Some ramblings about Crowley and Tiffany surplus plans

I saw a note the other day on what Tom Tiffany and David Crowley might do with the $3 billion or so that is projected to be in the state's bank account as they start their first budget.

Crowley, the Milwaukee County executive, ...knocked Tiffany for supporting Republicans’ One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which he said cut money from Medicare and Medicaid. He also knocked Tiffany for supporting the end of enhanced subsidies for those who get their coverage through the Affordable Care Act exchanges.

“We need to make sure we are providing back to the community in some form or fashion,” Crowley said during a media gaggle in Wausau in response to a question from WisPolitics. “We know that there’s an affordability crisis.”

That would require additional state spending making up for the needs that are resulting in our current economic and fiscal holes that are affecting a lot of Wisconsinites. So I looked to Crowley's website on the economy to get a better idea what that specifically means. Here are the main talking points.

There are a lot of generalities over details on this as you read further into Crowley's webpage, but it's typical Dem priorities like expanding broadband and roadwork, increased apprenticeships, encouraging small business with incentives, expanding access to health care, etc.. But I think the education and child care pieces are more specific and noteworthy.

Crowley’s plan includes universal early childhood education, new investments in public schools, and closing the special education reimbursement gap. He’ll ensure that every child has a launchpad to success—whether through college, technical school, apprenticeships, or direct-to-career pathways....

Crowley believes every family deserves access to safe, affordable, high-quality child care. As Governor, he will champion long-term investments that stabilize providers, expand early childhood programs, and ensure working parents never have to choose between earning a paycheck and caring for their children. Crowley will prioritize raising subsidy rates so families can afford care, supporting providers so they can keep their doors open, and growing pre-K readiness programs that give every child a strong start. By making child care more accessible and dependable, Crowley will strengthen Wisconsin’s workforce, support parents, and give every child the foundation to thrive.

This would seem to involve increased spending on those investments, both on one-time and ongoing bases. Another investment priority seems to be in green energies (which is VERY different than what claimte-denying Toxic Tommy would do).

Climate action is economic investment. Crowley will invest in solar, energy retrofits, and clean infrastructure that creates thousands of union jobs across Wisconsin. He’s already cut emissions nearly 50% in Milwaukee County—now he’s ready to take that impact statewide.

There's also this part, where Crowley indicates Milwaukee would not be the only community allowed to raise its own sales tax to free itself from fiscal handcuffs and reliance on the property tax.

Through smart revenue reform, Crowley will ensure local governments have the tools and funding to serve their residents — while lowering property taxes and re-empowering local decision-making. That means giving communities the resources to invest in what matters most: well-trained police and fire departments, reliable public works, responsive local services, and the ability to shape their own future without interference from Madison. As County Executive, Crowley successfully secured new state revenue tools for local governments, fought to restore local control, and delivered balanced budgets that protect public safety and expand services. As Governor, he’ll finish the job — because no one knows what a community needs better than the people who live and lead there.

And that's where we'll jump over to what Crowley's Republican opponent wants to do, because taxing and local government issues are where there seem to be significant differences.

Tiffany, a GOP congressman from Minocqua, said in a statement the new numbers are more proof that Wisconsin is overtaxed and isn’t “a green light for Madison and David Crowley to spend more of your money.”

“As governor, I’ll return the entire surplus to taxpayers and deliver lasting tax relief for working families so you can keep more of what you earn year after year,” he said.

Also in the last week, Tiffany has released an 8-point plan on the economy, and among the list of ideas are these.

Lower Property Taxes: End the 400-year property tax increase and freeze property taxes so families and seniors aren’t taxed out of their homes.

Deliver a 10% Working Families Income Tax Cut: Cut income taxes by 10% for working families earning under $150,000. Crowley voted against a 10% middle-class income tax cut in the Legislature, while Tiffany supported it. (Edit - he's talking about the 2019-21 budget that the then-gerrymandered Legislature threw at Gov Evers, which had a whole lot more than just a tax cut in it.)

End Taxes on Tips and Overtime: Eliminate state income taxes on tips and overtime so hardworking Wisconsinites keep more of what they earn....

Prevent Sales Tax Hikes: Protect Wisconsin families from additional sales tax increases. Crowley already raised Milwaukee County’s sales tax by 80%.

So Tiffany is going to reinstall limits on K-12 school resources and put a freeze on property taxes. So where is the money going to come to keep schools running by doing so? HAHAHA! We know there won't be any, just like in the Walker years.

And a 10% income tax cut on families making under $150K may be something, will have a price tag to it that gets paid year after year. Looking at the LFB's most recent Informational Paper on income taxes, it says that Wisconsinites making $150,000 or less paid around $3.77 billion in income taxes in 2022 (the last year data was accumulated for that repoert).

So based on 2022 returns, 10% cuts of income tax liability would be around $377 million a year. It might be a bit less than that in 2027, given that inflation and tax cuts since then have lowered some tax liability for people in these tax brackets over 5 years, so let's estimate it at $350 million a year. Most Wisconsinites in those tax brackets would take home an additional $100-$500, from what I can see, and the cost numbers indicate this one can be afforded (at least for now).

We know the price tag of ending taxes on tips and OT premium pay, because it was part of the deal between Evers and the GOP leaders in the Legislature that didn't pass back in May. The OT premium would cost $179.9 mil in year 1, then $148.1 mil a year after that, and the income tax exemption for tips would be $52.9 million to start anbd $48.9 mil a year after that.

And as for freezing sales taxes for local communities? Funny how Tom Tiffany would do that after his hometown of Minocqua put in a 0.5% sales tax of its own this July (related - has anyone asked Tiffany about Minocqua having a higher sales tax than Milwaukee County)? Also, how is any local community going to pay for anything if they can't raise property taxes or sales taxes?

It reminds me of Scott Walker refusing to increase gas taxes and fees as the state's roads continued to get worse while he was in office.

And before you say "the money would come from Tiffany would close the sales tax exemption that goes to data center", I'd remind you that the LFB hasn't assumed any loss of revenue from that provision. So ending that wouldn't change anything on revenue projections whatsoever. On the flip side, if that tax writeoff stays and blows up as high as the $1.9 billion that the LFB said was possible when it broke down the provision in April, so it seems like a good idea for Crowley to also join in getting rid of that one.

But it's "only" $580 million a year or so in income tax cuts that Tiffany would want (at least the ones he mentions, not the ones to the rich and corporate he'd be sure to do). We can afford that, right?

Don't be so sure. The cushion that's baked into the next state budget is going to be less than $3 billion, and possibly quite a bit less. Remember that state government is already spending more than we are taking in, even with these higher revenues.

In addition, the structural deficit for the next budget totalled $1.7 billion as of May, although the better revenues for 2026 is likely to reduce that some.

Then add in the state’s Medicaid budget already being projected to be $322 million in the hole by next June 30, which will reduce some of the $3 billion+ that is supposed to be available on that date.

There are also items that loom as additional expenses in the next budget that have to be accounted for. You can bet the cost to continue current Medicaid services are going to be significantly higher in the next budget, let alone what might have to be done to make up the difference for Wisconsinites that may be kicked off of Medicaid due to Tax Scam 2.0.

