Illinois Bill Book

Illinois would stop charging corporations a franchise tax starting in 2029, shifting the lost revenue to ordinary taxpayers.

Citizens could see higher taxes or fewer services because the state will lose money that corporations would have paid, so they should speak up now.

Big Business

• Accountability (hurts) — removes corporate tax obligations. Corporations no longer pay franchise tax
• Rights & Protections (neutral) — no direct impact on personal rights. bill does not affect individual legal protections
• Who Bears the Cost (hurts) — revenue loss may shift to taxpayers. state loses tax revenue, likely raising other taxes
• Process Transparency (neutral) — standard legislative process. bill follows normal introduction and referral steps
• Funding Tilt (hurts) — funds moved to general revenue, not new programs. no new money earmarked for services

• Official text (IL SB3441)https://www.ilga.gov/Legislation/BillStatus?DocNum=3441&GAID=18&DocTypeID=SB&SessionID=114&GA=104
• LegiScan — SB3441https://legiscan.com/IL/bill/SB3441/2025

The bill would stop most civil lawsuits against child welfare agencies for two years unless they act with willful or wanton misconduct.

Families and kids in foster care would lose the ability to hold agencies accountable for mistakes, making it harder to get compensation for harm. The agencies would be protected, which could keep services running but reduces oversight.

Child welfare agencies

• Accountability (hurts) — immunity reduces ability to sue. Limited immunity cuts agency accountability
• Rights & Protections (hurts) — rightRemoved. Civil liability shield limits people's rights
• Who Bears the Cost (hurts) — costShift. Families may bear damages instead of agencies
• Process Transparency (neutral) — task force oversight. Task force must report to legislature
• Funding Tilt (neutral) — no new money. Bill does not allocate additional funding

• Official text (IL SB1696)https://www.ilga.gov/Legislation/BillStatus?DocNum=1696&GAID=18&DocTypeID=SB&SessionID=114&GA=104
• LegiScan — SB1696https://legiscan.com/IL/bill/SB1696/2025

Tribal police could arrest you on tribal property or nearby areas, and the tribe would be protected by insurance instead of being sued.

People living near tribal lands could face law enforcement they never saw before, while any damages they suffer would be paid by the tribe's insurance, not the state, limiting their ability to hold the tribe accountable.

Insurers

• Accountability (hurts) — Limits ability to sue tribe beyond insurance limits. Reduces accountability for tribal actions
• Rights & Protections (hurts) — Restricts right to sue tribe for larger damages. Weakens protections for victims
• Who Bears the Cost (helps) — Shifts payment of damages to insurance carriers. Taxpayers not on the hook
• Process Transparency (helps) — Requires insurance carrier certification and map filing. Adds oversight steps
• Funding Tilt (hurts) — Benefits insurance companies with new business. Public funds not directly used

• Official text (IL HB3232)https://www.ilga.gov/Legislation/BillStatus?DocNum=3232&GAID=18&DocTypeID=HB&SessionID=114&GA=104
• LegiScan — HB3232https://legiscan.com/IL/bill/HB3232/2025

Limits lawsuits against child welfare agencies

This bill would limit your right to sue child welfare agencies, but it also tries to find a solution to their insurance problems, so now is the time to weigh in on how to balance these issues

Child Welfare Agencies

• Accountability (hurts) — Limits lawsuits. Reduces accountability for child welfare agencies
• Rights & Protections (hurts) — Limits right to sue. Reduces ability to hold agencies accountable
• Who Bears the Cost (neutral) — No clear impact. Unclear how costs will be affected
• Process Transparency (helps) — Task force will study issue. Increases transparency through task force
• Funding Tilt (neutral) — No funding impact. No clear funding implications

• Official text (IL HB3138)https://www.ilga.gov/Legislation/BillStatus?DocNum=3138&GAID=18&DocTypeID=HB&SessionID=114&GA=104
• LegiScan — HB3138https://legiscan.com/IL/bill/HB3138/2025

This bill would add a new fee for newborn screenings, which could cost families more money.

Families may need to pay extra for newborn screenings. Now is the time to speak up about this new fee.

