Any word on Illinois Anti Gun laws from ATA???

I just wonder if any one on here has heard anything from the ATA about the Anti Gun laws that Illinois is instituting? I know I like to pick on them but in all seriousness one would think that a pro gun organisation like the ATA (at least I hope they are pro gun) would have something to say, a little heads up to their grand vendors maybe.

If anyone knows something let us know. Merlo can't be the only one with insider info. Thanks.

 

The State of Illinois newly elected Governor has not directly said anything about the facility (WSRC) , if he has it has not yet been posted on the State of Illinois web site ... He is not letting any grass grow under his feet based on all of the things he is working on and adjusting, blaming the former Governor for ... It would be interesting to get some feed back from some of the vendors if they have been notified of anything yet by the State or the ATA ... WPT ... (YAC) …



Austin Berg
Director of Content Strategy


/BUDGET + TAX
FEBRUARY 20, 2019
reads, “the state can reduce the use of plastic bags in check-out lanes and generate $19 million to $23 million in new revenue with a five-cent-per-bag tax depending on whether or not the City of Chicago, which already has a plastic bag tax, is exempted.”

Chicago is one of ahandfulof U.S. cities to impose a bag tax, levying a 7-cent-per-bag tax for both paper and plastic grocery bags since February 2017.

According to the National Conference of State Legislatures, or NCSL, Illinois would be theonly state in the nationwith a plastic bag tax.

California bans single-use plastic bags and mandates certain businesses to levy a 10-cent minimum charge for recycled paper bags, reusable plastic bags and compostable bags. The stores that sell the bagskeep the fee money. Washington, D.C., in 2009 passed a5-cent taxon disposable paper and plastic bags for businesses that sell food or alcohol.

In contrast to Illinois, NCSL research shows neighboring states such as Missouri, Iowa, Wisconsin, Michigan and Indiana all have state laws on the bookspreventinglocal bag taxes.

 

Gov. J.B. Pritzker has pointed admiringly to other Midwestern states’ progressive income tax structures, but taxes on the median Illinois family would go up under all of them.

It is no secret that Gov. J.B. Pritzker wants a progressive income tax for Illinois. What he has not made clear, though, is that a progressive income tax would mean higher taxes on the vast majority of Illinoisans under any of the structures the governor has mentioned.

Pritzker said in his Feb. 20budget addressthat he will fight to eliminate Illinois’ flat income tax protection and install progressive income tax rates. The governor also insisted his tax plan will bring about a middle-class tax cut. But copying the progressive income tax rates of other Midwestern states would bring about tax hikes of up to $835 a year for the typical Illinois family.

During his campaign, Pritzker pointed to other Midwestern states to give insight into what his preferred tax system would look like. During aradio interviewin 2018, Pritzker said:

“You can look at … almost every state in the Midwest, from Minnesota, Wisconsin, Iowa, Missouri, you know, everybody’s got a progressive income tax, and if you look at all of those systems, I think that’s a reasonable way to look at how it works.”

But under each of these states’ tax regimes, the median family in Illinois with an annual income of $79,168 would see their income tax bill increase.



“[Illinois] can accomplish [a progressive income tax] with a more competitive rate structure than Wisconsin or Iowa,” Pritzker said in his budget address. But what he means by this is entirely unclear.

In fact, a recent Tax Foundationstudyon Wisconsin’s tax code recommended exchanging its progressive income tax for a flat income tax as one way to make the state more competitive. Both North Carolina and Kentucky have swapped their states’ progressive income tax for a flat income tax in recent years.

Calls to copy the progressive income tax structures of nearby states reveal the true cost of eliminating Illinois’ flat income tax protection: heavy tax hikes on middle-class families.

Indeed, the most recent progressive income tax rates filed by an Illinois lawmaker – House Bill 3522 in the 100th General Assembly – would have hiked income taxes on Illinoisans making as little as$17,300 a year.