There's also a sizable structural deficit in the state's Transportation Fund, which is currently spending around $300 million more than it is taking in without transferring more money from the General Fund.

So there's another $600 million in the next budget that needs to be taken care of in some way, And it'll likely be more, given that gasoline consumption and gas tax revenues won't rise much (if at all) while costs of construction keep going up.

Yes, there is likely room for some tax relief and/or state funds available to reduce property taxes in the next state budget. But the increasing needs and burdens placed onto state government makes Tom Tiffany's plans for permanent tax cuts a bad idea, and while David Crowley has good ideas on expanding and increasing investments, there are a lot of current expenses that are going to keep rising over the next two years.

No biggie that Tiffany didn't pay taxes. The biggie is how his donors duck taxes

As WisGOP desperately tries to talk taxes as some kind of attack against David Crowley and Milwaukee (it’s dishonest BS, but we won’t get into it in this post), we found out that Tom Tiffany didn’t pay state taxes for several years?

Tiffany's Willow Inc., owed and paid no state income taxes for more than a decade through 2016 - then paid just $65 in in 2017, $308 in 2018 and $240 in 2019, the records show.

And his Wisconsin River Cruises Inc., owed and paid no state income taxes between 2007 and 2013, according to the records.

Well how could that be?

Rachel Detert, an accounting professor at Marquette University, said it's possible that Tiffany didn't have a net tax liability some years because of losses "passed through" Wisconsin River Cruises Inc. since it was an S corp….

"A tax loss does not necessarily mean that the business was economically unsuccessful," said Detert, who is also a certified public accountant. "Taxable income is calculated under tax rules and can differ from financial statement income and cash flow." She added the depreciation allows a business to recover the tax cost of qualifying property, and that losses can carried forward and used against Wisconsin income in as many as the next 15 tax years.

I also agree that this isn’t really indicative of lawbreaking or Tiffany being a lousy business owner (although he definitely has the “mediocre local yokel who doesn’t know a thing about how corporations in big towns work” vibe).

But S corps? Pass-throughs? This sounds familiar….Oh yeah, I remember now!

GOP megadonors Diane Hendricks and Dick and Liz Uihlein were able to claim a combined $215 million in deductions in 2018 because of provisions ⁦@SenRonJohnson⁩ put into the tax cut Trump signed, according to ⁦@propublica⁩. https://t.co/mniK4o6R0I

— Patrick Marley (@patrickdmarley) August 11, 2021

From ProPublica, in August 2021, and how Ron Johnson shaped Trump/GOP Tax Scam 1.0 in 2017.

Johnson’s demand was simple: In exchange for his vote, the bill must sweeten the tax break for a class of companies that are known as pass-throughs, since profits pass through to their owners. Johnson praised such companies as “engines of innovation.” Behind the scenes, the senator pressed top Treasury Department officials on the issue, emails and the officials’ calendars show.

Within two weeks, Johnson’s ultimatum produced results. Trump personally called the senator to beg for his support, and the bill’s authors fattened the tax cut for these businesses. Johnson flipped to a “yes” and claimed credit for the change. The bill passed.

And guess who got the biggest tax cut for these “small, family-owned” businesses?

Dick and Liz Uihlein of packaging giant Uline, along with roofing magnate Diane Hendricks, together had contributed around $20 million to groups backing Johnson’s 2016 reelection campaign.

The expanded tax break Johnson muscled through netted them $215 million in deductions in 2018 alone, drastically reducing the income they owed taxes on. At that rate, the cut could deliver more than half a billion in tax savings for Hendricks and the Uihleins over its eight-year life.

But the tax break did more than just give a lucrative, and legal, perk to Johnson’s donors. In the first year after Trump signed the legislation, just 82 ultrawealthy households collectively walked away with more than $1 billion in total savings, an analysis of confidential tax records shows. Republican and Democratic tycoons alike saw their tax bills chopped by tens of millions, among them: media magnate and former Democratic presidential candidate Michael Bloomberg; the Bechtel family, owners of the engineering firm that bears their name; and the heirs of the late Houston pipeline billionaire Dan Duncan.

Move ahead to 2026, and guess who are by far the biggest donors to Tom Tiffany’s campaign (via the Wisconsin Republican Party)? Yep, Diane Hendricks and the Uihleins, happily kicking back their gains from these tax cuts.

Tiffany, who is the presumptive Republican nominee for governor, reported raising $8.7 million during the [Jan 1 to June 30, 2026] period, bringing his total raised over the course of his campaign to more than $10 million….

Over $6.1 million of Tiffany’s contributions came from transfers from the Republican Party of Wisconsin.

The state party received more than $6 million in contributions from megadonors including $4 million from Richard and Elizabeth Uihlein, owners of Uline shipping supply company located in Pleasant Prairie, Wisconsin, as well as $2.5 million from Diane Hendricks, ABC Supply CEO and a billionaire from Beloit….

Total coincidence!

That S corp tax cut not only continued in Trump/GOP Tax Scam 2.0 (which Tom Tiffany voted for in Congress), but also gave extra tax cuts to people like Hendricks and the Uihleins due to a work-around to the limits on the State and Local Tax (SALT) deduction.

For business owners of pass-through entities (partnerships and S corporations), the PTET [for pass-through entities] survives under OBBBA! Contrary to some expectations, the new law did not eliminate this strategy for payment of state income taxes. In many states, business owners in pass-throughs can elect for the entity to pay state and local income tax at the entity level. These taxes are deductible by the entity for federal tax purposes and reduce the flow-through income taxed to the business owner personally. This treatment allows the effective deduction of state and local taxes without being subject to the federal SALT limitations, saving the owner significant federal tax.

For example, a Kansas S corporation manufacturing company with $2 million of pre-tax income elects to pay the Kansas PTET at 5.7 percent, resulting in $114,000 (0.057 × $2 million) in Kansas tax at the entity level. The business owner is then taxed federally on only $1,886,000 ($2,000,000 − $114,000), not $2 million. The $114,000 is not counted as state and local tax on the individual’s income tax return. It is deducted by the business, reducing taxable income for the owner who, in this example, is at the top marginal federal rate of 37 percent, resulting in $42,180 (0.37 × $114,000) federal savings on this amount. Additionally, the business owner may still deduct up to $10,000 of other state and local taxes, such as real estate tax, personal property tax, or state income tax on other income if itemizing deductions.

Cool deal, eh? The business owners basically keep two sets of books – one for their company and another for themselves, and get to lower taxes on both of them depending on how they describe where they get the money from.

Given that Tom Tiffany listed his net worth as less than $300,000 in 2024, it adds up that he personally may not have had much to pay for state taxes for much of the 2000s. I don’t think he did anything illegal and it’s conceivable that his businesses may not have made much money at all on their own in those years. That’s not unusual for something of the size of Willow Inc. or Wisconsin River Cruises in the Northwoods.

But it also demands questions as to how much he might have benefitted from write-offs at the federal level from Trump/GOP Tax Scam 1.0 and 2.0. And we certainly should ask why Tiffany’s and WisGOP’s largest donors got some of the biggest tax breaks from those Scams, and what is being promised in kickbacks to Hendricks and the Uihleins and other Wisconsin oligarchs should this state be foolish enough to elect Tiffany as Governor.

