Share 
Illinois lawmakers passed the largest budget in state history in the early hours of June 1, approving a $55.9 billion fiscal year 2027 spending plan after an all-night session. The package introduces new taxes on social media companies, digital assets, fantasy sports operators and prediction market betting sites, and cleared both chambers without a single Republican vote.
Democrats build budget as federal funding shield
Gov. JB Pritzker had proposed a higher spending figure in February; the final package came in below his request but still earned his support. He called it the state’s eighth consecutive balanced budget.
“Illinois now finds itself in the strongest position in decades,” Pritzker said after the vote, adding, as reported by CBS Chicago, that the plan would make “people-first investments while maintaining our positive fiscal trajectory and protecting working families from paying new taxes.” He said he would sign the bill.
Democrats framed the plan as a hedge against federal funding cuts and tariff-driven economic instability. Senate budget leader Elgie Sims, D-Chicago, defended the measure on the floor. As reported by NPR Illinois and Capitol News Illinois, Sims said:
“This has prepared us for the great reality of federal cuts we face today. The reality of disruption coming from Washington. We are acting responsibly, not on fear.”
Fantasy sports and prediction markets face new levies
The revenue side leans on several new business taxes. Two proposals Pritzker outlined in February were included: a lower cap on corporate net operating loss deductions and a per-user tax on social media companies. Together, those two measures are expected to raise $500 million.
Illinois also brought fantasy sports under a formal licensing structure for the first time, with the Illinois Gaming Board serving as the regulatory authority. As detailed by Southern Illinois Now, operators serving 7,500 or fewer patrons qualify as small operators and will pay a $500 two-year license fee; those serving more than 7,500 patrons will pay $7,500.
All operators are subject to a 15% tax on adjusted gross fantasy contest receipts and must implement age verification, geolocation controls, identity verification and anti-money laundering measures. Rep. Curtis Tarver, D-Chicago, noted the industry itself had requested the framework. Combined with a new tax on digital asset sales, the measures are projected to generate $65 million in fiscal year 2027, according to NPR Illinois.
The budget also targets prediction markets through Senate Bill 3019, which amends the state’s Sports Wagering Act and defines “exchange wagers” as contracts tied to the outcome of a sporting event. Each such wager will carry a 1.75% transaction tax, doubling to 3.5% once an operator surpasses five million exchange wagers. The new framework may draw legal resistance: the CFTC already has an active lawsuit against Illinois over prediction market contracts, and companies such as Kalshi may mount additional challenges.
A grueliing path to passage
The path to passage was long. The main spending bill, House Bill 111, passed the Senate 37-21 just after 3 a.m., then cleared the House around 4:15 a.m. on a 76-39 vote. The separate revenue measure, Senate Bill 3019, passed the House at roughly 11:15 p.m. on a 73-41 vote, with the Senate following around 12:30 a.m.
Republicans criticized the process. The 3,700-page spending plan was introduced Saturday evening, and roughly 200 additional pages were added around 2 a.m. Monday. “Thirteen million people expect us to do our work in the openness of daylight, not in the final hours of darkness,” said Sen. Chris Balkema, R-Channahon.
What critics say Illinois got wrong
Outside analysts questioned the plan’s structural soundness. As reported by ABC7 Chicago, Bryce Hill, fiscal and economic analysis director at the Illinois Policy Institute, warned that new taxes ultimately reach consumers — whether through direct levies or higher prices passed along by businesses.
Fiscal analysts warned that next year’s budget will face far greater pressure from federal funding reductions. The state’s pension obligations, still unaddressed, are expected to make future budget cycles increasingly difficult.