But Illinoisans simply can’t afford another tax increase. In 2017 the General Assembly passed a 32 percent tax hike, which will inflict further damage on Illinois’ already weak economy. Further, progressive tax states experienceslower jobs growth, wage growth and economic growth– and a larger gap between the rich and poor that iswidening faster– compared to states without a progressive income tax.

Instead of hiking taxes yet again, the state needs to learn to do what taxpayers do every day: spend within their means. The Illinois Policy Institute’sBudget Solutions 2020plan provides lawmakers a roadmap to a balanced budget without tax hikes.

Thankfully, lawmakers from both sides of the aisle have already introduced many of the tools Pritzker needs to balance the state budget in the current General Assembly, including a smart spending cap, school district efficiencyand constitutional pension reform.



WPT … (YAC) …

 

A spending cap proposal filed by state Sen. Tom Cullerton, D-Villa Park, would ensure growth in government spending doesn’t exceed taxpayers’ ability to pay for it.

Illinois is in dire fiscal straits for a simple reason: The state perpetually spends more than it takes in. Illinois has not had a balanced budget since 2001, despite the fact that the state constitution requires it.

One long-term solution to Illinois’ budget woes? Smart spending growth. State Sen. Tom Cullerton, D-Villa Park, introduced aspending cap constitutional amendmentFeb. 15 that would tie growth in state government spending to growth in Illinois’ economy. That means Illinoisans can rest assured they’re getting a state government they can afford – a crucial first step toward restoring confidence for families and business alike.

A similar proposal garneredbipartisan supportlast year.

State spending outruns Illinois incomes

Illinois lawmakers have been on a spending spree. State spending per capita grew 48 percent faster than Illinoisans’ personal income per capita from 2007 to 2017. And without reforms such as Cullerton’s, there’s no sign it will slow down anytime soon.

State spending growth outpaced personal income growth across Illinois by an average of 48 percent between 2007 and 2017: Illinoisans’ personal incomes grew at an average annual rate of 2.52 percent, while state spending grew by 3.72 percent annually.



In some areas of Illinois, such as the Decatur Metropolitan Statistical Area, where annual incomes grew by 2.19 percent annually, per capita state spending growth outpaced per capita personal income growth by 70 percent per year from 2007-2017.

Illinois is already facing a $2.8 billion deficit for fiscal year 2020, which is projected to swell to $3.4 billion in fiscal year 2021. Gov. J.B. Pritzker’s campaign promises carry a tab of $13 billion to $18 billion in additional annual expenses.

Unrestrained growth in state government spending injects uncertainty into the lives of Illinoisans. That’s because lawmakers can do only one of two things when government spending outpaces growth in the state’s economy: raise taxes or mortgage the incomes of future generations by borrowing money.

The threat of future tax hikes makes it more difficult for families to plan their futures in the Land of Lincoln. Increasingly, they’re planning those futures in other states.

Illinois needs a mechanism to ensure lawmakers spend at a level taxpayers can afford.

Years of reckless spending

One gimmick Springfield politicians have used to “balance” the budget is not appropriating funds to pay their bills. The state’s backlog of unpaid bills alone reached $16 billion toward the end of 2017 – before the stateborrowedmore money to pay them down to $8 billion.

Illinoisans may have expected that additional revenues from the largest permanent income tax hike in state history in 2017 would have led to a balanced budget.

But shortly after the General Assembly passed the budget bill over then-Gov. Bruce Rauner’s veto, the Governor’s Office of Management and Budget found the budget resulted in a $1.5 billion deficit.

Even with the $5 billion tax hike, state government had failed to do what families across Illinois do every day: spend within their means.

This is not new in Illinois.

In fact, over the past 10 years, state spending and outstanding debt have consistently outpaced revenues. The state needs a tool to rein in the rapid growth of its debt and spending – an explicit cap on the growth of state spending, set at the growth rate of Illinois’ economy.