Severe Wisconsin weather events come with a cost. This time for WisDOT.

Back in May, the state sent out $16.9 million in disaster assistance funding to deal with repairs and other damages that accompanied specific severe weather events in 2025 and 2026. And now on Tuesday, the Wisconsin Department of Transportation is asking the Legislature’s Joint Finance Committee to send more money to local governments to help them pay for road work and maintenance activities over the Winter.

Let’s back up and mention what type of expenses we are talking about, courtesy of the Legislative Fiscal Bureau.

The Department requests a one-time appropriation supplement of $23,526,300 SEG in 2026-27 in the routine maintenance activities appropriation, due to higher than anticipated costs associated with counties responding to 2025-26 winter conditions. The Department indicates that frequent snow events in the early winter season and a record winter storm in parts of the state in mid-March required county crews to incur costs significantly in excess of budgeted amounts. Based on the nine-year winter cost average, the Department had budgeted $57.6 million in county work for the 2025-26 winter season. Actual winter costs exceeded the amount budgeted by $22,595,179.

In other words, it cost more than $80 million this winter for counties to do everyday maintenance and snow plowing and other types of work on state highways this winter.

By the way, WisDOT already sets aside $10 million for extra costs that maybe needed due to excessive winter needs for work on the highway. But we are already above and beyond that amount, and that’s before we find out what happens here during an El Nino winter that likely will raise temperatures but also raise water in the atmosphere, which could mean more 30-degree heavy snowfalls instead of 20-degree colder and drier days.

On top of the higher costs for regular maintenance, the Winter packed an extra punch for a few specific counties in Center and Northern Wisconsin.

In addition to higher winter maintenance costs, five counties (Lincoln, Marathon, Marquette Oneida, and Price) incurred a total of $931,051 in higher than expected costs due to damage to segments of the state highway system caused by rapid freeze/thaw events and severe weather conditions. The Department has requested an appropriation supplement of this amount in the SEG appropriation for routine maintenance activities to allow it to reimburse the five counties for the higher costs.

Needless to say, those higher costs are going to squeeze out local street repairs and road buildings if these state funds don’t come in. And WisDOT indicates that it’ll make state highways significantly worse for the next several months if more money isn't set aside.

The Department indicates that a failure to approve the request would require it to instruct counties to defer routine maintenance and perform only safety-related maintenance activities for the remainder of counties' calendar year 2026 fiscal year. Routine maintenance includes activities such as minor surface and base repair, mowing and weed control, shoulder grading and repair, minor bridge repair, debris and accident cleanup, and repair of damaged traffic signs. The Department indicates that deferring routine maintenance would likely result in accelerated pavement deterioration, increased future rehabilitation costs, and reduced roadway safety. The Department also indicates that deferring routine maintenance would likely make it difficult for county highway departments to maintain the workforces needed to maintain the state highway system.

However, the LFB mentions that there may be a bailout for these extra highway maintenance costs, as the state has asked for federal funding from other states that failed to commit all the funds from previous years, known as “redistribution” funds. This happens in almost every year, Wisconsin got $230 million back under this program last year, and $150 million of redistribution funds are baked into the state budget for this year.

The 2026 redistribution numbers just dropped on Thursday, with Wisconsin getting $180 million of those funds. LFB says that since we got more than $150 million of the unused funds for this year, that could be an option to help pay for the added weather-related costs.

If the Department receives $173,526,300 or more in federal redistribution funds, the $23,526,300 in excess of the $150.0 million in existing FED expenditure authority could instead be used to fund the supplemental request. The Committee could authorize the Department to transfer up to $23,526,300 in 2026-27 from the SHR {State Highway Rehabilitation] SEG appropriation to the routine maintenance activities appropriation to address the winter maintenance funding shortfall. The Department could then use up to $23,526,300 in federal redistribution funds it plans to allocate to the SHR FED appropriation in 2026-27 to replace the SEG transferred to the routine maintenance activities appropriation. Under this alternative, in the event that DOT receives less than $23,526,300 in federal redistribution funds, DOT would be allowed to transfer the amount of federal redistribution funds in excess of the $150.0 million in existing FED expenditure authority from the SHR SEG appropriation to the routine maintenance appropriation. DOT would then be allowed to transfer from the transportation fund balance to the routine maintenance appropriation an amount equal to the difference between $23,526,300 and the amount of federal redistribution funds in excess of the $150.0 million in existing FED expenditure authority. For example, under this alternative, if the Department were to receive only $165.0 million in federal redistribution funds from FHWA, the Department could transfer $15,000,000 in federal redistribution funds from the SHR SEG appropriation to the routine maintenance appropriation. DOT would then be authorized to transfer $8,526,300 from the transportation fund balance to the routine maintenance appropriation to fully-fund the Department's request.

OK, maybe that’s the way around it and we get by for this winter without further depleting the state’s Transportation Fund.

But there’s no question that increased severe weather events and higher costs of regular road work are combining to make repairs from those events cost more than ever. And we are going to have to adjust to and pay for these one way or the other.

US job growth even weaker than we thought, but Wisconsin may be revised to the good side

We had seen job growth slow down for much of 2025 and some of 2026, but we got new information this week that shows it was probably even slower than we knew.

The Bureau of Labor Statistics released its annual preliminary benchmark revision on Friday, estimating that total nonfarm employment for the year through March 2026 was overstated by 79,000, or 0.1%.

The revision to total private employment was larger, at negative 178,000, also 0.1%, according to the BLS. A final benchmark revision will be incorporated into official estimates when the January 2027 Employment Situation report is published in February 2027. Official establishment survey estimates are not updated based on the preliminary figures.

Economists surveyed by Bloomberg had expected payrolls to be revised up by 183,000, according to Bloomberg. Prior to Friday's report, official data showed that employers had posted a net gain of 211,000 jobs over the 12 months ending in March on a non-seasonally adjusted basis, working out to roughly 17,600 per month. The preliminary revision puts average monthly job growth closer to 11,000.

The markdown in private payrolls was driven by softness in sectors including retail trade, education and health services, manufacturing, and business services. Employment in transportation and warehousing, information, financial activities, and construction increased, while government payrolls were also revised higher.

This came in conjunction with the release of the Q1 figures for the Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages (QCEW), the more comprehensive survey of employers that is done well after the monthly jobs reports come in.

It also means that year-over-year job growth in America continued to slide at the start of 2026, dropping below 100,000 by March.

And as UW-Madison's Menzie Chinn mentions, manufacturing jobs being revised down by 67,000 means that the sector kept shedding jobs in the first three months of the year. And that puts into question the rebound in manufacturing jobs that has been reported over the last several months.

But Wisconsin fared quite well in this QCEW report, and our job situation is likely to be better when the official benchmark revisions for late 2025 and early 2026 come in. As you can see, Wisconsin was in the top 20 for private sector job gains between March 2025 and March 2026, and 2nd in the Midwest behind Michigan.

