind Contributions	Total Contributions	Cash Expenditures	Total Expenditures
Vote Yes For Fairness	$58,002,664.92	$0.00	$58,002,664.92	$56,744,203.75	$56,744,203.75
Vote Yes for Fair Tax	$2,520,050.00	$1,046,644.10	$3,566,694.10	$2,508,344.11	$3,554,988.21
Yes to a Financially Responsible Illinois	$688,884.37	$15,258.75	$704,143.12	$183,750.27	$199,009.02
Total	$61,211,599.29	$1,061,902.85	$62,273,502.14	$59,436,298.13	$60,498,200.98

Donors

The following was the top five donors to the support committees.

Donor	Cash Contributions	In-Kind Contributions	Total Contributions
Gov. J.B. Pritzker	$58,000,000.00	$0.00	$58,000,000.00
National Education Association	$850,000.00	$0.00	$850,000.00
AARP	$688,884.37	$0.00	$688,884.37
Omidyar Network	$500,000.00	$0.00	$500,000.00
Strategic Victory Fund	$500,000.00	$0.00	$500,000.00
American Federation of Teachers	$250,000.00	$0.00	$250,000.00

Opposition

The following table includes contribution and expenditure totals for the committees in opposition to the initiative.

Committees in opposition to Illinois Allow for Graduated Income Tax Amendment (2020)
Committee	Cash Contributions	In-Kind Contributions	Total Contributions	Cash Expenditures	Total Expenditures
Coalition to Stop the Proposed Tax Hike	$59,759,479.00	$0.00	$59,759,479.00	$59,184,724.47	$59,184,724.47
Say No to More Taxes	$1,045,000.00	$300,062.45	$1,345,062.45	$867,270.65	$1,167,333.10
Vote No on the Progressive Tax	$79,852.81	$42,421.20	$122,274.01	$79,872.81	$122,294.01
Chambers Against Progressive Income Tax	$79,239.70	$1,661.00	$80,900.70	$67,045.00	$68,706.00
Vote No On The Blank Check Amendment	$0.00	$0.00	$0.00	$0.00	$0.00
Total	$60,963,571.51	$344,144.65	$61,307,716.16	$60,198,912.93	$60,543,057.58

Donors

The following were the top five donors to the opposition committees.

Donor	Cash Contributions	In-Kind Contributions	Total Contributions
Kenneth C. Griffin	$53,750,000.00	$0.00	$53,750,000.00
Samuel Zell Revocable Trust	$1,100,000.00	$0.00	$1,100,000.00
Patrick G. Ryan	$1,000,000.00	$0.00	$1,000,000.00
Illinois Opportunity Project	$995,000.00	$0.00	$995,000.00
Jennifer Pritzker	$800,000.00	$0.00	$800,000.00

Satellite spending

See also: Satellite spending

There were at least two 501(c)(4) nonprofit organizations that spent funds to advertise for or against the constitutional amendment while legislators were considering the measure.

Support

• Think Big Illinois, a nonprofit organization, was launched on February 8, 2019, and aired advertisements supporting legislation to place the constitutional amendment on the ballot. Quentin Fulks, a former campaign staffer for Gov. J.B. Pritzker's (D) 2018 gubernatorial campaign, headed Think Big Illinois. Gov. Pritzker had donated to the organization but had no other involvement, according to Think Big Illinois spokesperson Lara Sisselman.

Opposition

• Ideas Illinois, a nonprofit organization, was launched on February 8, 2019, and aired advertisements opposing legislation to place the constitutional amendment on the ballot. The Coalition for Jobs, Growth and Prosperity, which formed in 2004, organized Ideas Illinois. Greg Baise, former president of the Illinois Manufacturers Association, led Ideas Illinois.

Media editorials

See also: 2020 ballot measure media endorsements

Ballotpedia identified the following media editorial boards as taking positions on the ballot measure. If you are aware of a media editorial board position that is not listed below, please email the editorial link to editor@ballotpedia.org.

Support

• Chicago Sun Times Editorial Board: "To our thinking, the plight of these workers demonstrates the fundamental unfairness of the flat income tax in Illinois, in which every dollar is taxed at the same rate no matter how rich or poor you are. And nothing makes a better argument for voting on Nov. 3 to move our state to a graduated income tax, which would require the wealthiest of us to pick up a little more of the total tab. ... If we’re serious about all that love for those “essential” workers, there’s only one clear choice: Vote for the graduated income tax on Nov. 3."

