-- Connecting the dots between our economy, government and business --
A spokeswoman for the city’s Finance Department said the agency is examining whether to make commercial property a part of the tax increase. If it’s included, it would be the second time the administration has expanded the proposal’s reach since Lightfoot began publicly discussing the idea in recent weeks.
Initial discussions involved applying a higher tax rate to sales of homes valued at $1 million or more, similar to a proposal offered by progressive aldermen who want the money earmarked to help the homeless. But in her address about city finances Thursday night, Lightfoot said the tax should apply to sales for $500,000 and up, potentially casting a much wider net.
With $162 billion more from taxpayers, couldn’t you deliver a few bond upgrades, too
A largely unasked question is becoming glaring: Is Illinois doing all it should to use artificial intelligence to make government cost less and work better? So far, the evidence says no.
Everybody needs a side hustle these days, and mine is Ukraine, where I am now.
Summary and audio linked here.
SIGN UP HERE FOR OUR FREE WIREPOINTS DAILY NEWSLETTER
Audio and summary
500k is a rich person’s house? lol
It sure is compared to the average guy in Elkhart, Indiana. I live in a two professional household and our house is only $350,000, but granted, there are quite a few $500k+ houses on my block.
Few people are aware that commercial property is already taxed on an annual basis at 2.5 times residential. They pile on to this, because there are far fewer commercial property owners than residents.
Ultimately they always choose the path of least resistance.
Soon the definition of high end homes will include out houses / port-o-potty’s or even cardboard boxes in an alley. Safe holiday everyone!!
If the city has a nearly billion dollar deficit, how could they possibly earmark any of this revenue to help the homeless?
The homeless are the most important tax payers in the City. Who are we but for how we treat our most vulnerable? I’d rather see the City pay for a homeless guy to have free housing than to pay any of the city’s other bills. The homeless guy pays taxes too you know.
Wow. The City attempts to tax the rich and they are already running out of rich people? Why stop at $500,000 homes since that wont cover the massive budget gap? Why not tax houses $50K and over? But even that won’t cover the massive budget gap so why not declare bankruptcy now?