Everyday People

• Who Bears the Cost (hurts) — Families will pay more for newborn screenings.. The new fee shifts costs to families.
• Rights & Protections (neutral) — No rights are removed, but costs increase.. The bill does not take away any protections.

Pushing for it: Department of Public Health
Bearing the cost: Unknown

• Official text (IL SB3741)https://www.ilga.gov/Legislation/BillStatus?DocNum=3741&GAID=18&DocTypeID=SB&SessionID=114&GA=104
• LegiScan — SB3741https://legiscan.com/IL/bill/SB3741/2025

The bill would let people buy psilocybin for therapy but would add a 15% tax and protect sellers from many lawsuits.

Supporters say it gives new mental‑health options and funds public health, but opponents warn the tax hurts patients and the immunity shields companies from accountability.

Psilocybin industry

• Accountability (hurts) — Immunity for licensees reduces their accountability. Licensees cannot be sued for many civil or criminal actions
• Rights & Protections (hurts) — Immunity removes right to sue. Consumers lose ability to sue licensed psilocybin providers
• Who Bears the Cost (hurts) — 15% tax shifts cost to users. Buyers pay extra tax on psilocybin purchases
• Process Transparency (hurts) — FOIA exemption limits public access. Certain program information is exempt from disclosure
• Funding Tilt (helps) — Tax creates dedicated funding. Revenue funds public health and harm‑reduction programs

• Official text (IL HB2992)https://www.ilga.gov/Legislation/BillStatus?DocNum=2992&GAID=18&DocTypeID=HB&SessionID=114&GA=104
• LegiScan — HB2992https://legiscan.com/IL/bill/HB2992/2025

This bill would change some insurance rules, affecting how companies help customers and manage funds for burn victims.

People should pay attention to this bill because it could change how well insurance companies respond to their needs. If the bill passes, it might not help those who need support the most.

• Accountability (neutral) — Customer service department may help accountability.. Companies must respond to complaints.
• Rights & Protections (hurts) — Dissolving the fund may hurt burn victims.. Fund provides support for burn victims.
• Who Bears the Cost (neutral) — Costs are unclear.. Future deposits go to the General Revenue Fund.
• Process Transparency (helps) — More oversight for insurance contracts.. Director of Insurance can review contracts.

• Official text (IL SB2505)https://www.ilga.gov/Legislation/BillStatus?DocNum=2505&GAID=18&DocTypeID=SB&SessionID=114&GA=104
• LegiScan — SB2505https://legiscan.com/IL/bill/SB2505/2025

The bill would make packaging makers pay recycling fees and run a deposit refund, while shielding them from some lawsuits.

Citizens could see higher product prices but get money back when they return bottles, and producers would gain protection from lawsuits, so trade‑off matters now as bill moves forward.

Packaging producers

• Accountability (hurts) — immunity reduces ability to sue producers. Provides immunity from liability for antitrust, restraint of trade, and unfair trade practices
• Rights & Protections (hurts) — consumer refund right but limited by producer immunity. Creates a refund system for beverage containers but shields producers from some lawsuits
• Who Bears the Cost (helps) — fees placed on producers, not consumers. Requires producer fees and charges for recycling program
• Process Transparency (helps) — requires reporting and rulemaking. Mandates reporting by producers, agencies, and facilities
• Funding Tilt (neutral) — creates state funds with appropriations. Creates Packaging Producer Responsibility Program Fund and Recycling Refund Program Fund

• Official text (IL HB4064)https://www.ilga.gov/Legislation/BillStatus?DocNum=4064&GAID=18&DocTypeID=HB&SessionID=114&GA=104
• LegiScan — HB4064https://legiscan.com/IL/bill/HB4064/2025

Manufacturers would have to set up a state‑wide program to collect hazardous household waste and would be shielded from antitrust lawsuits.

The bill would make product makers pay for a new collection system for dangerous chemicals in homes. That could mean more drop‑off sites and cleaner neighborhoods for everyday people. At the same time, the makers would be immune from competition lawsuits, which could let them avoid costs that might otherwise be passed to shoppers.