Opposition

• The Chicago Tribune Editorial Board: "But the subtext of every request for your vote is that you should trust present and future Springfield politicians to keep this much-stated promise: Taxes would rise only for the highest-income 3%; the rest of us would get teensy tax cuts. But as you encounter Democratic primary election candidates, ask them: You’ll guarantee me that Springfield wouldn’t also spike tax rates on middle-class taxpayers for how long, exactly? ... But Illinois Democrats don’t talk about restructuring how state government operates. They talk about how much more money they need to prop it all up. Remember that when proponents of this taxing amendment scream that there’ll be crisis after crisis if voters don’t cave and approve it."

Polls

Illinois Allow for Graduated Income Tax Amendment (2020)
Poll	Support	Oppose	Undecided	Margin of error	Sample size
University of Illinois Springfield Survey Research Office 9/13/2019 - 9/23/2019	67.0%	33.0%	0.0%	+/-3.5	1,012
Paul Simon Public Policy Institute at Southern Illinois University 3/11/2019 - 3/17/2019	67.0%	31.0%	2.0%	+/-3.1	1,000
AVERAGES	67%	32%	1%	+/-3.3	1,006
Note: The polls above may not reflect all polls that have been conducted in this race. Those displayed are a random sampling chosen by Ballotpedia staff. If you would like to nominate another poll for inclusion in the table, send an email to editor@ballotpedia.org.

Summaries

• September 13—September 23, 2019: The University of Illinois Springfield Survey Research Office asked 1,012 registered voters the following question: "Do you support or oppose amending the Illinois Constitution to allow for a graduated income tax?" The poll found that 67 percent of respondents favored the amendment and 33 percent opposed the amendment. The poll did not include an option for undecided. Democrats and Democrat-leaning voters supported the amendment at 79 percent. Republicans and Republican-leaning voters opposed the proposal at 52 percent.

• March 11—March 17, 2019: The Paul Simon Public Policy Institute at Southern Illinois University asked 1,000 registered voters the following question: "Would you favor or oppose a proposal to change the Illinois Constitution to allow a graduated income tax - that is, tax rates would be lower for lower-income taxpayers and higher for upper-income taxpayers?" Of the 1,000 respondents, 67 percent favored the proposal, 31 percent opposed the proposal, and 2 percent were undecided. Democrats had the highest level of support at 88 percent. Independents supported the proposal at 65 percent. Republicans opposed the proposal at 55 percent.

Background

Income tax in Illinois

For personal income earned in 2018, the income tax was a flat rate of 4.95 percent. The Illinois State Legislature overrode Gov. Bruce Rauner's (R) veto of a bill to increase the rate from 3.75 percent to 4.95 percent in 2017.

Senate Bill 687 (2019)

Gov. J.B. Pritzker (D) signed Senate Bill 687 (SB 687), which was designed to enact a graduated income tax, on June 5, 2019. SB 687 would not go into effect unless voters approve SJR 1 on November 3, 2020. The Illinois House of Representatives passed the final version of SB 687 on May 30, 2019, in a vote of 67-48. The Illinois State Senate passed the final version of SB 687 on May 31, 2019, in a vote of 37-20.

SB 687 would change the state's income tax from a flat rate to six graduated rates beginning on January 1, 2021. The following table illustrates the graduated rate under SB 687 for single and joint filers:

Illinois SB 687 (2019) income tax rates
Brackets	Single		Joint
	Income	Rate	Income	Rate
1	Up to $10,000	4.75% marginal rate	Up to $10,000	4.75% marginal rate
2	$10,001—$100,000	4.90% marginal rate	$10,001—$100,000	4.90% marginal rate
3	$100,001—$250,000	4.95% marginal rate	100,001—$250,000	4.95% marginal rate
4	$250,001—$350,000	7.75% marginal rate	$250,001—$500,000	7.75% marginal rate
5	$350,001—$750,000	7.85% marginal rate	$500,001—$1,000,000	7.85% marginal rate
6	Annual income of $750,001 or above	7.99% on net income instead of marginal rates	Annual income of $1,000,000 or above	7.99% on net income instead of marginal rates
Source: Illinois General Assembly, "Senate Bill 687," accessed June 11, 2019

Comparison of state income tax structures

As of 2019, 43 states levied a tax on personal income. Of these 43 states, 11 had a flat income tax rate. The flat rates ranged from 2.00 percent in Tennessee to 5.25 percent in North Carolina. The remaining 32 states had graduated tax structures, with various numbers of brackets and ranges. New Hampshire and Tennessee taxed personal income derived from interest and dividends but not wages and salaries.

