Blog Post

Do the Math Before You Vote in the Illinois Primary

Kelly A. Anderson and Gabriel Kokoszka • February 27, 2024

Understanding the Referendum: “Amending the Real Estate Transfer Tax”

A city skyline with a river in the foreground and mathematical equations in the background.


Chicago residents participating in the March 19th primary will walk into the voting booths expecting to make consequential decisions about their nominees for President and States Attorney. But, the typical voter may find themselves slightly confused and overwhelmed when they reach a lengthy referendum at the end of their ballot, entitled “Amending the Real Estate Transfer Tax.” This referendum is four entire paragraphs of tax jargon and financial chatter, informing the reader about a ballot measure on a local tax change. 


In fact, this is a highly consequential ballot referendum on a proposed change to the local real estate transfer tax, and it’s essential to understand what the referendum means before primary day. Read on, and we’ll break it down for you. 


Flat Tax No More: Changes to Chicago Real Estate Transfer Tax


The current real estate transfer tax rate in Chicago is 0.75 percent of the sales price of the subject property, regardless of what the price is. This means that no matter what type of property you sell in the city of Chicago, big or small, the city takes a 0.75 percent slice of the total sale price. 


This proposed ballot referendum would change that. If passed, the transfer tax on properties sold for more than $1 million would increase from 0.75 percent to 2 percent, more than doubling the existing rate, but would only apply to the amount of the sale greater than $1 million. Basically, every dollar over $1 million would be taxed at that higher rate. 


In addition, properties sold for more than $1.5 million would be taxed at an increased rate of 3 percent, with the increase, once again, only applying to every dollar in the sale price over $1.5 million.


And finally, the transfer tax on properties sold for less than $1 million, would receive a tax decrease from that original rate of 0.75 percent to 0.60 percent.


The referendum requires that the increased revenue generated from the tax must “be used for the purpose of addressing homelessness, including providing permanent affordable housing and the services necessary to obtain and maintain permanent housing.” 


Critics have attacked the city’s lack of specifics for how the funds must be used, and insist that while many properties that sell for less than $1 million will receive a tax cut, the tax increases on the sales above $1 million will chill commercial investment in Chicago at a time when downtown is struggling with post-pandemic work culture, and this could also result in residential and commercial renters seeing increased transfer tax costs passed on to them by landlords.


Meanwhile, proponents of the referendum insist that the above arguments amount to fearmongering over a relatively minor tax change, and emphasize Chicagoan’s shared interests in not seeing homelessness go unabated—both from a standpoint of human compassion and due to the blight and decreased livability that cities can experience if homelessness is not addressed.


Possibly a Moot Point?


At this time, interestingly, the ballot referendum has been declared invalid and will not be counted in response to a February 23rd ruling from a Cook County judge, who decided in part that the ballot measure was an illegal, textbook example of “logrolling,” or putting politically-unpopular proposals with popular ones on a ballot, and asking voters or legislators to decide on them in a single vote. In this case, the ballot referendum frames the single proposal as both a tax cut for some, and two types of tax increases for others, amounting to three separate tax decisions at once.


So, although the question will remain physically on the ballot, the results will not be tallied and reported unless the judge’s decision is overturned on appeal. However, an appellate court decision could make this ballot measure binding again in the blink of an eye. And even if the ballot language remains stricken, proponents of the tax change will likely rephrase the referendum and work to get it on the next citywide ballot. If you rent, own, or are looking to own property in the city of Chicago, this referendum could ultimately impact you, and you should walk into the voting booth with a clear understanding of that impact.


For questions about this and other real estate tax issues or any legal needs, Lavelle Law offers free consultations. Please contact Attorney Kelly Anderson at (847) 241-1786 or kanderson@lavellelaw.com and we can set up your appointment!