Manufacturers

• Accountability (hurts) — Immunity reduces ability to hold manufacturers accountable. Manufacturers are shielded from antitrust lawsuits
• Rights & Protections (hurts) — Protects manufacturers, not consumers. No new consumer rights are added
• Who Bears the Cost (helps) — Costs shift to manufacturers and stewardship org. Annual $200,000 fee paid by stewardship organization
• Process Transparency (neutral) — Requires registration and reporting. Annual registration and reporting requirements
• Funding Tilt (helps) — Funding comes from industry, not taxpayers. Fee is paid by stewardship organization, not the state budget

Pushing for it: Stewardship organization (industry) ($200,000)
Bearing the cost: Unknown

• Official text (IL HB1893)https://www.ilga.gov/Legislation/BillStatus?DocNum=1893&GAID=18&DocTypeID=HB&SessionID=114&GA=104
• LegiScan — HB1893https://legiscan.com/IL/bill/HB1893/2025

If you ask your health insurer for a balance, they can charge up to $40 and must give you 7 days to agree on payment before sending debt to a collector

Consumers should watch this bill because it could add a new fee to simple balance requests, but it also forces insurers to give notice and a short negotiation window before turning debts over to collectors.

Insurers

• Accountability (helps) — Requires insurer notice before collection. Adds a written notice step to hold insurers accountable
• Rights & Protections (helps) — Gives consumers a negotiation window. Provides 7‑day period to agree on payment or request more time
• Who Bears the Cost (hurts) — Allows fee on balance requests. Consumers may have to pay up to $40 for the information
• Process Transparency (helps) — Mandates written communication. Insurers must send a clear written notice with payment terms
• Funding Tilt (neutral) — No new funding changes. Bill does not create or shift public funds

• Official text (IL HB3754)https://www.ilga.gov/Legislation/BillStatus?DocNum=3754&GAID=18&DocTypeID=HB&SessionID=114&GA=104
• LegiScan — HB3754https://legiscan.com/IL/bill/HB3754/2025

This bill lets children and their parents sue anyone who secretly records them in bathrooms, locker rooms, hotel rooms, or private homes without permission, and recover money for emotional harm, punitive damages, and lawyer fees.

Right now, Illinois kids have almost no legal weapon against creeps who plant hidden cameras in changing rooms or bathrooms. This bill flips the script: it creates a real lawsuit that kids or parents can file, with real teeth (punitive damages, attorney's fees). The 'per se harm' language means a child doesn't have to prove they suffered, the law presumes they did. That's huge. The 2-year clock doesn't start until the kid turns 18, which protects young victims from a fast-running deadline. Privacy protections let the child use a fake name in court so their identity stays sealed. The law exempts parents, cops doing their job, and good-faith reporters of crimes. This is a slam-dunk for protecting kids, and it's moving fast through a bipartisan sponsorship. The window to support it is NOW, before final passage.

Everyday People

• Right to sue & recover damages (economic, noneconomic, punitive) (helps) — Bill creates a direct private right of action with full damages available to child victims and parents. Section 25 authorizes prevailing plaintiff to recover economic and noneconomic damages proximately caused by violation, punitive damages, and reasonable attorney's fees and costs
• Presumption of harm (per se) (helps) — Child does not need to prove actual harm; law deems violation per se harmful and traumatic. Section 15 states child who proves violation is deemed 'per se harmful and traumatic' and does not need additional evidence to prove harm, though may present evidence of extent
• Privacy protections for child plaintiff (helps) — Child can proceed anonymously in court; identity and characteristics redacted from all public filings. Section 20 allows plaintiff to use pseudonym under Code of Civil Procedure and permits court to exclude or redact identifying characteristics from all pleadings and documents
• Statute of limitations tolled for minors (helps) — Clock does not start running until child reaches age of majority or emancipation, protecting young victims from time-bar. Section 30(c) provides time for filing does not begin to run until child becomes emancipated or attains age of majority
• Scope of locations (restrooms, locker rooms, hotel, private homes) (helps) — Coverage of high-risk private spaces where children have reasonable expectation of privacy. Section 10(a) creates cause of action for recordings in restrooms, tanning beds, tanning salons, locker rooms, changing rooms, hotel guest accommodations, or residence in area with reasonable expectation of privacy
• Exemptions for parents, law enforcement, good-faith reporters (neutral) — Balanced carve-outs prevent overreach while protecting legitimate investigations and parental authority. Section 10(b) exempts parent or legal guardian unless prohibited by other law, law enforcement in lawful performance of duties, and recordings made in good faith reporting unlawful conduct
• Inspection & notification mandate for government agencies (helps) — State and local inspectors must check for hidden cameras in regulated spaces and report to police. Section 35 requires State agencies and units of local government that inspect restrooms, tanning facilities, locker rooms, changing rooms, or hotel accommodations to also inspect for hidden cameras and immediately notify law enforcement if discovered

