Iowa advocates call for attention on proposed income tax constitutional amendment

Advocates speaking for and against a proposed state constitutional amendment held events Thursday calling for more attention on the ballot measure, which would set a higher bar for state lawmakers to raise the income tax in future sessions.

Iowa Republicans held a news conference Thursday in Grimes, where multiple speakers said they supported the measure, arguing it would serve as a needed protection for taxpayers. The amendment, which would be added to the Iowa State Constitution if approved by voters, would require a supermajority — two-thirds — of state lawmakers to approve increases to the state’s personal income or corporate tax rate in order for these tax changes to pass.

The Iowa Legislature had to approve the measure in two consecutive general assemblies to place it on the Nov. 3 ballot. At the news conference, Rep. Dan Gehlbach, R-Urbandale, said when the amendment language was discussed in 2024 and 2026, he and every Republican in attendance voted in favor of the measure, while Democratsin attendance voted against it.

“It strikes me as just common sense that if politicians want to raise our taxes, there should be wide consensus, not narrow support,” Gehlbach said. “So you’d think this would garner wide bipartisan support, but think again.”

Eric Klein, a Clive businessman who also spoke at the event, said he was in support of the proposed constitutional amendment “because I believe that Iowa families and taxpayers don’t need to worry about a future tax hike.”

“This common sense amendment to our state constitution ensures that politicians cannot indiscriminately raise taxes, because Iowa taxpayers deserve to keep more of what they earn,” Klein said.

But opponents of the measure said it will not prevent Iowans from facing increased taxes — it will only limit which taxes can be raised if the state is seeking more revenue. Anne Discher of Common Good Iowa said the goal of the amendment was to “lock in” conservative tax policies enacted in the past decade by a GOP-controlled Legislature, even if future lawmakers want to make changes.

Previously, Iowa had a “progressive” income tax system, in which higher earners paid a larger percentage of their income in tax than lower earners, Discher said, speaking Thursday at an online “Lunch & Learn” event hosted by the Iowa Farmers Union. When Iowa Republicans made tax cuts in recent sessions, they transitioned the tax system to a “flat” income tax rate, where all taxed entities pay the same percentage of their income, no matter how much they are earning.

“What happens when you do that is you give the biggest breaks to the richest folks and the most profitable corporations,” Discher said.

When the measure was discussed in previous legislative sessions, Democrats argued the proposed constitutional amendment would restrict future lawmakers from making changes to Iowa’s income tax system as a means to address a state budget crisis.

Discher said this would mean other forms of taxes would likely be raised — taxes she said would have a larger impact on low- and middle-income families.

“To be clear, they’re keeping a simple majority (approval to pass) in place for every other tax,” Discher said. “I think the most obvious, the most notable one is the sales tax, because that is the other major source of revenue for the state budget. But I will note, it would still only take a majority to raise the fuel tax to raise vehicle registration taxes to raise court fees and fines. It would take a simple majority of the Legislature to cut state aid to balance the budget and pass costs long in the form of college tuition.”

Republicans and supporters of the state constitutional amendment also criticized state Rep. Josh Turek, the Democratic nominee for U.S. Senate, for voting against the amendment language in 2024.

“Josh Turek voted to make it easier for politicians to raise taxes on hardworking Iowans, and that’s just a preview of what he would do in the U.S. Senate,” Gehlbach said.

In order to amend the constitution, a simple majority of voters must approve the language in the November election. If the income tax amendment is not approved, there would be no other changes to the rules Iowa lawmakers must follow to increase income taxes. The current requirement for a majority of state legislators to approve changes would remain in place.

Turek is running against Republican Ashley Hinson in the November election.

A spokesperson for Turek’s campaign said during his time in the Iowa House, Turek “has repeatedly worked with Republicans to cut taxes for Iowans, lowering income and property taxes,” while Hinson “voted to cut health care for 110,000 Iowans just to give a tax break to her … billionaire donors,” referencing her support for the One Big Beautiful Bill Act that made cuts to Medicaid funding.

Other speakers at the GOP event Thursday argued Turek would reverse other portions of the OBBB Act, like cutting taxes on tips, overtime, and Social Security. Turek said in August he agreed with President Donald Trump that “we should have no tax on tips and overtime” and said he would support keeping some portions of the law in place.