Tuesday, December 29, 2009
Sunday, December 27, 2009
High sales tax in Chicago...because of a low flat-rate income tax
Why are our sales taxes so high in Chicago, Cook County and Illinois?
Because we choose sales taxes more than income taxes in this state.
There's no such thing as a Chicago income tax. There is in New York City. And Washington, D.C. But not Chicago.
So the money has to come from somewhere. If we don't tax income, then we either tax sales or property.
That's it. Those are the choices. Income tax. Sales tax. Property tax.
And the state income tax is...low. So the state sales tax is high.
It's 6.25%. That's pretty high.
Here is a Wikipedia state-by-state comparison of sales taxes.
The state income tax is only 3%. That's pretty low.
It's the lowest income tax rate in the country. Check out Wikipedia.
There is no state property tax.
So Illinois uses a pretty high sales tax, a very low income tax and no state property tax.
If we had a higher income tax rate -- and if we used tax brackets like the federal government and like 30-some other states -- we could lower our sales tax.
So the next time you look at your receipt and wonder why the sales tax is so high, think about our low income tax and our lack of state income tax brackets.
Because we choose sales taxes more than income taxes in this state.
There's no such thing as a Chicago income tax. There is in New York City. And Washington, D.C. But not Chicago.
So the money has to come from somewhere. If we don't tax income, then we either tax sales or property.
That's it. Those are the choices. Income tax. Sales tax. Property tax.
And the state income tax is...low. So the state sales tax is high.
It's 6.25%. That's pretty high.
Here is a Wikipedia state-by-state comparison of sales taxes.
The state income tax is only 3%. That's pretty low.
It's the lowest income tax rate in the country. Check out Wikipedia.
There is no state property tax.
So Illinois uses a pretty high sales tax, a very low income tax and no state property tax.
If we had a higher income tax rate -- and if we used tax brackets like the federal government and like 30-some other states -- we could lower our sales tax.
So the next time you look at your receipt and wonder why the sales tax is so high, think about our low income tax and our lack of state income tax brackets.
Thursday, December 24, 2009
Welfare
Last night my friend complained about this here project saying, "a small business is already taxed at about 40% by its 'business partner', the government, and now you want the business owner to pay higher taxes on personal income from said business because he/she/I make 'too much money".
No, anonymous-friend, it's not that I'm jealous of your money and want to punish you. I don't want you to pay for "women who pop out babies to collect welfare". Maybe welfare should get a revamp, but the majority of your taxes do NOT go to welfare... read this
grrr, republican-friend-with-sweet-moustache, let us again take a look at Quinn's list of where your Illinois taxes go. List! I imagine if every dollar that goes towards a woman with children counts as welfare then you could be right, friend-of-mine. But you know, gentle reader, that is a misrepresentation of the numbers.
And, close-friend-with-whom-I've-shared-great-adventures-and-who-has bought-me-many-generous-gifts, you too should be able to vote your conscience in 2010. So let's all contact our reps to get it on the ballot!
Thanks for the inspiration and whiskey talks, Keith.
No, anonymous-friend, it's not that I'm jealous of your money and want to punish you. I don't want you to pay for "women who pop out babies to collect welfare". Maybe welfare should get a revamp, but the majority of your taxes do NOT go to welfare... read this
grrr, republican-friend-with-sweet-moustache, let us again take a look at Quinn's list of where your Illinois taxes go. List! I imagine if every dollar that goes towards a woman with children counts as welfare then you could be right, friend-of-mine. But you know, gentle reader, that is a misrepresentation of the numbers.
And, close-friend-with-whom-I've-shared-great-adventures-and-who-has bought-me-many-generous-gifts, you too should be able to vote your conscience in 2010. So let's all contact our reps to get it on the ballot!
Thanks for the inspiration and whiskey talks, Keith.
Saturday, December 19, 2009
Really!?
Where does Illinois get it's cash money? Hmmm. Notice how high the sales taxes are compared to income tax. No es bueno for poor peeps, ya'll.
Property Tax 37.1%
General Sales Tax 16.6%
Selective Sales Tax 17.2%
Individual Income 17.1%
Corporate Income 5.3%
Licenses & Other 6.6%
compare us to other states
Property Tax 37.1%
General Sales Tax 16.6%
Selective Sales Tax 17.2%
Individual Income 17.1%
Corporate Income 5.3%
Licenses & Other 6.6%
compare us to other states
Wednesday, December 16, 2009
Women and Taxes
The following is an excerpt from"Taxes are a Woman’s Issue: Reframing the Debate". It is a very comprehensive description of the necessity of a progressive tax system from the National Council for Research on Women. Though the research was specifically on women, the information applies to everyone who is not super-rich and is important for everyone to understand.
Women generally benefit from a progressive tax system that taxes people according to their ability to pay. They are disadvantaged by a tax system that doesn’t raise enough money for public services that support and help compensate for their patterns of paid and unpaid labor.
How Has This happened?
Significant changes in tax policy over the past quarter century have led to increasingly inadequate budgets at the local, state, and national levels and a decreasingly progressive tax system overall.
Taxes on wealth, the most progressive kinds of taxes, have been systematically rolled back. Capital gains taxes, which apply to profits made on the sale of financial assets like real estate or stocks, account for more than half of the income of the very wealthy, yet tax rates on that income have been more than halved since the 1970s. Likewise, the inheritance tax on large estates and taxes on dividend income from corporate stocks and bonds, both of which affect to a very large degree the very wealthy, have been slashed.
Add to this the great growth in more regressive taxes – like state sales taxes and payroll taxes – and you have a system that is taking less and less from those with more – and more and more from those with less.
Tax cuts since 2001 have accelerated this trend, lowering the combined federal, state and local tax rate for the top 1% of taxpayers by 12 % while low-income taxpayers enjoyed cuts of only 3 %. For women with low incomes, they pose devastating threats to their fundamental security and that of their families. This inequality is built into the ways the nation raises and spends its tax revenues. It is both systemic and structural, affecting all women but not in the same ways or to the same degree.
Less Public Money: Decreasing progressivity has meant that governments have a smaller pool of wealth available to fund our public services.
More Pressure on Low- and Middle- Income Earners: With changes in the tax system at all levels of government, the share of the national tax bill paid by low and middle income wage earners, disproportionately women, is increasing while the wealthy and corporations are seeing more of their incomes remain in their pockets after taxes.
Underfunded Public Services: With decreased tax revenues there is less money to sustain the quality and availability of public services that affect us all – like public education, roads, sanitation, environmental protection, and public safety.
Squeeze on Social Welfare: Need-based public programs like Medicaid, nutrition programs, and childcare on which low-income women particularly depend have been consistently squeezed. In February 2006, Congress and the President cut an additional $39.5 billion over 5 years from such programs as health care for the elderly and student loans.
A Widening Gap between Rich and Poor: In 2001, the richest 20% of households owned 83% of the country’s assets while the bottom 18% had zero or negative net worths – and this discrepancy is even more dramatic when race is considered. Nearly 31% of African American households had zero or minus net worth.
The report is co-authored by Mimi Abramovitz, a professor at the Hunter College School of Social Work, and Sandra Morgen, director of the Center for the Study of Women in Society and professor of anthropology at the University of Oregon, with the National Council for Research on Women and published by the Feminist Press. read the full article
Women generally benefit from a progressive tax system that taxes people according to their ability to pay. They are disadvantaged by a tax system that doesn’t raise enough money for public services that support and help compensate for their patterns of paid and unpaid labor.
How Has This happened?
Significant changes in tax policy over the past quarter century have led to increasingly inadequate budgets at the local, state, and national levels and a decreasingly progressive tax system overall.
Taxes on wealth, the most progressive kinds of taxes, have been systematically rolled back. Capital gains taxes, which apply to profits made on the sale of financial assets like real estate or stocks, account for more than half of the income of the very wealthy, yet tax rates on that income have been more than halved since the 1970s. Likewise, the inheritance tax on large estates and taxes on dividend income from corporate stocks and bonds, both of which affect to a very large degree the very wealthy, have been slashed.
Add to this the great growth in more regressive taxes – like state sales taxes and payroll taxes – and you have a system that is taking less and less from those with more – and more and more from those with less.
Tax cuts since 2001 have accelerated this trend, lowering the combined federal, state and local tax rate for the top 1% of taxpayers by 12 % while low-income taxpayers enjoyed cuts of only 3 %. For women with low incomes, they pose devastating threats to their fundamental security and that of their families. This inequality is built into the ways the nation raises and spends its tax revenues. It is both systemic and structural, affecting all women but not in the same ways or to the same degree.
Less Public Money: Decreasing progressivity has meant that governments have a smaller pool of wealth available to fund our public services.
More Pressure on Low- and Middle- Income Earners: With changes in the tax system at all levels of government, the share of the national tax bill paid by low and middle income wage earners, disproportionately women, is increasing while the wealthy and corporations are seeing more of their incomes remain in their pockets after taxes.
Underfunded Public Services: With decreased tax revenues there is less money to sustain the quality and availability of public services that affect us all – like public education, roads, sanitation, environmental protection, and public safety.
Squeeze on Social Welfare: Need-based public programs like Medicaid, nutrition programs, and childcare on which low-income women particularly depend have been consistently squeezed. In February 2006, Congress and the President cut an additional $39.5 billion over 5 years from such programs as health care for the elderly and student loans.
A Widening Gap between Rich and Poor: In 2001, the richest 20% of households owned 83% of the country’s assets while the bottom 18% had zero or negative net worths – and this discrepancy is even more dramatic when race is considered. Nearly 31% of African American households had zero or minus net worth.
The report is co-authored by Mimi Abramovitz, a professor at the Hunter College School of Social Work, and Sandra Morgen, director of the Center for the Study of Women in Society and professor of anthropology at the University of Oregon, with the National Council for Research on Women and published by the Feminist Press. read the full article
Friday, December 11, 2009
How do tax brackets work?
mmmk, so it has come to my attention that some people don't understand how progressive taxes work. It's probably because you're in the lowest bracket and have never had to think about it. Let's say you are Cam Barker, a Black Hawk with a mid-range salary of 3,000,000 dollars. If Illinois switched to tax-brackets from the flat tax Cam would be taxed 3% on the first 20, 000, 5% up to 100,000, and 7% above that. Those numbers are arbitrary, but you can see that progressive taxes don't just take 7% of 3 million, but tax each level independently. Therefore, the percentage someone in a higher bracket really pays is not so high. This site has a thingy where you can put in your own numbers for your federal taxes, whoo fun!