Pushing for it: Children and parents who sue and win (recover economic damages, emotional distress damages, punitive damages, attorney fees)
Bearing the cost: Defendants who secretly record children in private spaces

• Official text (IL HB4262)https://www.ilga.gov/Legislation/BillStatus?DocNum=4262&GAID=18&DocTypeID=HB&SessionID=114&GA=104
• LegiScan — HB4262https://legiscan.com/IL/bill/HB4262/2025

This bill would stop landlords from charging surprise fees like admin charges, pet fees, and eviction penalties, and forces all costs onto the first page of a lease so tenants know exactly what they're paying upfront.

Renters in Illinois get hammered with hidden fees, for renewing a lease, for contacting the landlord, even for being evicted. This bill says: no more. Every cost must be on page one in plain language, and a bunch of sneaky charges are banned outright. Late fees cap at $25 and only kick in after 7 days. Pet fees disappear. Renewal fees? Gone. The landlord can't force you to hire an agent either. Right now, this is in committee, it's the moment to push it forward because landlords will lobby hard to kill it once the real estate industry wakes up.

Everyday People

• Right to transparency and fair terms (helps) — Tenants gain clear disclosure of all fees upfront and protection from surprise charges.. All fees must be explicitly on the first page of the lease with itemized descriptions. Tenants are not liable for undisclosed fees.
• Limits on predatory charges (helps) — Bans arbitrary and cumulative fees that trap tenants in debt cycles.. No administrative renewal fees, modification fees, contact fees, eviction penalties, or pet occupancy fees. Late fees capped at $25 and only after 7 days grace.
• Cost shift to landlords (helps) — Landlords absorb costs they previously shifted to tenants; some may pass through higher rent.. Landlords lose revenue from prohibited fees. Security deposits and move fees are capped relative to monthly rent.
• Process and enforceability (helps) — Bill creates clear standards and liability for violation, but enforcement relies on tenant lawsuits and landlord compliance.. Landlord is liable if landlord's agent or any agent publishing the listing violates fee rules. Presumption that agent acts with landlord permission.
• Home rule preemption (hurts) — Bill preempts local ordinances; removes cities' ability to set their own rental standards.. Bill states it preempts home rule, centralizing tenant-protection rules at state level.

Pushing for it: Tenants (through fee elimination and caps)
Bearing the cost: Landlords and real estate agents (through prohibited and capped charges)

• Official text (IL SB1964)https://www.ilga.gov/Legislation/BillStatus?DocNum=1964&GAID=18&DocTypeID=SB&SessionID=114&GA=104
• LegiScan — SB1964https://legiscan.com/IL/bill/SB1964/2025

This bill would stop landlords from charging tenants more than one month's rent upfront, cap application and late fees, and make sure tenants know their rights before signing a lease.

Right now, landlords in Illinois can charge whatever they want for deposits, application fees, and late payments, sometimes hundreds of dollars extra. This bill would set hard limits: deposits capped at one month's rent, application fees at $20 max, late fees at $50 or 5% of rent (whichever is less), and background checks at $20 or actual cost. It also says tenants can't sign away these protections. The Attorney General gets power to enforce it as a consumer fraud violation. The 'rightRemoved' badge applies because the bill explicitly voids any lease clause that tries to make tenants waive these new rights, meaning it's restoring and protecting tenant rights that were being erased by one-sided lease language. This is early-stage (just assigned to Judiciary committee) so now is when tenant advocates should push hard.

