Would a graduated income tax help or hurt Coloradans?
Re: “Amendment 87’s graduated income tax could cause big employers to leave,” October 12 editorial.
I would like to thank The Denver Post Editorial staff for pointing out the big threat of Amendment 87. Corporations are constantly looking at where they locate and how much business they do in each state. Taxes and regulations are key factors in those decisions.
For many years, Colorado unemployment was significantly below the national average, but in recent years its rate is about the same as the national average, with metropolitan Denver being above the average. Colorado residents must compete for jobs with all the other states and even internationally. We don’t need to add Amendment 87 to give employers another reason to leave Colorado.
Amendment 87 doesn’t include changes to tax brackets over the years for inflation. The federal IRS adjusts income tax brackets each year for inflation. Shouldn’t a Colorado graduated tax system do the same? The $500,000 bracket may seem like a long way from you or the average taxpayer, but year after year the average tax rate will increase as more taxpayers are included in the higher rate, and this increase would be exempt from TABOR revenue limits. This automatic increase for taxpayers whose income enters a new bracket is accomplished without the legislature having to address the unpopularity of raising taxes.
Rich Griffin, Aurora
The Post’s editorial against Amendment 87 is another scare tactic to influence voters against this important, positive change to Colorado’s income tax. Amendment 87 brings fairness and equity to our tax structure, overcoming the highly regressive feature of our current flat tax rate that has average workers paying a much higher proportion of their income in tax than the wealthy and ultra-wealthy. The new graduated tax will also help address our endemic underfunding of education as well as providing some tax relief to lower-income Coloradans.
In addition to The Post’s misguided position, our mail is being flooded with inaccurate information alleging that Amendment 87 will do away with current income exemptions for Social Security and pension payments. That’s just plain wrong and an intentional misreading of Amendment 87. Voters should check with the authors of Amendment 87, the Bell Policy Center, as I did, to understand that Amendment 87 makes no changes to current law that provides exemption from taxes for Social Security and other pension income. Let’s bring fairness to our tax system and provide the resources we need for education.
Vote yes on Amendment 87.
Charles Kreiman, Denver
I was shocked and dismayed at The Post’s editorial urging voters to say no to Amendment 87, a ballot amendment that asks the wealthiest Coloradans to finally pay their fair share.
While admitting that a “flat income tax leaves the state’s middle class holding a heavier tax burden than their wealthiest counterparts, for whom 4.4% is no burden at all,” The Post worries that some wealthy companies or individuals may leave Colorado because of this tax increase. Colorado cannot be held hostage to greedy people who do not want to pay their share of funding K-12 public education, health care, and early childcare.
The Post reported that the 7 Fortune 500 companies in Colorado had $1.13 trillion in profits in 2025. The Bell Policy Center reported that the wealth of Colorado’s billionaires grew by 43% ($22 billion) over the past year. It’s only fair to ask the wealthy to help fund the priorities that make Colorado such a great place to live.
That is why I am strongly supporting Amendment 87.
Mary Jo Sobocinski, Lakewood
To send a letter to the editor about this article, submit online or check out our guidelines for how to submit by email or mail.