What had been reported as a sizable drop in jobs at the end of 2025 in the monthly jobs reports now appears to have been a small gain for us over that time period, followed by a slight decline in the first 3 months of 2026. This is far from scientific, but in using year-over-year growth numbers for the QCEW, I get this for our state.

We also see a reversal from the full-country revisions when it comes to manufacturing, as a decline that the Wisconsin Department of Workforce Development was reporting for the end of 2025 doesn't show up in the QCEW. But it also makes you wonder if the rebound that's been reported for the rest of this year actually happened.

It's a similar story for leisure and hospitality jobs, which the DWD monthly reports said had gone down at the end of 2025 and then rocketed back up in 2026. If you look at the QCEW and do a year-over-year comparison, it looks like jobs gained in the sector in the second half of 2025, then dipped in the first part of 2026. And we'll see if the originally reported increase for April and May holds up upon further review.

It's nice to see Wisconsin holding up better than most Midwest states as the "gold standard" jobs report comes in. But the national numbers should worry you, as this economy isn't going to be able to grow much overall if job growth is at the lowest non-COVID levels in years. And it reminds me of this quote by our nation's Treasury Secretary from last week.

Bessent on the latest bad jobs report: "After the deportations that we've seen and the closing of the border, we don't need to produce as many jobs"

[image or embed]

— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar.com) August 20, 2026 at 10:16 AM

If the lack of jobs being added in America reflects a lack of growth (or decline) in the labor force, and if fewer people are needed to work, then we're going to have to think differently as to how we want our economic policies to look. And in how to handle the persistent inflation that might result from overconsumption in a time of labor, supply shortages, and a lack of competition from new businesses being started up.

Higher Wis revenues help in 2026. But GOP Tax Scam will cost state more in 2027 and beyond

We got the final numbers for Wisconsin tax revenues, and they exceeded the already-rosy possibilities the Evers Administration gave this Spring.

General purpose revenues (GPR) increased 3.4% in fiscal year 2026 (FY26) to $23,132.2 million. This is 2.0% more than the Legislative Fiscal Bureau’s modified January 15, 2026 estimate of $22,681.4 million.

So on the revenue side, it’s $450 million more than projected by LFB, and more than $1.2 billion above what was baked into the 2025-27 budget.

Based on LFB’s breakdown of the K-12 and tax cut plan that was shot down by the State Legislature, this means there was $3.4 billion in the state’s bank account on June 30 if expenses end up meeting projections. And if we assume revenues grow in FY 2027 by the same 1.8% that LFB projected back in May, there would stil be just under $3.3 billion at the end of the budget cycle on June 30, 2027.

But that’s a big IF on the expense side. We know that the state is projected to need another $322 million in funding for Medicaid to get through the budget cycle that ends next June 30. In addition, inflation is running higher than the 2.9% for 2026 that was projected by LFB when the budget was put together in Spring 2025. While the higher revenues help state budgets in the short term because of higher sales taxes on higher-priced items and excessive profits for companies, expenses will eventually increase for programs such as Medicaid and other costs of services (and already have in some cases).

However, the current strong revenue numbers could give a chance to revive the K-12/tax cut deal between Evers and WisGOP legislative leaders that was tanked in the State Senate this May. And Joint Finance Co-Chair Rep. Mark Born told WisPolitics that he'd be open to doing so. So let’s go back to the price tags of the items in that deal.

$300 single/$600 married couple income tax rebate $870 mil
Special Ed aids $315 mil
K-12 aid to cut property taxes $302.5 mil
Tech College property tax cut $50 mil
Additional charter/choice aid payments $16.3 mil
Income tax exclusion on OT premium $179.9 mil (then $148.1 mil a year after that)
Income tax exemption for tips $52.9 million ($48.9 mil a year after that)

I still favor a one-time tax rebate . Although I don't mind the idea of a one-time bump in Special Ed aids, as it would be very hard to justify taking that away in the next budget.

I'd add that one complication about any K-12 aids being put in at this time of the year is that the school year has now started, and there are already 61 operating referenda questions scheduled for November, which might make for an odd situation if these schools are getting the aids that would lessen the need for a referendum for added resources.

Also remember why Tom Tiffany opposed the deal in May. Because he wanted more money left over for permanent income tax cuts that lower revenues year after year. And he wants to handcuff K-12 schools even further.

Tom Tiffany said during an interview on News Talk 1130 WISN on Tuesday that he would not vote for the package that would send $600 million more to schools in the state, in exchange for no taxes on tips or overtime, and direct refund checks to taxpayers across the state.

“I would not vote for it,” Tiffany said.

He blamed Gov. Tony Evers for offering Republicans a bad deal.

“He could have put in here the repeal of the 400-year property tax increase, and he did not,” Tiffany added. “All he wanted in there for the relief was a ‘sugar high’ for a year.”

Yes, Tiffany is deceiving about Evers' veto that allowed K-12 schools to raise resources at a still-insufficient $325 per student. The large number of referenda shows that's likely not enough and that the state needs to do its part to help in both resourcing the schools and in leveling off school property taxes. But under Tiffany and WisGOP, that clearly would not going to happen, so vote accordingly.

One last variable to consider - Tom Tiffany and his fellow Republicans in Congress set a time bomb that goes off after this November's midterms that goes beyond the $72 million in added FoodShare costs that the State of Wisconsin is already taking on due to changes in Tax Scam 2.0. And it'll either make Medicaid costs go much higher, or cause a lot of Wisconsinites to be in need.

Rural hospitals closing or shutting down key departments like obstetrics will be one of the biggest stories of 2027. Democrats need to make it one of the biggest stories of the next two months.

[image or embed]

— 🗽LOLGOP🗽 (@thefarce.org) August 29, 2026 at 6:14 AM

Nonprofit hospitals just finished three straight years of improving margins, helped along by Democrats strengthening the ACA, strong patient volume and new tools. Fitch Ratings says that streak is over. The ratings agency called Trump’s bill the “dominant near-term threat” to hospital finances, with Medicaid enrollment cuts, work requirements, and payment caps set to hit starting in 2027. Public Citizen reviewed financial records from nearly every hospital in the country and found that 446 were at high risk of closing or cutting services due to the law’s roughly $1 trillion in Medicaid cuts. The hospitals most exposed sit in blue states like California, New York, Illinois, and Washington, and the damage falls hardest on Black and Latino communities....

Rural America gets hit hardest of all. Nearly 200 rural hospitals have closed since 2005, and more than 400 others, over a fifth of all rural hospitals left standing, are at risk right now. New paperwork requirements and eligibility checks every six months instead of every year are expected to knock 1.5 million rural Medicaid recipients off their coverage. A new cap on state payments to hospitals will speed up closures even further. (Wisconsin is less exposed to this due to Gov Evers and the Legislature working through the night to increase the state's hospital assessment before Tax Scam 2.0 was passed).

States don’t get to run a deficit the way Washington does. When H.R. 1 phases down the provider taxes states use to fund their share of Medicaid and caps what they can pay hospitals directly, states have to make up the gap in the same budget year, not the same decade. Colorado already cut Medicaid provider rates and capped payments to family caregivers to close a $1.5 billion gap. Montana stopped covering doula services. Oregon ordered every state agency to find cuts. This is the same law terrorizing the same states twice (at least), once through the hospitals and once through the statehouse.