2018 gubernatorial election

See also: Illinois gubernatorial and lieutenant gubernatorial election, 2018

J.B. Pritzker (D) won the gubernatorial election on November 6, 2018, defeating incumbent Gov. Bruce Rauner (R). Pritzker campaigned on enacting a graduated income tax, including a constitutional amendment. He said, "the bottom 20 percent are paying roughly 13 to 13.5 percent of their income in state taxes. The people at the top are paying 6 percent. That seems very unfair." Rauner opposed Pritzker's proposal and instead campaigned on decreasing the rate of the state's flat income tax. He said a graduated income tax would be a nightmare for Illinois. Rauner added, "I want to roll the income tax rate back down to 3 percent over the next four or five years."

The election of J.B. Pritzker made the state of Illinois a Democratic trifecta, meaning Democrats won control of the House, Senate, and governor's office. Democrats also increased their majorities in the Illinois State Legislature. In the state Senate, Democrats won 40 seats, an increase from 37 seats. In the state House, Democrats won 74 seats, an increase from 67 seats. The pass a constitutional amendment 36 votes were needed in the Senate and 71 votes in the House.

Tax policies on the ballot in 2020

See also: Taxes on the ballot

In 2020, voters in 14 states voted on 21 ballot measures addressing tax-related policies. Ten of the measures addressed taxes on properties, three were related to income tax rates, two addressed tobacco taxes, one addressed business-related taxes, one addressed sales tax rates, one addressed fees and surcharges, and one was related to tax-increment financing (TIF).

Click Show to read details about the tax-related measures on statewide ballots in 2020.