Everyday People

• Accountability & Enforcement (helps) — AG gets explicit enforcement power; violations tied to Consumer Fraud Act. Attorney General authorized to enforce and adopt rules; violations are unlawful consumer practices under Illinois Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Practices Act, giving tenants and AG a legal hook to challenge abuse.
• Rights & Protections (helps) — Hard caps on deposits, fees, late charges; rights cannot be waived. Bill sets absolute limits on deposits (one month rent), application fees ($20), late fees ($50 or 5% rent), and background checks ($20 or actual cost). Section 30 explicitly voids any agreement waiving or modifying these rights, preventing landlords from erasing protections via lease language.
• Who Bears the Cost (helps) — Tenants keep more of their money; landlords absorb limits. Tenants no longer pay excessive upfront fees and deposits; late-fee caps protect those with temporary payment delays. Landlords cannot shift these costs; they absorb the caps as a cost of doing business.
• Process Transparency (helps) — Mandatory disclosure of rights and fee receipts required. Landlords must provide Attorney General's 'Landlord and Tenant Rights and Laws' sheet before lease signing; must give copy of background check and receipt if charging a fee.
• Multi-State Copycat Risk (neutral) — No evidence of multi-state coordinate activity in bill text. Bill is Illinois-specific; no mention of interstate coordination or copycat legislation elsewhere.

Pushing for it: Renters who would otherwise pay excess deposits, application fees, inflated late fees (hundreds per tenant (savings on deposits, fees, late charges))
Bearing the cost: Landlords absorbing fee caps and deposit limits as cost control; revenue loss not quantified in bill

• Official text (IL HB4998)https://www.ilga.gov/Legislation/BillStatus?DocNum=4998&GAID=18&DocTypeID=HB&SessionID=114&GA=104
• LegiScan — HB4998https://legiscan.com/IL/bill/HB4998/2025

If someone sends you explicit images without permission and it upsets you, you could take them to court and make them pay at least $500 plus your lawyer fees.

Right now, if someone floods your phone with unwanted sexually explicit images, your options are limited. This bill gives you a real legal tool: you can sue them and win money. The catch? You have to prove the images would bother a reasonable person and that you didn't ask for them. That's a fair bar. The bill protects internet companies and legitimate services (like health apps) from getting sued just for hosting or moving the material, only the person who knowingly sent it unprompted faces liability. This matters now because online harassment is a real problem, and victims need a way to fight back that isn't just "report and hope." But watch for how courts will define "emotional distress", that language could get stretchy.

Everyday People

• Right to sue for unwanted harassment (helps) — Creates a new private right of action for victims. Bill establishes that recipients of non-consensual explicit images can sue the sender in court, restoring a direct legal remedy.
• Minimum damages floor protects low-income victims (helps) — $500 minimum covers cases where emotional harm is real but hard to measure in dollars. Plaintiff can recover actual damages or $500, whichever is greater, plus attorney's fees, no victim needs a big bank account to get justice.
• Emotional distress standard is plaintiff-centered (helps) — Reasonable person test accounts for plaintiff's circumstances and knowledge. Court will apply the standard of a person in the plaintiff's shoes with the plaintiff's knowledge, not a hypothetical stranger.
• Platform and provider immunity is clear (helps) — ISPs, apps, and legitimate services are explicitly shielded from liability. Exempts internet providers, mobile data providers, app operators, subscription services, and health care providers, only the actual sender can be sued.
• Venue is flexible for plaintiffs (helps) — Suit can be filed where material was sent from or received. Plaintiff can sue in the jurisdiction where they received the images, avoiding travel and cost barriers.