So it might make sense to hold onto more surplus funds into the next budget, because Donald Trump. Tom Tiffany and other Republicans are going to force the state to spend more money due to Tax Scam 2.0.

Personally, I'd be OK with one-time income tax rebates at this point, and have them go out in October as an advance to help Wisconsinites pay the higher school property taxes that Republicans have caused due to their lack of state funding. I'd add in the special ed funding and/or Tech College funding (I think Tech Colleges should be state-funded anyway), as those are items that are going to be very hard for either side to want to give up on, no matter what happens in November.

Then I'd bank the rest (around $2 billion as it stands today) because we don't know how bad and costly things are going to get under the last 2 years of Trump/Vance/other. But it seems likely that it'll be a sizable cost for both everyday Wisconsinites and our state government, and WisGOP Congressmen like Tom Tiffany have only themselves to blame for that.

US economy didn't grow much in Q2, but prices and profits sure did!

Another key bit of data relased this week was the second look at GDP for Q2 2026. The GDP part wasn’t big news – real GDP was estimated at 1.5% in the first release last month, and it stayed at 1.5% here, with a slight upward increase in consumption offset by an increase in imports.

It was interesting that inflation was estimated to be even higher than what was originally reported in July.

The price index for gross domestic purchases increased 5.8 percent in the second quarter, revised up 0.1 percentage point from the previous estimate. The personal consumption expenditures (PCE) price index increased 5.3 percent, revised up 0.2 percentage point, and the PCE price index excluding food and energy increased 3.6 percent, also revised up 0.2 percentage point.

That 5.3% increase in the PCE price index is up for an annualized rate of 4.6% in Q1 and 2.9% in Q4 2025 (aka – the last quarter before we started dropping bombs on Iran).

But there was a first-time release in that report about something else.

Profits from current production (corporate profits with inventory valuation and capital consumption adjustments) increased $400.9 billion in the second quarter, compared with an increase of $74.4 billion in the first quarter.

OH? As inflation jumped in Q2 in 2026, we also saw a big jump in corporate profits to another record?

But at least the US is getting more taxes from these corporations making record profits, right?

It's almost like these sorts of things might be connected, eh?

Even the Trump fluffer running for Governor in our state admits that corporations and related consolidation are part of the reason prices are higher.

GOP gubernatorial candidate Tom Tiffany broke with Donald Trump over the president’s plans to import 300,000 metric tons of ground beef and then sell it below market price….

During a stop in Hales Corners yesterday, Tiffany told reporters: “I stand with Wisconsin farmers” when asked about the president’s plans to import ground beef over the next 90 days. In exchange for easing tariffs, the exporters will provide a 25% discount on beef, according to the deal Trump announced.

Tiffany said a core issue is the beef packing industry is dominated by four producers, leaving insufficient capacity for ranchers. He vowed if elected to start a young farmer program.

Not mentioned - Tom Tiffany voted for the corporate tax cuts last year that increases the incentive for profit-hoarding.

And is Tom Tiffany demanding that the Trump Administration break up these four beef packers to drop prices and increase competition. OF COURSE NOT!

Is he getting back to his day job in DC and going to work on legislation to stop Trump's desperate and stupid moves that could depress prices and viability for producers? OF COURSE NOT!

Is he demanding that all of this foreign beef be strictly inspected to make sure they meet American standards, especially since 30,000 pounds just got recalled in Texas and Florida after slipping by inspectors? OF COURSE NOT!

He's just complaining and trying to seem like he cares about the Ag owners, while not doing anything that might cut off the real economic and health problems that may result. And Tiffany certainly won't do anything to discourage the corporate profiteering off of the higher prices that Americans are paying in the second half of 2026.

Inflation over 3% may mean higher interest rates, but July spending and wages are soft

After a weak retail sales report earlier in the month, Thursday had the Commerce Department’s income and spending report for July , which would give an indication how the consumer side of the economy looked like for the start of the 3rd quarter of 2026.

Consumer spending rose in July at the slowest pace in seven months, suggesting the U.S. economy lost a little steam after the end of the 2026 World Cup and start of the third quarter.

Personal spending increased a mild 0.2% last month, the government said. Americans spent less on goods for the second month in a row after splurging in the spring.

Lower gasoline prices last month made spending look weaker than it really was, but households also had to rebuild savings after using rainy-day funds to cope with a surge in inflation this year.

Consumer spending is the main engine of the U.S. economy. Spending in the second quarter grew at a surprisingly robust 3.5% annual pace, adjusted for inflation, after a meager 0.5% increase in the spring.

That 3.5% increase in consumer spending for Q2 is post-inflation, which translated into an annualized increase of nearly 9% before inflation, or around 0.75% a month. So a 0.2% increase is quite a deceleration from that standpoint.

On the positive side, the same report said American incomes were up by 0.4% for July, which meant the US savings rate rose to 3.0%. That’s the first time the savings rate went up in 6 months, and is the highest level since March (although it’s still among the lowest levels in 20 years).

But if you dig into the actual report itself, you find out that most of that income increase was outside of wages and other compensation people get from work.

Total wages and salaries only rose by 0.3% for July, and are only up 3.5% overall in the country in the last 12 months. And with gas prices heading back up in August, does real consumer spending and inflation-adjusted wages take a step back at the same time, and put a limit on Q3 growth?

In the wake of that income and spending report, questions in the financial media turned to what effect these numbers will have on Federal Reserve policymakers when they meet in 3 weeks.

The Personal Consumption Expenditures (PCE) index rose 3.3% in July [over 12 months] on a "core" basis, which excludes volatile food and energy prices. That was in line with expectations and the same level as June. Month over month, prices rose 0.2%, also in line with expectations and up from 0.1% in June.

The monthly increase suggests inflation is rising at a mild rate (from Jake: It WAS rising at a mild rate through July. Maybe not so much now). New York Fed president John Williams has said that if inflation on a monthly basis, as measured by PCE, comes in at 0.2% or lower, that would indicate inflation is coming back down to the Fed's 2% target on its own, implying the Fed would not need to raise rates.

Boston Fed president Susan Collins said Tuesday that she was content to hold rates steady at the last meeting, but she would need to see evidence that inflation is dropping to continue holding rates.

Absent that, Collins said it would be appropriate to raise rates "soon" to ensure the Fed gets inflation back down in a reasonable time frame.

It’s noteworthy that we won’t see the August income and spending report with the Fed’s preferred PCE measure until after that September Fed meeting. And the Fed meeting after that one is not scheduled until late October, after many Americans will have voted in the 2026 midterms.

One month does not make a trend, but between the loss of jobs, mediocre spending figures and low wage growth, it sure seems like the 3rd Quarter of 2026 got off to a slow start for the US economy. I know the Atlanta Fed is still claiming the data indicates GDP growth is closer to a boom than a recession, but I think those projections will decline quickly if August’s data is as lame as what we’ve seen in July.

Wisconsin's brain drain problem could be solved if Wis businesses would pay up

Recently, the Wisconsin Policy Forum released a report on our state's “brain drain” problem.