According to the U.S. Census Bureau, Illinois’ outstanding state debt grew to $62 billion in 2017 from $55 billion in 2007 – an increase of $7 billion. This includes all debt obligations remaining unpaid as of 2017. But that $62 billion in outstanding debt does not even include accrued state liabilities for pension benefits, which Moody’s Investors Service estimates at $250 billion.

Total state expenditures grew even faster. Between 2007 and 2017, total state expenditures grew to $86 billion from $60 billion, an increase of $26 billion in spending.



Illinois’ outstanding debt is already sky-high, due not only to borrowing, but also to the interest that collects on the principal each year. And if the General Assembly continues to spend at the current pace, the state’s revenues will never be able to catch up.

Without a way to limit the growth in spending to sustainable levels, Illinois’ future holds more punishing tax hikes for already overburdened residents.

The economic impact of an income tax increase

Continuously hiking taxes to pay for years of budget mistakes is a recipe for poor economic performance, meaning fewer job opportunities and slower wage growth for working Illinoisans.

Most economists agree that when lawmakers raise taxes, economic growth suffers because higher taxes have a negative impact on investment. This was the case with Illinois’ 2011 tax hike, which cost the state $56 billion and 9,300 jobs from 2012 to 2016, and will be the case with the 2017 tax hike as well.

Illinois has experienced a decline in investment because of the 2011 tax hike. This is made clear by data from the Bureau of Economic Analysis, which show that noninvestment spending in the private and public sectors has taken up an increasing share of Illinois’ economy.

Declining investment means a reduction in not just the number of jobs in Illinois, but also in the quality of those jobs.

Uncertainty over future tax hikes itself can be enough to drive investment out of the state toward a more investment-friendly, fiscally sound climate.

Spending cap could restore confidence

A spending cap means restraining the growth of government spending to what taxpayers can afford, providing the certainty individuals and businesses need to thrive.

Business owners make investment decisions with expectations of future returns. Given the risks involved with any business decision, economists agree it is important that public policy does not add to the risk business owners face. Illinois already has an unfriendly business environment, and any uncertainty over the future tax burden from unsustainable increases in state spending will likely lead to business owners holding off on investment and hiring decisions, ultimately resulting in slower economic growth.

A spending cap also incentivizes efficient use of tax dollars.

Using data from 29 countries,researchby the International Monetary Fund reveals that fiscal rules have led to stricter prioritization and greater efficiency in spending. When expenditure rules are enshrined in law and not just a political promise that can easily be broken, they are associated with spending control and improved fiscal discipline. Higher public sector efficiency would free up resources for more high-quality public investments such as certain infrastructure projects that benefit Illinoisans and can help to jumpstart the state’s sluggish economy.

It also means averting future tax increases.

The ability to rein in Illinois’ major cost drivers is limited at present, as the Illinois Supreme Courthas ruled pension benefits for government workers – and the skyrocketing taxpayer costs of funding them – are not subject to change. Aconstitutional amendmentis necessary to fix this problem.

However, discretionary spending is one area in which lawmakers can practice fiscal responsibility without running afoul of the courts.

Illinois would not be alone in trying to enforce fiscal discipline on its lawmakers,27 other stateshave some sort of tax or expenditure limitations and 15 of those are enshrined in their constitutions.

The Texas Constitution, for example, restricts growth in appropriations to the growth rate in state personal income, with exceptions for constitutionally mandated appropriations or in case of emergencies. Meanwhile, theColorado Constitutionlimits growth in state spending to an index of population and inflation.

If the Illinois General Assembly would simply restrict the growth of state spending to the average annual growth in Illinois’ gross domestic product for the last 10 years – 2.43 percent for 2008 to 2017 –Illinois would be on its way to paying off its backlog of bills and eventually repealing the income tax hike.

When lawmakers control spending and provide a basic level of certainty about the long-term growth of state government – thus warding off future tax hikes – Illinois can once again become an attractive destination for families and businesses.