Pushing for it: Victims of unsolicited explicit images (can recover actual damages or $500, whichever is greater) ($500 minimum per claim plus attorney fees)
Bearing the cost: Individual senders who knowingly transmit non-consensual explicit images

• Official text (IL HB1590)https://www.ilga.gov/Legislation/BillStatus?DocNum=1590&GAID=18&DocTypeID=HB&SessionID=114&GA=104
• LegiScan — HB1590https://legiscan.com/IL/bill/HB1590/2025

Landlords would have to list every recurring fee (like pet or utility charges) on rental listings and lease pages so renters see the real total cost before signing, and tenants could sue if fees are hidden.

Right now, landlords in Illinois can bury fees deep in leases or spring surprise charges after a tenant moves in, turning a $1,200 rent into $1,500 once you've already committed. This bill says: no more. Every recurring or one-time required fee has to be on the listing and front-and-center on page one of the lease. If it's not there, you don't owe it. The bill also bans landlords from forcing tenants to buy insurance for common-area damage (a sneaky way to shift risk). Most importantly, it lets renters actually sue a landlord who violates these rules and recover real damages plus attorney's fees, so you can afford a lawyer to fight back. This is a rare moment: the bill is just introduced, moving to committee. Now is when tenants and housing advocates can push for passage before landlord lobbyists mobilize.

Everyday People

• Right to Sue (helps) — Bill explicitly grants tenants the right to bring civil action and recover attorney's fees.. Sec. 45 allows 'any person alleging a violation' to sue for 'actual damages, injunctive relief, and attorney's fees and costs,' making it affordable for renters to enforce their rights in court.
• Cost Shift Away From Tenants (helps) — Tenants are explicitly not liable for undisclosed fees; cost remains with landlord or is prohibited entirely.. Sec. 35(a) and (b) state if fees are not explicitly disclosed on the first page, 'the tenant is not liable for the fee.' Sec. 40 bans common-area insurance requirements, eliminating a cost landlords previously shifted.
• Process Transparency (helps) — Requires 'clear and conspicuous' disclosure of all recurring and one-time fees on listing and lease front page.. Sec. 35 mandates fees appear 'on the real estate listing or an accompanying link to a website' and 'on the first page of the lease agreement in a clear and conspicuous manner as part of the total cost of rent.'
• Accountability (helps) — Landlords face financial and legal consequences for hiding fees.. Tenants can recover actual damages and attorney's fees, creating a direct financial incentive for landlords to comply and disclose upfront rather than litigate.
• Consumer Protection (helps) — Bill directly addresses predatory rental fee practices that catch renters by surprise.. Prohibition on undisclosed fees and required upfront listing reduce deceptive practices common in rental markets.

Pushing for it: Tenants and renters (recover actual damages and attorney's fees in lawsuits)
Bearing the cost: Landlords who hide or charge undisclosed fees; those who require tenant-paid common-area insurance

• Official text (IL SB3363)https://www.ilga.gov/Legislation/BillStatus?DocNum=3363&GAID=18&DocTypeID=SB&SessionID=114&GA=104
• LegiScan — SB3363https://legiscan.com/IL/bill/SB3363/2025

The bill would stop local districts from keeping more than double last year's tax money and would give any extra cash back to taxpayers.

If passed, Illinois residents could see money they overpaid in taxes returned each quarter, reducing waste and keeping local governments from hoarding cash.

Everyday People

• Accountability (helps) — Adds clear rule on surplus cash handling. Districts must track cash limits and issue refunds
• Rights & Protections (helps) — Protects taxpayers' right to get excess money back. Refunds are based on each taxpayer's share of the prior levy
• Who Bears the Cost (helps) — Cost of excess cash stays with the taxing district. Taxpayers receive refunds rather than bearing the loss
• Process Transparency (neutral) — No major change to transparency. Bill sets a limit but does not require new reporting
• Funding Tilt (neutral) — No specific funding shift identified. No direct benefit to any industry or business

• Official text (IL HB5785)https://www.ilga.gov/Legislation/BillStatus?DocNum=5785&GAID=18&DocTypeID=HB&SessionID=114&GA=104
• LegiScan — HB5785https://legiscan.com/IL/bill/HB5785/2025

The bill would stop medical debt collectors from contacting patients or filing lawsuits while an insurance appeal is pending, and would cap interest on medical debt.