Based on our analysis of data from the U.S. Census Bureau’s 2024 American Community Survey five-year estimates, we estimate that 59.8% of Wisconsin-born adults aged 31 to 40 who now live in another state have a bachelor’s degree or higher. In contrast, an estimated 45.2% of adults in that age group who were born in another state but now live in Wisconsin hold a bachelor’s degree or higher, a gap of 14.6 percentage points…. We refer to this gap as “net brain drain.”

Wisconsin’s net brain drain ranks second nationally, behind only North Dakota (see Figure 1 on page 1). This is a slight improvement from 2009, when Wisconsin’s net brain drain (-15.3 percentage points) was the highest in the nation. Most other Midwestern states have experienced similarly high rates of net brain drain, with the exception of Illinois, which stands out as the region’s only net “brain‑gain” state (+10.4 points). Nationally, a few other states with strong metropolitan hubs — such as Virginia (+5.8 points) in the Southeast and Colorado (+8.2) and Utah (+1.0) in the West — defy regional brain‑drain trends….

In some ways, Wisconsin is a victim of its own success, as the Policy Forum paper notes that Wisconsin raises a larger number of college graduates than most states, but then we get a sizable amount of them who leave.

A state’s educational baseline affects the impact of net brain drain. Among U.S.-born adults aged 31 to 40, Wisconsin starts from a relatively strong position; 43.4% of Wisconsin‑born adults in this group hold a bachelor’s degree or higher, which is above the national average of 40.6% and ranks 16th nationally (see Figure 3). In contrast, several other high brain‑drain states begin from a much lower baseline; for example, only 38.0% of 31- to 40-year-old Indiana natives hold bachelor’s degrees.

So even with a relatively high number of college-educated natives leaving the state, Wisconsin still keeps enough of our graduates to not have a low education level of the workforce overall.

Although Indiana’s net brain drain rate (–11.5 percentage points) is slightly better than Wisconsin’s (– 14.6 points), our state also fares better when looking at the educational attainment of current residents within this same age range. Both states see similar gaps in educational attainment between their birth cohorts and current residents (–4.4 points versus –3.7), but Wisconsin’s stronger starting point results in a more educated resident population. Wisconsin ranks 26th nationally at 39.0%, while Indiana ranks 39th at 34.2%

Interestingly, in the same month as that brain drain report came out, Wisconsin ranked very well for those who are currently residing in our state.

With high marks for safety and affordability, Wisconsin was listed among the country's best places to live in 2026 in a new report from WalletHub.

The personal finance website ranked states on a 100-point scale that looked at a range of categories: affordability, economy, education, health, quality of life and safety. Overall, Wisconsin ranked third in the nation, with a total score of 59.32.

So what’s going on here? Here’s what Wallethub had to say.

Wisconsin is the third-best state to live in, thanks to its affordable housing market, where the ninth-highest housing affordability helps make homeownership more attainable for residents.

Wisconsin has the 15th-lowest premature death rate in the country and the 16th-lowest share of live birth with low weight. It also has the ninth-highest share of residents with health insurance coverage, at 94.8%.

The Badger State also ranks sixth for the quality of its school systems. It has the best high school graduation rate in the country, too, over 96%. Good-quality education has helped the state’s residents find employment, contributing to the seventh-lowest unemployment rate in the country.

Finally, Wisconsin offers a safe environment for residents, with the sixth-lowest property crime rate in the country and has the 18th-lowest traffic fatality rate in the country.

So we’re consistently above average in a lot of things people want out of a state. And that top-ten ranking for school systems (best in the Midwest) sure goes against Tom Tiffany’s complaints about how education is allegedly failing in this state.

So what’s the disconnect here? One part seems obvious.

If college-educated Wisconsinites are most likely to leave to Minnesota and Illinois and other states that have larger metro areas, that means they are likely getting paid more in those places. And if you look at the Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages (QCEW), you’ll find that Illinois and Minnesota consistently pay higher average wages than we do.

I also want to supplement that wage information with a chart that was included in wide-ranging Journal-Sentinel article about admissions to UW-Madison what places its students come from, and where they end up in the years after their graduation.

UW system data on alumni residency shows the majority of in-state students will live in Wisconsin after earning their degree. Three years postgraduation, 87% of in-state students will still live in Wisconsin, while 10 years after graduation 63% will.

When you look at out-of-state alumni living in Wisconsin, that percentage drops to about 11% living in Wisconsin three years after graduation.

Alumni from other UW campuses are more likely to stay in Wisconsin. About 93% of in-state students and 16% of out-of-state students are Wisconsin residents three years postgraduation.

That gap between where in-state students at the flagship school in Madison and the other UWs end up is illuminating to me, because it shows that many Badgers have to go elsewhere to boost their career/life opportunities once they hit their mid-to-late 20s. It is less likely to be the case for graduates of the other UW schools as they advance in their careers, although it also does happen more over time for them as well.

That chart also shows that Wisconsin-based companies aren’t offering enough to out-of-state students to keep them around after graduation, even if they might have better access to recruit those students due to on-campus collaborations and work experiences.

So it seems we need to find a way to encourage more pay and advancement with growing companies here in Wisconsin. Some of this may be through advanced research jobs and opportunities through our colleges and universities (a big reason why the Madison area outpaces the rest of the state), but the private sector needs to be stepping up in this state and competing with larger metro areas for talent.

If they can even offer a salary that is close to what the big towns pay, that may be enough to encourage Wisconsin’s college graduates to stay and raise families in a state that has strong K-12 schools, good affordability (comparatively, anyway), and a high quality of life.

Sorry Scotty - I don't think we're growing and tariffing our way out of this debt

We hit a new fiscal milestone in this country last week - $40 trillion in debt! But Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent says Americans shouldn't worry, because we can just power through it.

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent says "we're going to have to grow our way out of this" in reference to the U.S. debt crossing the $40 trillion threshold.

[image or embed]

— NBC News (@nbcnews.com) August 20, 2026 at 3:00 PM

But it won't just be growth that gets our fiscal situation back on track, In an interview with CNBC's Sara Eisen, Bessent claimed tariff revenue will be part of the plan.

“One of things that’s temporary here that’s influencing the deficit has been these tariff refunds, and we won’t have to do that again,” Bessent said, adding that the administration was reinstituting tariffs. “I would expect that our 2026 tariff income is going to be roughly what it was in 2025.”

Oh? You mean we will be back to having $30 billion a month in tariffs that Congress didn't approve of? That's what businesses and consumers were paying to the government before the previous tariffs were ruled illegal by the Supreme Court, and those funds had to be sent back to those businesses (those refunds were not necessarily passed on to consumers).

But the CBO said on Friday that tariff refunds and related adjustments will only lower around $250 billion a year of tariff revenue in this fiscal year, and CBO has also estimated our budget deficit to go over $2 trillion for this fiscal year. So that's another $1.85 trillion of deficit due to everything else. And how is that number going to go down in future years?

Perhaps Bessent was thinking of a couple of things. The first is new 10-12.5% tariffs on most imported goods that the US put in place last month. Although I'll add that the CBO accounted for this in their analysis of lower tariff revenue overall.

