In Colorado, a classroom teacher and a billionaire face the same headline state income-tax rate: 4.4%. That surprising comparison is the hook of a viral video about Amendment 87, a tax measure appearing on the state’s November 3, 2026 ballot. The flat rate is real. But the full tax picture—and the proposal to change it—is more complicated than a short video can fit.
Before the campaign slogans and courtroom arguments take over, here is what the official state analysis actually says.
One tax rate, very different incomes
Colorado taxes taxable income at a flat 4.4% rate. That means the same statutory rate applies regardless of how much an individual earns. It does not mean every person pays precisely 4.4% of their gross salary: federal and state deductions, income exclusions, and tax credits affect how much income is taxable and how much tax is ultimately owed. And someone’s net worth—the value of their assets minus liabilities—is not the same as their taxable annual income.
That’s why the video’s contrast between a teacher and an enormously wealthy resident is a statement about the state tax-rate structure, not proof they pay identical proportions of every dollar they receive.
What Amendment 87 proposes
Amendment 87 would remove Colorado’s constitutional requirement for one uniform income-tax rate and introduce six graduated brackets starting in tax year 2027. According to the Colorado General Assembly’s 2026 Blue Book and its nonpartisan fiscal analysis, the rates would be:
| Portion of Colorado taxable income | Proposed rate |
|---|---|
| First $25,000 | 3.7% |
| $25,001–$100,000 | 4.2% |
| $100,001–$500,000 | 4.4% |
| $500,001–$750,000 | 7.4% |
| $750,001–$1 million | 7.9% |
| Above $1 million | 8.4% |
Crucial detail: These are marginal rates. A taxpayer whose taxable income reaches $600,000 would not pay 7.4% on all $600,000; only the portion above $500,000 would face that bracket’s rate. The proposal also applies to corporate taxable income—not just personal wages or salaries.
The official fiscal analysis finds that taxpayers with less than approximately $510,834 in Colorado taxable income would pay less, while those above that point would generally pay more. It estimates about 3.4 million individual and corporate taxpayers below the threshold would see an average annual reduction of $176; roughly 64,000 above it would see an average increase of $39,171. Individual results would vary.
Would it raise $2 billion or $2.7 billion?
Both numbers appear in debate over the measure, but they refer to different kinds of estimates. State legislative analysts forecast approximately $1.972 billion in additional revenue in fiscal year 2027–28, the first full fiscal year. The $2.7 billion printed in the official ballot question is the state’s estimate of the maximum increase for that year, allowing for possible forecasting error. Neither is a promise of the final amount collected.
Money raised would go to a newly created Colorado Future’s Account for K–12 education, health care, and early childhood care and education. The measure directs that this revenue supplement, rather than replace, existing spending. The General Assembly would determine the specific program allocations, with annual reporting and auditing requirements.
The Social Security claim: what is actually changing?
The video pushes back against campaign messages suggesting that Amendment 87 would eliminate Colorado’s tax deductions for Social Security income and military pensions. That concern has appeared in opposition messages, but nonpartisan legislative analysts say the measure does not repeal those existing deductions. Tax experts interviewed in an October 29 report on the dispute likewise rejected the claim that those exemptions automatically disappear. A retiree’s other taxable income could still be subject to the graduated brackets.
That is different from predicting how an imagined future lawsuit might unfold. The video uses satire to argue about legal threats, but the suggestion that opponents will successfully remove the exemptions is not an established result.
The governor, the businesses, and the other tax measure
There is another wrinkle: Colorado Governor Jared Polis opposes Amendment 87, even though the video uses a caricature of the state’s wealthy political class to make its point. Polis says the proposed higher business tax rates could weaken the state’s competitiveness and increase costs. Supporters respond that the higher rates would affect a comparatively small share of taxpayers and would provide money for schools, health programs, and child care. Both perspectives are arguments about the likely effects of a documented proposal, not settled economic outcomes. See Denver7’s reporting on the dispute.
Meanwhile, voters will also see Proposition 136, which would cap the state income-tax rate at 4.4%. The official Blue Book warns that the two measures conflict in some respects. If both pass, the legislature or courts may have to resolve what takes effect; the result should not be assumed in advance. On October 30, the Colorado Supreme Court rejected a separate challenge seeking to keep Amendment 87 off the ballot, so votes on the measure will be counted. Colorado Public Radio reported the ruling.
What each side says
Supporters argue that the graduated structure would reduce taxes for most filers while raising money for underfunded public services. They describe the change as a way to better reflect differences in taxpayers’ financial circumstances.
Opponents argue that higher rates on upper incomes and some businesses could reduce investment, encourage relocation, and expand government spending. They also point out that the proposed income brackets would not automatically rise with inflation, potentially affecting more taxpayers over time. These arguments are summarized in the state’s official voter information booklet.
Both the proposed tax reduction for most filers and the proposed large aggregate tax increase are part of the same fiscal plan. Whether the tradeoff is desirable is a question for voters; what matters for understanding it is knowing who would pay, how much would be raised, and what the law would actually require.
Apep Bar’s question: When two people face the same tax rate but have vastly different resources, what should count as a fair comparison—the percentage on paper, the dollars paid, or what remains afterward?
Source video and documents
Watch the YouTube Short: “Billionaires in this state pay the same tax rates as teachers”
Colorado 2026 Blue Book: official ballot analysis (Amendment 87) · Legislative Council Staff: fiscal impact statement · Colorado Department of Revenue: income-tax guide · Colorado Public Radio voter guide
Editorial note: This article describes ballot language, fiscal projections, and differing public arguments. A campaign video’s dialogue, including dramatized exchanges, should not be treated as direct testimony from the public figures it portrays.