Tax-related policy ballot measures in 2020

Income Tax a/ot Arizona Proposition 208: The campaign Invest in Education proposed the ballot initiative to enact a 3.50% income tax, in addition to the existing income tax (4.50% in 2020), on income above $250,000 (single filing) or $500,000 (joint filing). Proposition 208 was designed to distribute the revenue from the 3.50% income tax to teacher and classroom support staff salaries, retention programs, and career and technical education programs. a Colorado Proposition 116: In 1987, the state's income tax was changed from graduated rates to a flat rate. Going into 2020, that flat rate was 4.63%. The ballot initiative reduced the rate from 4.63% to 4.55%. d Illinois Allow for Graduated Income Tax Amendment: The Illinois State Legislature proposed this constitutional amendment to allow the state to enact legislation for a graduated income tax. Going into 2020, the state constitution required that the state personal income tax be a flat rate. Gov. J.B. Pritzker (D), who advocated for a graduated income tax during his gubernatorial campaign, was providing funds to the campaign backing the amendment. Business-Related Taxes d Alaska Ballot Measure 1: The campaign Vote Yes for Alaska's Fair Share proposed the ballot initiative to increase taxes on oil production fields located in Alaska's North Slope that exceeded certain output minimums. According to Robin Brena, chairperson of Vote Yes for Alaska's Fair Share, three oil production fields—Alpine, Kuparuk, and Prudhoe Bay—met those criteria. BP, Conoco Phillips, ExxonMobil, and Hilcorp Energy funded the campaign to defeat Measure 1. a Nebraska Initiative 431: The initiative was designed to impose an annual tax of 20% on gross gambling revenue of licensed gaming operators; distributing 2.5% of tax revenue to the Compulsive Gamblers Assistance Fund, 2.5% to the General Fund, 70% to the Property Tax Credit Cash Fund, and 25% to the counties where gambling is authorized at licensed racetracks. The initiative was one of three initiatives that together were designed to authorize, regulate, and tax gambling at racetracks in Nebraska. Property-Related Taxes d California Proposition 15: The ballot initiative would have amended Proposition 13 (1978), which required that residential, commercial, and industrial properties are taxed based on their purchase price, with an annual adjustment based on inflation or 2%, whichever was lower. Proposition 15 would have required commercial and industrial properties, except those zoned as commercial agriculture, to be taxed based on their market value. In California, the proposal to assess taxes on commercial and industrial properties at market value, while continuing to assess taxes on residential properties based on the purchase price, is known as split roll. The state fiscal analyst estimated that Proposition 15 would generate between $6.5 billion and $11.5 billion. Proposition 15 would have required that the revenue be allocated to local governments and schools. a California Proposition 19: The state Legislature proposed the constitutional amendment as a compromise with the California Association of Realtors, which had qualified a different ballot initiative. Proposition 19 was designed to allow tax assessments to be transferred from someone's old home to their new home anywhere in the state and increased the number of times that tax assessments can be transferred from one to three for persons over 55 years old or with severe disabilities. Proposition 19 was also designed to require that inherited homes that are not used as principal residences, such as second homes or rentals, be reassessed at market value when transferred. a Colorado Amendment B: The constitutional amendment repealed the Gallagher Amendment (1982), which required a 45%-55% ratio between residential assessment rates and non-residential assessment rates regarding tax revenue. Therefore, Amendment B permitted the Colorado Legislature to define tax assessment limits without reference to the 45%-55% ratio requirement. In Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, New Jersey, and Virginia, voters also decided eight ballot measures related to exemptions, adjustments, and payments: Florida Amendment 5, Florida Amendment 6, Referendum A, Louisiana Amendment 2, Louisiana Amendment 5, Louisiana Amendment 6, New Jersey Question 2, and Virginia Question 2. Sales Tax a Arkansas Issue 1: The ballot measure continued an existing a 0.5% sales tax, with revenue dedicated to roads, highways, and bridges. Going into 2020, the tax was set to expire in 2023. Issue 1 had the support of Gov. Asa Hutchinson (R), and the campaign behind Issue 1 received financial support from Alice and Jim Walton. Tobacco a Colorado Proposition EE: The ballot measure increased the tax rate on cigarettes from 84 cents per pack to $2.64 per pack and the tax rate on tobacco products from 40% of the manufacturer's list price to 62% of the manufacturer's list price. The ballot measure created a tax on nicotine products, such as e-cigarettes, with scheduled increases over seven years to 62% of the manufacturer's list price. Revenue from the tax increases was dedicated to preschool, education, housing, and the General Fund. a Oregon Measure 108: The ballot measure increased the cigarette tax from $1.33 to $3.33 per pack. The ballot measure also taxed e-cigarettes and other nicotine inhalants at a rate of 65% of the wholesale sales price and cigars at 65% of the wholesale sales price (but not to exceed $1.00 per cigar). Measure 108 dedicated revenue from the tax increases to the Oregon Health Authority. Fees a Colorado Proposition 117: In 1992, the Colorado Taxpayer's Bill of Rights (TABOR) Amendment defined government-owned firms that provide goods or services for a fee as enterprises. Examples of enterprises include state nursing homes, state lotteries, Colorado Correctional Industries, and College Assist. The ballot measure was designed to require voter approval of laws that create new enterprises should the enterprise's projected or actual revenue from fees and surcharges exceed $100 million within the first five years. TIF a Nebraska Amendment 2: The constitutional amendment increased the repayment period for tax increment financing from 15 to 20 years for areas where more than one-half of properties are designated as extremely blighted.

Path to the ballot

See also: Amending the Illinois Constitution

In Illinois, a 60 percent vote is needed in each chamber of the Illinois General Assembly to refer a constitutional amendment to the ballot for voter consideration.

The constitutional amendment was introduced into the state legislature as Senate Joint Resolution 1 (SJR 1) during the 2019 legislative session. With passage in both the state Senate and House, SJR 1 was referred to the ballot for voter consideration. Votes occurred along partisan lines. Democrats supported SJR 1, and Republicans opposed SJR 1. In 2019, Democrats held supermajorities in the Senate (68 percent of seats) and House (63 percent of seats). From 2016 to 2018, Democrats held majorities in the House and Senate but not enough seats to pass a constitutional amendment along partisan lines.

In the Illinois State Senate, 36 votes were needed to approve SJR 1. Democrats controlled 40 seats in the state Senate, and Republicans controlled 19 seats. On May 1, 2019, the state Senate passed SJR 1, with support from 40 state senators. Democrats supported SJR 1, while Republicans opposed SJR 1.

In the Illinois House of Representatives, 71 votes were needed to approve SJR 1. Democrats controlled 74 seats in the state House, and Republicans controlled 44 seats. On May 27, 2019, the state House passed SJR 1, with support from 73 senators.

