Critics warn Illinois’ ‘megaproject’ tax breaks shift costs to taxpayers
		
		[October 25, 2025]  
		By Catrina Barker | The Center Square contributor 
		
		(The Center Square) – A Springfield proposal grants major tax breaks to 
		“megaprojects,” which critics warn could leave homeowners and small 
		businesses paying the price. 
		 
		House Bill 4058, which mirrors similar proposals in the Senate, has 
		drawn sharp criticism from taxpayer advocates, like Brian Costin, deputy 
		state director at Americans for Prosperity Illinois. Costin said the 
		measure opens the door for politically connected developers to benefit 
		at public expense. 
		 
		“This is Gov. [J.B.] Pritzker’s property tax hike,” said Costin. “He is 
		trying to raise property taxes on the regular folks of Illinois to 
		reward millionaires and billionaires.” 
		 
		The bill began as a local concept in Arlington Heights for a 
		professional football stadium, but Costin said it has grown far beyond 
		that. Costin said HB 4058 appears to be the governor’s preferred version 
		of the legislation, pointing to recent media efforts by administration 
		allies. 
		
		
		  
		
		“They’ve kind of been putting a press push out with his Illinois 
		Economic Development Corporation chairman,” Costin said. “Pritzker 
		appointee, John Atkinson, wrote an editorial in the [Chicago] Tribune, 
		and my editorial was kind of in response to that. I don’t think they 
		would’ve let him write that unless it had the governor’s approval.” 
		 
		In simple terms: the bill lowers the minimum size for a “megaproject” 
		from $500 million to $100 million, meaning smaller projects can now get 
		the same huge tax breaks. Costin warns this lets more developers take 
		advantage of the program, while regular homeowners and local businesses 
		end up paying more in taxes to cover the difference. 
		 
		“The way the bill actually works is that megaproject property taxes are 
		frozen for 23 to 40 years at their pre-development level,” Costin 
		explained. “At the same time, all the overlapping taxing bodies can 
		still raise their property tax levies as if the developer were paying 
		full taxes on the property’s new value. That means every dollar in tax 
		relief for the developer gets shifted onto taxpayers outside the 
		megaproject area.” 
		 
		[to top of second column] 
			 | 
            
             
              
            
			  
            Costin said the measure’s special payment provision lets local 
			governments collect as if big developments paid full property taxes, 
			even though the projects get decades-long tax breaks. 
            “There’s a special payment provision that says, ‘We’ll give you this 
			special payment if you give us a massive property tax break,’” 
			Costin said. “All of the local taxing bodies can still raise their 
			property tax levies as if the megaproject were paying in full, plus 
			they get this special payment. So they’re financially held harmless 
			— and taxpayers outside the district are the ones who pay for it.” 
			 
			Costin raised additional concerns about constitutional issues, 
			Illinois’ “uniformity clause.” 
			 
			“That clause requires people to be taxed and assessed uniformly,” 
			Costin explained. “But this bill creates a whole different set of 
			rules for politically favored projects. It’s interesting that 
			they’re acknowledging potential constitutional problems before the 
			bill even passes.” 
			 
			While supporters argue the bill could create jobs, Costin cautioned 
			that those benefits may be overstated. 
			 
			“Lower property taxes do bring jobs and economic opportunity,” he 
			said. “But this isn’t really a property tax relief bill, it’s a 
			property tax shift. Whatever benefits there are for developers are 
			offset by the fact that taxpayers elsewhere are paying more to make 
			it happen.” 
			 
			He also warned that developers often leverage such incentives to 
			build their portfolios rather than invest locally.  
			 
			“A lot of times, these developers come in, get a nice subsidy, build 
			it out, and then leave,” he said. “The long-term promises are mixed 
			at best.” 
            
			   |