"Ahhh, yes!" you say, "I get it! It really is a fair way of getting some money to service the fine citizens of Illinois." Don't you want a chance to vote about it? Go back in this blog a bit and you'll find a link to your state reps. shoot off a lil' email and feel good and smug for a while, yes?
"Ahhh, yes!" you say, "I get it! It really is a fair way of getting some money to service the fine citizens of Illinois." Don't you want a chance to vote about it? Go back in this blog a bit and you'll find a link to your state reps. shoot off a lil' email and feel good and smug for a while, yes?
Thursday, December 10, 2009
Happy Holidays to me
I was recently informed that I have been overpaid at work for the last 5 paychecks. Essentially, taxes were added instead of subtracted. I have to pay it back now. This prompted me to find out where my money is going. Take a look at this.
Saturday, December 5, 2009
There will already be one constitutional amendment on the November 2010 Illinois ballot (about recalling the governor)
Thanks largely to the advocacy of Governor Pat Quinn, voters in Illinois will have the chance in November to decide whether to add an amendment to the state constitution that gives voters the ability to recall the Governor.
So putting one more amendment on the November 2010 ballot isn't that big a deal. Voters will already have one amendment to consider. Putting an amendment on the ballot asking voters whether we should eliminate the no-tax-bracket mandate will provide for a little series of amendments for voters to consider.
If you'd like to read the amendment, it's HJRCA 31 .
So putting one more amendment on the November 2010 ballot isn't that big a deal. Voters will already have one amendment to consider. Putting an amendment on the ballot asking voters whether we should eliminate the no-tax-bracket mandate will provide for a little series of amendments for voters to consider.
If you'd like to read the amendment, it's HJRCA 31 .
Thursday, December 3, 2009
Though I have been living above the poverty line for almost 2 years now,
I am certainly not rolling in it. Many of my friends think my lifestyle is extravagant, what with the rent I've been paying on time, eating in restaurants, purchasing lattes, and riding in cabs. I have friends on the other end of the spectrum. They are horrified that I don't have a savings account, health insurance, sicks days, or pictures from a vacation in Costa Rica. I am safely in the middle.
I am representative of many people in their mid twenties. I know that some of my peers will work their way up to making six figures and we will slowly drift apart. They will develop a taste for the finer things and we will have less common ground. When this happens, I hope that they will not loose their integrity, that greed does not creep in.
I've heard people say they don't want to pay for services for poor people, that progressive taxes aren't fair. Somehow it turns into a debate of poor vs rich and blue vs red. I try my hardest to see their point of view. If someone can clarify, please post a comment.
I am certainly not rolling in it. Many of my friends think my lifestyle is extravagant, what with the rent I've been paying on time, eating in restaurants, purchasing lattes, and riding in cabs. I have friends on the other end of the spectrum. They are horrified that I don't have a savings account, health insurance, sicks days, or pictures from a vacation in Costa Rica. I am safely in the middle.
I am representative of many people in their mid twenties. I know that some of my peers will work their way up to making six figures and we will slowly drift apart. They will develop a taste for the finer things and we will have less common ground. When this happens, I hope that they will not loose their integrity, that greed does not creep in.
I've heard people say they don't want to pay for services for poor people, that progressive taxes aren't fair. Somehow it turns into a debate of poor vs rich and blue vs red. I try my hardest to see their point of view. If someone can clarify, please post a comment.
Tuesday, December 1, 2009
"I'm Just a Bill"
In case School House Rock didn't stick with you, here is a lovely map of how a bill to becomes a law.
Find your public officials
You can see who represents you here. You can search by address and follow the links to each official's contact information.
Have fun!
Have fun!
Can we vote on it?
It's more than a partisan issue, friends. Senator Frerichs proposed an amendment that would have allowed a vote on progressive vs. flat rate taxes (see Dan's post below). Everyone should be in favor of this amendment, regardless of party preference. We deserve to have our state tax structure represented on the ballot. Senator Kwame Raoul should be commended for his powerful plea to both parties to forget about their next election bids to do what is sensible and fair. Our elected officials need to put aside their own interests and represent ours by taking flat taxes out of the constitution and putting them up to the people of Illinois for scrutiny.
3% flat tax for all may sound fair, but when combined with consumption and property taxes it puts a huge burden on the middle and lower classes. Tax brackets do not take advantage of the wealthy and they are not a tax hike.
Tell your state representatives you want it on the ballot. We want to vote on it!
3% flat tax for all may sound fair, but when combined with consumption and property taxes it puts a huge burden on the middle and lower classes. Tax brackets do not take advantage of the wealthy and they are not a tax hike.
Tell your state representatives you want it on the ballot. We want to vote on it!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