WPT … (YAC) …

 

Getting behind bipartisan budget reform is the kind of bravery Illinoisans deserve from the executive branch. Instead, they’re getting more of the same.

Gov. J.B. Pritzker delivered his inaugural budget address Wednesday.

His response to Illinois’ budget problems? Tax hikes, borrowing and a can-kick – the same recipe for failure that has led the state to this point. Bipartisan solutions on the table in Springfield were ignored.

First, take the tax hikes and new revenue, which will disproportionately come from lower-income Illinoisans.

Pritzker’s plan includes legalizing sports betting, a statewide plastic bag tax, a cigarette tax hike, a vaping tax, cutting tax credits that fund school choice scholarships for low-income children, expanding the tax on video gaming, and taxing recreational marijuana, to name a few. It also hikes taxes on medical care organizations and cuts the credit retailers get from the state for collecting sales taxes.

Next, the borrowing. Pritzker wants a $2 billion pension obligation bond, or POB. Former Govs. Rod Blagojevich and Pat Quinn issued $17.2 billion in POBs to pay into state pension funds in 2003, 2010 and 2011. They are expected to cost $30.8 billion to repay. In other words, the last time lawmakers used POBs it increased the cost of pensions to taxpayers by about $13.6 billion. This kind of risk is why the Government Finance Officers Association recommends against the use of POBs.

And finally, the can-kick. Pritzker is extending the deadline for when Illinois needs to true up its pension funds by seven years. Voila. Putting more of the burden of yesterday’s government on the backs of young and unborn Illinoisans.

A major pain point for many Illinois families, their property tax bill, was left unaddressed. Pritzker’s budget does nothing for people worried about those bills cutting deeper and deeper into their home equity.

The buzzword around Pritzker’s budget address was “honesty.” But at the core of this budget proposal is a false, dishonest choice: deep cuts to core services or a constitutional amendment eliminating Illinois’ flat tax protection to allow for a progressive income tax hike.

Left unsaid is that even Pritzker’s “all cuts” option holds harmless all state worker compensation, health insurance benefits that are unheard of in the private sector, and pension benefits. It’s as if a family making a $10,000 a month mortgage payment on a $50,000 income tried to balance their household budget by not buying food or medicine. There’s an elephant in the room.

Take pensions, for instance. The most recent data from the National Association of State Retirement Administrators shows Illinois’ state and local governments spend the most in the nation on pension benefits as a percentage of all state and local revenue. Pension-related spending consumes more than 25 percent of Illinois’ state budget, crowding out spending on social services, public safety and education.

Pritzker’s solution to the pension problem is not to bargain with government workers on behalf of taxpayers to balance their interests. It is to borrow more money, hike taxes, and dump all of it into a bottomless pit. This kind of cowardice will ultimately harm public workers counting on a pension payment that won’t materialize.

But what about a progressive income tax? Is that the solution?

“[Illinois] can accomplish [a progressive income tax] with a more competitive rate structure than Wisconsin or Iowa,” Pritzker said in his budget address. This may be the closest Pritzker has come to revealing any proposed income tax rates. But it is entirely unclear what he means.

In fact, a recent Tax Foundation study on Wisconsin’s tax code recommended exchanging its progressive income tax for a flat income tax as one way to make the state more competitive. Both North Carolina and Kentucky have swapped their states’ progressive income tax for a flat income tax in recent years.

Raising the amount of revenue to fund the spending Pritzker wants can’t just come from a progressive tax on the backs of millionaires. It will have to come from middle-class tax hikes. The math doesn’t work otherwise.

The most disappointing element of the Pritzker budget is that there are bipartisan measures in the General Assembly today that could balance the state budget without tax hikes.

A state government spending cap that limits growth in spending to taxpayer incomes, a school district efficiency measure that would reduce expensive district-level bureaucracy, and a constitutional amendment allowing for changes to future, unearned pension benefits have all been filed.