More News & Resources

Lavelle Law News and Events

LATEST UPDATE on the Corporate Transparency Act and New Deadline for Filing BOIR
By Frank J. Portera February 20, 2025
This article will serve as another update to the ongoing Corporate Transparency Act developments. As of February 17, 2025, a federal judge in the Eastern District of Texas lifted the injunction it had ordered on January 7, 2025, in Smith v. U.S. Department of the Treasury, 6:24-cv-00336 (E.D. Tex.), allowing the federal government to once again enforce the Corporate Transparency Act and its Beneficial Ownership Information Report requirements.
A Step-by-Step Guide to Bringing a Lawsuit in Illinois
By Sarah J. Reusché February 14, 2025
This article is the second in our Litigation 101 series. It focuses on the flip side: how to sue someone else. Suing someone is a serious decision that requires careful thought and preparation. Before pursuing legal action, it’s crucial to reflect on the issue and understand the steps involved in bringing a lawsuit. This article outlines the basics to help you approach the process with confidence and make informed decisions.
Updates Regarding the Corporate Transparency Act Hold: Key Implications for Businesses
By Frank J. Portera February 13, 2025
On December 11, 2024, we published an article titled “Corporate Transparency Act on Hold: Key Implications for Businesses,” which addressed the nationwide injunction impacting the enforcement of the Corporate Transparency Act and its Beneficial Ownership Information Reporting rule. Since then, there have been a few significant legal developments that businesses should monitor closely. While the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network is currently prohibited from enforcing BOIR requirements, ongoing litigation, and the related appeals may alter this status. Below, we provide a timeline of key events and insights into what business owners should anticipate moving forward.
IRS Special Payments Sent to 1 Million Taxpayers Who Did Not Claim 2021 Recovery Rebate Credit
By Timothy M. Hughes February 10, 2025
The Internal Revenue Service is issuing automatic payments to eligible people who did not claim a Recovery Rebate Credit on their 2021 tax returns. The payments are in follow up to an IRS announcement last month of the intent to take this special step. The IRS took this step after reviewing internal data showing many eligible taxpayers who filed a return but did not claim the credit. The Recovery Rebate Credit is a refundable credit for individuals who did not receive one or more Economic Impact Payments (“EIP”), also known as stimulus payments.
SCOTUS Resolves Circuit Split on FLSA Exemption Standard
By Steven A. Migala February 5, 2025
The Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) establishes federal minimum wage and overtime pay requirements, with exemptions for employees in bona fide executive, administrative, professional, computer or outside sales roles. 29 U.S.C. § 213. Employees classified as "outside sales" must primarily engage in making sales or obtaining contracts for services or the use of facilities, and they must conduct their work primarily away from their employer’s place of business. 29 C.F.R. § 541.500.
Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act (BIPA)
By Sarah J. Reusché January 23, 2025
Amendments to BIPA SB 2929 became effective on August 2, 2024. Codified as 740 ILCS 14/10 and 14/20, this Act introduced two pivotal changes to BIPA that dealers should be aware of: • Limiting Per-Scan Damages: The amendments clarify that a single violation under BIPA accrues per type of violation, rather than per scan. This significantly reduces the financial exposure for dealerships. • Electronic Consent: The amendments formalize electronic signatures as a valid means of securing biometric consent, streamlining compliance processes for businesses.
IRS National Taxpayer Advocate Releases Annual Report to Congress. And in an Unrelated Matter DOJ Ta
By Timothy M. Hughes January 10, 2025
The National Taxpayer Advocate recently released her annual report to Congress. A few highlights from the report are summarized in this article.
Nearly 300 New Illinois Laws are going into effect in 2025.
By Lavelle Law January 8, 2025
Nearly 300 New Illinois Laws are going into effect in 2025. Listed below are some that may have a significant impact on you or your business.
Happy New Year and Cheers to New Adventures in 2025!
By Lavelle Law December 31, 2024
As we say farewell to 2024, we’re excited to look back on the unforgettable moments from our Koozie Challenge! From the frozen wonders of Antarctica to the excitement of the Paris Olympics, and countless incredible destinations in between, the Lavelle Law koozie truly went the distance this year! A big thank you to our clients, staff, family, and friends who took part in the fun. Here’s to even more adventures in 2025! Happy New Year from Lavelle Law!
Lavelle Law concludes the 2024 annual food drive.
By Lavelle Law December 30, 2024
Schaumburg-based Lavelle Law wrapped its annual food drive benefiting the Schaumburg Township Food Pantry. During the month of October, Lavelle Law set up collection boxes around Schaumburg and the surrounding area, where residents and workers could drop off nonperishable food items, paper goods, personal care items, baby food and diapers. Participants could also make cash donations online.
More Posts
Share by: