• Assessor Kaegi Legislation. Two proposals that have been introduced in recent years by Cook Coun- ty Assessor Fritz Kaegi to require new disclosures of sensitive property tax assessment data to his office failed to pass yet again. HB 1827 (Davis) and HB 1829 (Slaughter) would seek additional powers to require certain income-producing properties in Cook County to share income and expense data and physical description data, respectively. The proposals did not receive any vote. • Progressive Income Tax Proposals. HJRCA 8 (Tarver): Last November, voters in Illinois voted on three advisory referenda. One of the questions asked voters if they would support a 3% income tax surcharge on incomes of over $1 million to be used towards “property tax relief.” Given the advisory and non-bind- ing nature of the question, no real campaign was made to inform voters, which resulted in its passage by 60.8% of the voters voting on the question. This year, Chairman Tarver introduced a constitution- al amendment that would impose a similar surcharge of 3% on incomes higher than $1 million, with revenues going to school districts in the State. The amendment did not receive a substantive hearing or vote. SJRCA 4 (Martwick)/ HJRCA 16 (Rashid): Senator Martwick (who previously has introduced graduated income tax proposals) and Representative Rashid introduced a constitutional amendment that would amend the State’s “non-graduated rate” (or “flat tax”) requirement and allow the State to adopt by law an income tax rate or rates. The amendment did not receive a vote or hearing. Chamber-Supported Housing Bill Builds Momentum • Build Illinois Homes Tax Credit Act. HB 1147 (Avelar) and SB 62 (Peters) were identical initiatives of the Illinois Housing Council to create the Build Illinois Homes Tax Credit Act, an effort create a new tax credit that would incentivize the development of affordable housing in the State. The Chamber was a strong supporter of the effort and hopes to continue to advocate for the legislation at a future date. The House and Senate bills were both heard as subject matter hearings where business groups and hous- ing advocates both supported the passage of the legislation. Bills Considered But Not Passed • HB 1074 (Yang Rohr) would have prohibited separate fees from being charged by tax preparing soft- ware for electronically filing an Illinois income tax return. Though the legislation was amended, the proposal failed to advance given the continued opposition to the proposal. • HB 1283 (DeLuca) would have allowed municipalities outside of Cook County to impose a local motor fuel tax of up to $0.03/gallon. The measure is one that the Chamber opposed. The bill did not advance out of the Committee. • HB 1396 (Tarver) is an initiative of TFI that the Chamber was supporting. The proposal would have made a positive modification to the foreign tax credit to prevent possible double taxation of certain invest- ment partnerships. The bill did not advance, though it did receive a subject matter hearing. • HB 744 (Mayfield), under FA #1, would have established the Small Business Financing Transparency Act that would have provided the IDFPR with expansive new powers to regulate certain commercial financing services in Illinois. The amendment was hastily posted to the House Financial Institutions and Licensing Committee, though the measure did not get a vote. The Chamber is strongly opposed to this proposal. • A proposal (HB 2790) that would allow non-home rule units of government to regulate most com- mercial operations passed the House unanimously. The concern with this legislation is that allowing additional jurisdictions to regulate commercial operations may lead to over-regulation and competing regulatory environments for businesses to operate under. The bill failed to advance in the Senate. • Rep. Syed passed HB 3564 out of the House by the narrowest of margins with several Democratic members not voting. The bill amends the Landlord and Tenant Act by adding a new section that sets landlord/tenant fee limitations, including new rules around allowable fees and fee amounts. The fees impacted include: Background check fees and required disclosure of the report, Move-in fees, Appli- 26 | END OF SESSION REPORT
View this content as a flipbook by clicking here.