Patients could avoid harassing calls and costly court battles while they try to get insurance decisions reversed, and they won’t be hit with high interest if they set up payment plans.

Everyday People

• Accountability (helps) — collectors must get hospital approval before suing. prevents unauthorized lawsuits
• Rights & Protections (helps) — protects patients during insurance appeals. stops collection calls and legal actions
• Who Bears the Cost (helps) — shifts debt interest burden away from patients. caps interest at 0% or 2%
• Process Transparency (neutral) — .
• Funding Tilt (neutral) — .

• Official text (IL SB1223)https://www.ilga.gov/Legislation/BillStatus?DocNum=1223&GAID=18&DocTypeID=SB&SessionID=114&GA=104
• LegiScan — SB1223https://legiscan.com/IL/bill/SB1223/2025

The Junk Fee Ban Act would make stores and restaurants show the total price, including all fees, so shoppers know exactly what they will pay.

Consumers would stop being surprised by hidden charges, while businesses would have to be more honest and may face penalties if they hide fees, so the bill protects everyday shoppers now as it moves through committees.

Everyday People

• Accountability (helps) — adds penalties for hidden fees. businesses can be sued for violating disclosure rules
• Rights & Protections (helps) — gives shoppers clear price info. requires total price display before purchase
• Who Bears the Cost (helps) — cost falls on businesses. businesses must change advertising and may pay fines
• Process Transparency (neutral) — bill text is clear. defines terms and disclosure methods
• Funding Tilt (neutral) — no new funding. does not allocate money

• Official text (IL HB0062)https://www.ilga.gov/Legislation/BillStatus?DocNum=62&GAID=18&DocTypeID=HB&SessionID=114&GA=104
• LegiScan — HB0062https://legiscan.com/IL/bill/HB0062/2025

The bill would make insurers pass drug rebates to you, cutting your out‑of‑pocket cost for each prescription.

Right now the bill is just a proposal, but if it passes you could see lower copays on your prescriptions. Insurers would have to use the rebates they get from drug makers to lower what you pay at the pharmacy. This could save families money and make medicines more affordable.

Everyday People

• Accountability (neutral) — No new oversight body, but insurers must follow rebate rule. Insurers must apply rebates to cost sharing as required.
• Rights & Protections (helps) — Strengthens consumer right to lower out‑of‑pocket cost. Mandates passing rebates to patients at point of sale.
• Who Bears the Cost (helps) — Shifts rebate benefit to consumers, reducing their cost. Consumers pay less; excess rebates lower premiums.
• Process Transparency (neutral) — Rules may be adopted by Dept of Insurance, but no major transparency change. Implementation left to regulator.
• Funding Tilt (neutral) — No new funding or tax changes. Bill does not create new spending.

• Official text (IL HB1171)https://www.ilga.gov/Legislation/BillStatus?DocNum=1171&GAID=18&DocTypeID=HB&SessionID=114&GA=104
• LegiScan — HB1171https://legiscan.com/IL/bill/HB1171/2025

The bill would let a consumer or employee stop arbitration by filing a stay within 20 days, and force the other side to pay fees.

This bill could give everyday people more power to fight unfair contracts, stopping forced arbitration and making the other side pay costs, so they can go to court if needed.

Everyday People

• Accountability (helps) — adds sanctions for breach. Provides penalties for parties that break arbitration agreement
• Rights & Protections (helps) — adds stay right. Lets consumer/employee block arbitration by filing stay within 20 days
• Who Bears the Cost (helps) — shifts fee burden. If fees not paid, breaching party loses right to compel arbitration
• Process Transparency (helps) — requires invoices. Arbitrator must send full fee invoices to all parties
• Funding Tilt (neutral) — no new funding. Bill does not change funding sources

• Official text (IL HB2408)https://www.ilga.gov/Legislation/BillStatus?DocNum=2408&GAID=18&DocTypeID=HB&SessionID=114&GA=104
• LegiScan — HB2408https://legiscan.com/IL/bill/HB2408/2025