Vote in the Illinois State Senate May 1, 2019
Requirement: Three-fifths (60 percent) vote of all members in each chamber
Number of yes votes required: 36  a
	Yes	No	Not voting
Total	40	19	0
Total percent	67.80%	32.20%	0.00%
Democrat	40	0	0
Republican	0	19	0

Vote in the Illinois House of Representatives May 27, 2019
Requirement: Three-fifths (60 percent) vote of all members in each chamber
Number of yes votes required: 71  a
	Yes	No	Not voting
Total	73	44	1
Total percent	61.86%	37.29%	0.85%
Democrat	73	0	1
Republican	0	44	0

On May 18, 2020, House Minority Leader Jim Durkin (R-82) and Senate Minority Leader Bill Brady (R-44) introduced a resolution to remove the constitutional amendment from the ballot.

How to cast a vote

See also: Voting in Illinois

Click "Show" to learn more about voter registration, identification requirements, and poll times in Illinois.

How to cast a vote in Illinois

The information below covers regular voting policies in the state. Information may have not applied to the election on November 3, 2020, because of temporary changes in response to coronavirus. Click here to read about changes made for the 2020 elections. Poll times In Illinois, all polls are open from 6:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. Central Time. An individual who is in line at the time polls close must be allowed to vote. Registration Check your voter registration status here. To register to vote in Illinois, a person must be a U.S. citizen, a resident of an Illinois precinct for at least 30 days prior to election day, and at least 18 years old by election day. A 17-year-old may vote in a primary if he or she will be 18 years old at the subsequent general election. Preregistration is available starting at age 16. Regular registration closes during the period beginning 27 days prior to an election and ending two days after the election. Online registration closes 16 days prior to an election. Grace period registration is available in person through election day at certain locations. Prospective voters can register online, by mail, or at any of the following locations: “ County Clerk's Office Board of Election Commissioner's Office City and Village Offices Township Offices Precinct Committeeman Schools Public Libraries Military Recruitment Offices ” Two forms of identification are required to register in person, one of which must display the voter's current address. Automatic registration Illinois automatically registers eligible individuals to vote through the Department of Motor Vehicles and other designated automatic voter registration agencies. Online registration See also: Online voter registration Illinois has implemented an online voter registration system. Residents can register to vote by visiting this website. Same-day registration Illinois allows same-day voter registration. Residency requirements Illinois law requires 30 days of residency in the state before a person may vote. Verification of citizenship See also: Laws permitting noncitizens to vote in the United States Illinois does not require proof of citizenship for voter registration. An individual applying to register to vote must attest that they are a U.S. citizen under penalty of perjury. All 49 states with voter registration systems require applicants to declare that they are U.S. citizens in order to register to vote in state and federal elections, under penalty of perjury or other punishment. As of January 2025, six states — Alabama, Arizona, Georgia, Kansas, Louisiana, and New Hampshire — had passed laws requiring verification of citizenship at the time of voter registration. However, only two of those states' laws were in effect, in Arizona and New Hampshire. In three states — California, Maryland, and Vermont — at least one local jurisdiction allowed noncitizens to vote in some local elections as of November 2024. Noncitizens registering to vote in those elections must complete a voter registration application provided by the local jurisdiction and are not eligible to register as state or federal voters. Verifying your registration The Registration Lookup page, run by the Illinois Board of Elections, allows residents to check their voter registration status online. Voter ID requirements Illinois does not require voters to present identification while voting, in most cases. First-time voters who registered by mail and did not submit their driver’s license number, state ID number, last four digits of their social security number, or other form of ID are required to present identification showing their name and address before voting. The following list of accepted ID was current as of August 2024. Click here for the Illinois State Board of Elections voting information page to ensure you have the most current information. “ A current and valid photo identification Utility bill Bank statement Government check Paycheck Lease or contract for residence Student ID & mail addressed to voter’s residence Government document ”

See also

2020 measures

• 2020 ballot measures
• Taxes on the ballot

Illinois

• Illinois ballot measures
• Illinois ballot measure laws
• Personal income tax

News and analysis

• Ballot measure lawsuits
• Ballot measure readability
• Ballot measure polls

External links

Information

• Senate Joint Resolution 1 (2019)
• Illinois Proposed Constitutional Amendment Guide

Support

• Vote Yes for Fairness
• Vote Yes for Fairness on Facebook
• Vote Yes for Fairness on Twitter

Opposition

• Vote No on Blank Check Amendment
• Vote No on Blank Check Amendment on Facebook
• Vote No on Blank Check Amendment on Twitter