Colorado's flat income tax appears headed for extinction. Early returns show Amendment 87, which would replace the state's single-rate system with six graduated brackets, leading in initial results, while a rival measure that would have capped tax rates instead was trailing behind, according to the Denver Gazette.
Amendment 87 would scrap Colorado's long-standing flat tax in favor of a tiered structure that raises rates as income climbs. Per Colorado Public Radio, the measure would create six brackets starting at 3.7% for earnings up to $25,000 and rising to 8.4% for incomes above $1 million. The Denver Gazette reported the measure was backed by the Bell Policy Center and a group called Protect Colorado's Future, and that it was leading 67% to 33% in initial election results, while Proposition 136, the competing measure that sought to cap individual income taxes for workers and businesses at 4.4%, trailed with 31% of the vote in the unofficial tally.
Who Wins and Who Pays More
The core trade-off is straightforward on paper: most Coloradans would see a tax cut, while a smaller group of high earners would pay more. According to the Denver Gazette, taxpayers earning less than $500,000 would see their tax liability decrease by anywhere from a few hundred dollars up to $325 per taxpayer, and someone earning $25,000 would see their bill drop by $175. CPR frames the dividing line similarly, noting the dividing line between households and businesses that would see their tax bill go up versus those that would see it go down is about $500,000 per year, though some estimates put that line as high as $1 million per year.
At the upper end, the math shifts noticeably. The Denver Gazette reported that a taxpayer at the $550,000 threshold would pay $25,375, or $1,175 more, while someone earning $2 million would owe $143,925, up from $88,000, an increase of $55,925. Supporters of Amendment 87 argue, per the Denver Gazette, that it is unfair to tax a teacher, a nurse and a millionaire at the same flat rate, and that the measure would cut taxes for most Coloradans overall.
Competing Price Tags for the State
Just how much new money Amendment 87 would generate depends on who's doing the counting. The Denver Gazette reported the measure would raise roughly $2 billion annually for K-12 education, healthcare and early childhood programs, while CPR's election-results coverage put the figure at $2.7 billion a year for the state if it passes. Colorado Newsline, citing nonpartisan state analysts, estimated the increase at $2 billion annually as well. Ballot Explained adds that the additional revenue would be required to go to K-12 schools, health care and early childhood programs and would be exempt from TABOR's revenue limit, according to Ballot Explained.
Proposition 136 took the opposite approach, aiming to cap the income-tax rate at 4.4% of federal taxable income for individuals and corporations rather than tiering it, as CPR reported in its election-results coverage. The Colorado Chamber of Commerce backed that approach, according to CPR, liking that it would provide a predictable and competitive tax structure for businesses and individuals. A search snippet from the Colorado General Assembly's Blue Book states the measure has no impact on current TABOR refunds or TABOR refund mechanisms, though that detail comes from a partial excerpt rather than the full document text.
A Democratic Party Split Down the Middle
The ballot fight exposed real friction inside Colorado's dominant political party, with the Denver Gazette reporting that Democratic stalwarts were split on Amendment 87 even as most of the party's rank and file supported it. CPR's October preview of the measures put it more bluntly, describing the squabble as one that spotlighted a gaping divide among Democrats, noting that a pair of high-profile Democrats, former U.S. Sen. Ken Salazar and Gov. Jared Polis, had weighed in against the measure.
Per the Denver Gazette, Polis opposes Amendment 87, and Salazar said in an online video that the measure would hurt workers. Attorney General Phil Weiser, who is running for governor against Republican Victor Marx and independent Greg Lopez, also said on October 30 that he opposes Amendment 87. Weiser said the state could lose hundreds of millions of dollars if the competing ballot measure also passed, and he said voters should have a clear picture of how revenue-increase money will be spent. He added that if Amendment 87 passes, he will work to implement it effectively, but if it fails, he will work as governor to build support for a progressive income tax measure instead.
Backers Point to Childcare and School Funding Gaps
On the other side of the party split, state Sen. Julie Gonzales endorsed Amendment 87 and urged her followers to vote for it, according to the Denver Gazette. Gonzales framed the measure as a matter of fairness, saying the goal was to tax the rich their fair share to fund healthcare, childcare and schools while providing a tax break to 97% of Coloradans.
Lorena Garcia, who heads the Colorado Statewide Parent Coalition, also endorsed the measure and spoke about it at a University of Denver panel, per the Denver Gazette. Garcia argued that Colorado's existing systems struggle to meet demands and that tax-hike revenue could fill funding gaps, pointing to childcare costs that can run families between $1,200 and $2,700 per month and a state childcare subsidy system that serves only a fraction of eligible families.