Or maybe Bessent knew this was going to happen after the markets closed on Friday.

Update: The U.S. has now imposed 50% tariffs on $20 billion worth of Canadian products. Prime Minister Mark Carney says Canada will match those tariffs "dollar for dollar" next month.

[image or embed]

— NPR (@npr.org) August 22, 2026 at 11:33 AM

Trade negotiations between the United States and Canada fell apart Friday night, shortly before a midnight deadline for the 50% tariffs to take effect on $20 billion worth of Canadian products, including some dairy products, alcoholic beverages, cement and hockey equipment.

U.S. Customs and Border Protection issued a bulletin to businesses Friday warning that its officers would be ensuring importers complied with the new rates starting immediately after the deadline passed. Carney said Friday night that "Canada will match those tariffs dollar for dollar to protect our workers and businesses." He later said the retaliatory tariffs set to kick in next month will focus on American sectors such as "steel, dairy, appliances, agricultural equipment, pulp and paper, and electronics."

Tariffs on dairy, pulp and paper? That seems pretty relevant to Wisconsin farmers and businesses, as UW-Madison's Menzie Chinn reminds us that Wisconsin has nearly 1/4 of the value of its exports go to Canada.

If you adjust for inflation, it looks like we export nearly $6 billion to Canada. Do you think any of the 6 WisGOP Congressmen are going to tell the Trump Admin that these new tariffs are likely help their constituents? Including Tom Tiffany, who wants to be governor of this entire state, and would deal with the job losses that might result from the lack of sales?

What, me worry?

Likewise, are these Congressmen going to be asked if they agree with this claim from Trump's Treasury Secretary?

Bessent on the latest bad jobs report: "After the deportations that we've seen and the closing of the border, we don't need to produce as many jobs"

[image or embed]

— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar.com) August 20, 2026 at 10:16 AM

So how do we grow so fast our debt doesn't matter, while not creating as many jobs as in the past?

It's not possible unless you are talking about massive inflation that $40 trillion total have a lot less meaning than it has today. There's no way we'd be having massive growth as Bessent describes without a large amount of supply shortages (due to fewer workers making stuff) and big increases in income to workers and consumer spending - when real wage growth is down in 2026 and consumer saving is already declining and at multi-year lows. So how much more can/will the American consumer spend?

Trump/GOPs are nothing but BSers when it comes to the budget and the real economy. But what do you expect from the dumb son of a real estate mogul whose advisors are mostly mega-millionaires and billionaires? Aka "people who will ever deal with the consequences of a bad decision that hurts the economy for people with real jobs?"

Is productivity the middleman that's allowing for big corporate profits?

One of the mysteries we have had in the last year-plus is why businesses continue to report increased costs due to tariffs, but consumer prices haven’t risen by nearly as much over the same time. I’d theorized that there was something going on in the middle of those stages of production, and I got more evidence of that this week.

Robust U.S. productivity levels appear to have blunted the full inflationary impact of President Donald Trump's large-scale trade tariffs, new research from the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston said.

"Industries in which tariffs induced higher costs in ‌2025 also experienced greater labor productivity growth, which helped them mitigate those higher costs," bank researchers wrote in a paper ‌released on Wednesday.

That means that while firms may have confronted higher input costs due to the president's tax increases, by getting more output out of their workforces they were ​able to hold off on passing on those costs. That in turn helped inflation, which has been above the Fed's 2% target for half a decade, come in lower than it otherwise would have due to the taxes. Altogether, the tariffs, which rose from an average level of 2.5% before Trump's return to 10%, joined with healthy productivity rates, added 0.5 percentage point to the core level of the personal consumption expenditures price index, the ‌authors found. The analysts said firms facing strong tariff-related ⁠cost increases managed to keep output steady while cutting labor inputs, and "the reduction in hours contributed to greater labor productivity growth."

In other words, workers are the ones paying the price of the tariffs, even more than consumers are. Businesses are squeezing out more from their employees (and/or using fewer employees), which allows for both higher profits and limits on inflation.

It goes along with this chart that I brought up last week.

it helps explain why wage and job growth have been so lousy for American workers under Trump 2.0. And helps explain why so many people don’t trust data centers and AI initiatives these days, because we can see where workers and their pay raises keep getting squeezed out in favor of automation and money-trading schemes under the guise of “increased productivity”.

Next week, we get the first look at corporate profits for the 2nd quarter of 2026. Let's see if my theory holds up, especially in the wake of big increases in oil and gas prices between April and June. I suspect it will.

Bessent's added bond buying ain't the break TrumpWorld thinks it is

On the day that the US Debt crossed the $40 trillion threshold, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said his agency was going to jump deeper into the bond market.

The US Treasury unexpectedly said Wednesday that it will step up purchases of long-term government bonds, giving a stressed corner of the market more support.

The bond market responded immediately — then partially reversed course. The 30-year Treasury yield (^TYX) fell to 5.19% Wednesday, its biggest one-day drop in 10 months, before rebounding sharply early Thursday.

The dollar index (DX-Y.NYB) fell 0.75% Wednesday, its biggest drop since April 30, and was little changed Thursday….

Only two weeks ago, Treasury laid out its normal quarterly financing plan and left its long-term buyback cap at $2 billion. Wednesday, it said that cap would rise to at least $4 billion beginning Sept. 9 — well before the next scheduled update in November.

If the Treasury buys up more of its own bonds, it throws more money outward, in an attempt to reduce the longer-term interest rates that have been on the rise for much of 2026.

However, having an excess of dollars can drop the dollar’s value, and if the longer-term bonds are traded out for shorter maturities of bonds, more bonds come due in the short term, causing higher expenses when that happens.

And as you can see in the chart, the markets seemed to disregard Bessent's bond-buying plans, as yields of both the 10-year and 30-year bond durations went back up by 4 basis points on Thursday, while the DOW dropped by more than 700 points.

So what did Bessent do on Thursday afternoon in response? He doubled down and said the Treasury might throw out even more money!

Bessent told CNBC that the Treasury's buyback program of government debt could surpass the $4 billion announced on Wednesday.

"We are going to make a market in these. We routinely do buybacks, and we're going to increase the size of the buyback … it could be more than $4 billion per issue," Bessent said.

He noted that the Treasury is trying to signal support during a typically thin August trading session — particularly for the 30-year Treasury — at a time when massive corporate bond issuance is distorting the market, along with other factors.

"We have a big toolkit," Bessent added. "Part of it is signaling here to show that we believe yields don't reflect the underlying fundamentals of this Iran conflict. We will get on the other side of this."

I dunno, Scott. Higher deficits due to cutting taxes during a war do tend to raise interest rates, since more bonds need to be sold to pay for the increased deficits. And oil is now up nearly 27% since the 4th of July, as conflict in Iran drags on and the US’s Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR) continues to dwindle. That also seems to be a logical supply-and-demand reaction and not the distortion Bessent is claiming.

I sense panic from these guys, especially given that a sizable amount of AI companies and rich guys are so strung out on debt these days. If all of their circular financing becomes too expensive to pay off, then the music stops, and things might get freaky.