Getting behind bipartisan budget reform is the kind of bravery Illinoisans deserve from the executive branch.

Instead, they’re getting more of the same.


WPT … (YAC) …

 

Couldn't happen to a nicer bunch of suckers!
Government raised and fed.
Only wants more!
Government housing projects only produce ones that are dependent on the working taxpayers, but guess what?
They vote!!!!
Anytime that one can be elected to office that has no job, never had a job, not a property owner, draws a government check, no responsibility whatsoever.
What can you expect?
Then all the politicians cater to these people to retain their elected position because they vote.
I ask again!
What can one expect?

 

The State of Illinois is and has been a cesspool of corruption for as many years as I can remember, I was born and raised there and on occasion met a few of the elected officials, after shaking hands you just felt DIRTY and like you better get a shower … The actions of the ATA EC, ED and many on the BOD seem to fit right in by their actions over the past almost 20 years … They get no respect because they have not earned it … WPT … (YAC) …

 

WPT have you been hacked? I haven't seen that many graphs by anyone other than Neil. Thank You I've been wanting a graph for some time now and you delivered biggly.

 

Brad,
I cannot take credit for the graphs being as they came right off of the State of Illinois web site, the new Governors way of making his points known on and about all of the tax increases he has proposed … The Priztger administration said they will tax any and everything until they can come up with a balanced budget and have a surplus on hand … WPT … (YAC) …

 

Awe come on Bill, you don't have to be so modest...LOL

 

When AOC becomes president and the Democrats control the House and the Senate, she will fix everything in Illinois and America. I can hardly wait - NOT.

 

My concern about the State of Illinois is the arrangement between the State and the ATA. I confess my own ignorance to the details of the terms and conditions. If anyone has a hard copy they could share....

As wpt points out, the history of Illinois government is not an enviable saga. When people in positions of authority are surrounded by an environment of systemic corruption; the “when in Rome” school of thought can take hold very easily.

I think the office move “investigation” result and the “just change the bylaws and all will be well” ruling concerning the gift guns reflect my view. What then can be stated about the current and future temptation of ATA officials conducting business in such an environment?

 

Par4,

Take a look at the thread titled "Who Found The Property? 2012 PULL" not far from this thread.

History Buff has put some very interesting Hard Copy on there about the purchase of the ATA office building.

Other threads about the Hall of Fame building being given ownership to the State, and other matter,s are within different threads but off hand I don't have them for you.

 

This has a "hard copy" ..... http://www.americantrapshooter.com/index.php?threads/look-at-ata-idnr-sparta-lease-agreement.1207/

This has HoF "hard copy" ..... http://www.americantrapshooter.com/index.php?threads/view-hall-of-fame-lease-with-idnr-sparta.1231/

"What then can be stated about the current and future temptation of ATA officials conducting business in such an environment?"....
"Future temptation of ATA officials" can be described with a single word ..... "emboldened" ..... "1. give (someone) the courage or confidence to do something or to behave in a certain way."

When the only result of a challenge is adding some simple unquantified text for "compliance", it would be hard to believe that the current "ATA officials" feel anything other than "emboldened" .....

Who knows what may shock and awe the faithful lemmings ..... but it seems safe to say it hasn't happened yet for the drinkers of the Kool Aid .....

 

I see our dear friend "layer of pipe" suggests the new laws will have little effect on gun vendors at the GA in Sparta. What a great find for the ATA as besides being a piper he's also a lawyer. Plenty of misinformation out there as to what constitutes the legal selling of guns outside one's state. Stay tuned!

 

AND of course the ATA will not step up to the plate and CLARIFY this issue.

Pipey says all is OK, others read the law differently.

OH, I forgot, it's getting to the point that EVERYONE is included in this "Need To Know Basis", not just the annual members.

 

If the ATA handles this problem as well as they have all others, we have nothing to worry about. If they screw up on this one they will be history along with their crown achievement called sparta. Roger C.