And I think Wall Street sensed the panic from the White House today, which is why the market had a big drop on a day where there wasn't a lot of negative earning or economic news. Or maybe they just got further confirmation that he's a complete dumbass who will try to BS his way through this one vs having a plan to adjust to reality.

WisGOP calls Crowley a tax hiker in MKE Co. WisGOPs think Sconnies won't look into the facts

I saw some ad the other day from the Tiffany campaign trying to call David Crowley a tax hiker because of his record as Milwaukee County Executive. So I decided to dig into last year's Milwaukee County budget document and see where things stand in the most-populous county in the state.

The 2026 budget for Milwaukee County levies $309,014,834 in taxes on property during the year, which is an increase from the 2025 Adopted budget of approximately $10.4 million. However, the 2026 Budget still levies less in property taxes than the 2023 Adopted Budget as a result of Wisconsin 2023 Act 12. The 2026 Budget is a reduction of $3.9 million from the 2023 budget property taxes levied.

Act 12 was the shared revenue deal at the state level that gave a large increase in shared revenues to villages and towns in Wisconsin, to make up for 12 years of negligence under the WisGOP Legislature. The bill also allowed Milwaukee County to add a 0.4% sales tax and the City of Milwaukee to put in a 2.0% sales tax, in exchange for smaller % increases in shared revenues.

That deal allowing a sales tax came after years of stagnant and/or declining aids from the state being sent to Milwaukee County.

In 2010, Milwaukee County received $66.5 million of mass transit operating assistance; in 2026 the County anticipates receiving an amount of $66.7 million in state aid for transit (85.20). State shared revenue has declined from $37 million in 2010 to $35.5 million in 2026. Basic community aids have declined from $48.6 million in 2010 to $35.0 million in 2026. General transportation aids have increased from $4.3 million in 2010 to $5.8 million in 2026.

Combined, these four revenue sources have been reduced from $156.5 million in 2010 to an estimated $143.1 million in 2026. This is a reduction in real dollars not even adjusting for inflation. If Milwaukee County had received inflationary adjustments across these revenue sources since 2000, for example, the 2026 revenue budget for these state aids would be $115 million more than it is. This issue has contributed significantly to Milwaukee County’s historical structural deficit.

The County budget office adds that another big reason their budget is under stress is that they have to pay for an increasing amount of services under state law, without getting much more in resources to pay for them.

From 2021 through 2025, local tax levy required to provide Milwaukee County’s mandated services increased from 59.7% of county tax levy in 2021 to 78.2% of county tax levy in 2025. In 2026, Milwaukee County will spend $230.4 million dollars of County property tax levy on state mandated services. This is a slight decrease to 74.6% of total property taxes levied. This reduction is a direct result of support provided by the state of Wisconsin in the form of Expressway Policing Aids. The 2025-2027 state budget recognized the unique mandate to Milwaukee County to patrol Milwaukee County’s expressways and provided the Milwaukee County Sheriff’s Office with $19 million in Expressway Policing Aids for 2026.

Based on information from the Milwaukee City Assessor’s office, let’s look at what has happened to the County’s property tax rate, starting with the 2020 budget that Crowley inherited.

That’s a cut in property tax rates by nearly 35% since Crowley has taken ovcer. Sure, the overall amount of property taxes have gone up, because Milwaukee has become one of the hottest housing markets in America, and the median sale price of a home in the County has gone up by 58%, from $190,500 in July 2020 to $301,750 in July 2026.

But the other part of that "tax hiker" argyument by Tiffany and WisGOP is that Milwaukee County got a new sales tax of 0.4%. So let’s look at what that has come in or been estimated for the sales tax totals.

Milwaukee County Sales Tax Collections
2020 $82.0 million
2021 $92.1 million
2022 $90.0 million
2023 $103.5 million
(sales tax increase of 0.4% is passed)

2024 $181.5 million
2025 $188.1 million
2026 $195.6 million

So that's quite a difference in taxes being brought in with the new sales tax in Milwaukee County.

Know what other community just boosted their sales tax? Tom Tiffany’s hometown!

The Wisconsin Department of Revenue reminds retailers about the adoption of a 0.5% premier resort area tax in the Town of Minocqua starting July 1, 2026.

Residents voted to adopt this premier resort area tax as a local retail sales tax in 2018 with authorization by the Wisconsin Legislature for 2026. Generally, proceeds from a premier resort area tax may only be used by the local government to pay for infrastructure expenses within the jurisdiction of that premier resort area.

Effective July 1, 2026, certain sellers must collect the 0.5% premier resort area tax on taxable sales made to customers in the Town of Minocqua.

I’ll add that Tom Tiffany voted to allow a similar 0.5% sales tax for the City of Rhinelander when he was in the Legislature, as part of the 2015-17 state budget. That tax has been in effect since July 2017. The cities of Eagle River and Bayfield also have local sales taxes of 0.5%, which also are communities currently represented by Tom Tiffany.

So it seems like Tom Tiffany can be OK with local sales taxes for his Northwoods constituents to take pressure off of their property taxes, but somehow David Crowley is a tax hiker for a smaller tax increase in the county that is the Number 1 attractor of tourism dollars in the state?

Of course, Tom Tiffany and WisGOP don’t think that voters will understand how Milwaukee County takes up a small portion of the overall property tax bill for its residents. The “rising taxes” argument is generally due to the City of Milwaukee and Milwaukee Public Schools – budgets that David Crowley has little to no control over.

According to the Wisconsin Department of Revenue, citizens and businesses pay a total of approximately $2.1 billion in property taxes to the various taxing entities in Milwaukee County. These entities include:

Milwaukee County government.
Municipal governments (cities and villages).
School districts.
Technical college.
Special districts (such as the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District or the Southeast Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission).
Tax Incremental Finance districts.

Of this $2.1 billion total, Milwaukee County government makes up about 14%.

There’s a bigger bottom line here, given that Tom Tiffany has now dealt with several federal budgets in Congress. That seems especially important as US debt just hit $40 trillion on Wednesday, with this year’s federal deficit on track to go over $2 million.

And a signficant reason why the debt and deficit keeps growing? Because of Tom Tiffany and his fellow Republicans in Congress keep voting for tax cuts that overwhelmingly have favored the rich, as the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities pointed out last March.

This is coupled with Tiffany's votes in the last 14 months for massive increases in spending in the last 12 months for ICE, and being fine with a bloated military and a stupid war in Iran – neither of which have improved Wisconsin’s economy one whit, and have increased the cost of gasoline.

So does Tom Tiffany and the GOP really want to talk about David Crowley's budget choices in this Fall's elections? Because if we look at the reality and have that debate, it's one the WisGOPs deserve to lose. Milwaukee County's property tax rates have gone down significantly under Crowley, while Tom Tiffany voted to defund K-12 schools and local governments while in the Legislature, causing property taxes to rise throughout Wisconsin. And Tiffany's reckless votes in DC to give even more tax cuts for the rich and corporate have caused long-term interest rates to rise, raising borrowing costs for businesses and homeowners.

But the Crowley campaign and the WisDems have to make the argument to make the average voter think about these facts. So get to it, guys.