Passing Prop 136 would keep Colorado income tax rates right where they are, but would it scuttle benefits voters might like from Amendment 87?

At its simplest, passing Proposition 136 would cap individual/family and corporate income tax rates in Colorado at 4.4%, which is where they are currently. However, there is a competing ballot measure this year in Amendment 87, and there might be complications if both 136 and 87 get more than 50% of the vote, which is mathematically possible.

Prop 136 is statutory, not Constitutional, and would pass with a simple majority of votes (50% plus one or more).

Ballot Language is Short

Unlike a lot of 2026 initiatives that might have many pages of text, what’s below is the whole thing:

SECTION 1. In Colorado Revised Statutes, add 39-22-102.5 as follows:

39-22-102.5. Maximum Tax Rate.
(1) Starting January 1, 2027, neither the individual income tax rate nor the corporate income tax
rate may exceed 4.4% of a taxpayer’s federal taxable income.

SECTION 2. Effective date.
This measure is effective upon proclamation of the Governor and applicable to the tax year
beginning January 1, 2027 and all future tax years thereafter.

There Must Be More to the Story, Yes?

Yes, there’s more. It’s been known for years that liberals and progressives wanted to run a ballot measure calling for a Colorado graduated income tax. In January 2026, proponents Chris DeGruy Kennedy of the Bell Policy Center and Kiyana Newell of New Era Colorado – both generally considered liberal organizations – filed Initiative 195 (now known as Amendment 87), which included new graduated state income tax tiers that basically get higher on higher-earning income categories. (There were several other initiatives drafted, but of them, only 195 went to the petitioning phase.)

In April 2026, proponents Michael Fields and Suzanne Taheri, both associated with the conservative organization Advance Colorado, filed as designated representatives for Initiative 232 (now known as Prop 136). Why? Fields, who is Advance’s executive director, said in a quote published in August 2026 in Colorado Politics: “This is a clear counter to the far left’s attempt to hike taxes in Colorado, price people out of the state we love, and drive business out. We’ll always fight to protect TABOR and keep our taxes low.”

There’s really no skirting the issue – Proposition 136 was proposed to counter Amendment 87.

What Happens With Two Competing Ballot Measures?

According to the most recent draft of the Colorado Blue Book, it’s not exactly clear what would happen if both Proposition 136 and Amendment 87 get more than 50% of the vote – and since they’re separate ballot measures, it’s completely numerically possible for both of them to pass. It’s probably not inaccurate to assume a lot of people would support only one measure but not the other based on political leanings, but strange things have happened in Colorado elections so perhaps it’s not a great idea to assume.

Again per the Blue Book, normally the initiative with the most votes takes effect if there are two competing initiatives clearing 50% on the same ballot. However, here are a few scenarios that might arise if they both get more than 50%:

  • The new proposed tax rate on income above $500,000 in Amendment 87 would be higher than the 4.4% limit in Prop 136.
  • If Prop 136 earns more votes than Amendment 87, the Blue Book says it’s “unclear” if the tax rate decreases in Amendment 87 for lower-income earners would go into effect.

The Blue Book section concludes: “The state legislature or a court will need to determine how to resolve any conflicts.”

Fiscal Impact

If Prop 136 passes and Amendment 87 does not, there would not be any direct fiscal impact because income tax rates would stay where they are currently.

However, if Proposition 136 passes and Amendment 87 does not, the roughly $2 billion in new revenue projected for the first year under Amendment 87 would not be collected, and would not go toward State of Colorado education, healthcare, and/or childcare programs.

And if Amendment 87 passes while Prop 136 does not, wealthier Coloradans and certain corporations would pay higher income tax rates. This would impact their bottom lines to some extent, and the section below discusses some possible tangible effects of a tax increase.

How Might Prop 136 Drive Economic Behavior?

The conservative think tank Common Sense Institute says: “Supporters of Initiative 232 (now 136) believe that maintaining a flat income tax system keeps Colorado economically competitive. Under a flat tax system, high-income individuals are more likely to move to the state than under a graduated tax system. Likewise, a flat tax encourages higher-income earners to remain in Colorado rather than relocate.”

CSI continues: “States surrounding Colorado such as Utah and Arizona have flat-rate taxes, while Wyoming has no income tax at all. Nebraska, New Mexico, and Oklahoma have graduated income taxes, and Kansas has a planned transition toward a flat income tax. Eight states replaced their graduated income taxes with flat rates between 2021 and 2025… Colorado has the fourth-highest cost of living in the United States.”

Supporters of Amendment 87 have their own social and economic arguments, for example about the positive impacts of decreasing income taxes for lower-income families. Readers might wish to visit my post on 87 for more (soon to come, though), or visit the pro-87 website https://protectcoloradosfuture.com/faq/

Proponents:

Two committees have been formed to support Prop 136: A Brighter Colorado and Keep Colorado Affordable. Both committees are registered to Steven Ward.

  • A Brighter Colorado supports both 136 and 132, along with Amendments 81, 82, 85 and 86. As of Oct. 6, it had reported $2,612,150.00 in total contributions, including a non-itemized report from Oct. 6 of $2,305,525.00 in contributions, $250,000 from McLean, Virginia-based Common Sense America, and $100,000 from Colorado Dawn.
  • Keep Colorado Affordable had not reported any donations yet.

Opponents

  • Vote Common Sense opposes Propositions 136, 132, 133, 134, and 135, along with Amendments 81, 82, 84,  and 85. It has reported $646,500 in total contributions as of Oct. 6, including $200,000 from Washington, DC-based Green Advocacy Project, $100,000 from Merle Chambers of Denver, $65,0000 from Colorado Fund for Children & Public Education, $50,000 from Coloradans for Real Safety Solutions, $50,000 from Colorado Immigration Rights Coalition, $50,000 from Colorado WINS, and $35,000 from COBALT.

Proposition 136 Pro:

  • The graduated income tax in Amendment 87 might discourage wealthier Coloradans or some businesses from doing business here, so supporters of 136 think it’s best to keep income tax rates where they currently are.

Proposition 136 Con:

  • Passing Prop 136 but not Amendment 87 might mean lower-income Coloradans won’t get the tax breaks from 87, and the state wouldn’t get a great deal of revenue from 87 for education, childcare, and healthcare.

Links to More Information

Richard’s Take

I’ll be voting “no” on Prop 136, but at least it wouldn’t go into the Constitution if it passes.

Without going too deeply into the graduated income tax system proposed in Amendment 87, passing it would decrease income taxes for most Coloradans. Many of these are people or families for whom even a small tax decrease might help them afford something tangible and maybe essential – a trip to the grocery store, short-term transportation expenses, maybe a monthly cell phone bill – but if Prop 136 passes and Amendment 87 doesn’t, the lower-income folks wouldn’t get that tax break.

At several points in my 2026 voter guide, I’ve said that people need to do the numbers on tax proposals and make good decisions based on their real-life needs and situations. Same here. This post is about Prop 136 and I want to mostly stick to Prop 136, but voters should know that if Prop 136 passes and Amendment 87 doesn’t (or if they both pass and 136 gets more votes), a large amount of “new” revenue would not be available for State of Colorado healthcare and education systems.

I want to make it crystal clear for voters that even though tax rates wouldn’t change under Prop 136, that doesn’t mean that voting for it would be a benign action. Prop 136 will have support in conservative circles, and I can’t guarantee that some centrists won’t vote for it – and frankly, it might get more than 50%. Still, a relatively small number of votes might matter if both 136 and 87 get more than 50%.

There is an argument that passing 87 might cost jobs and economic activity, primarily if wealthier individuals or companies facing an income tax increase make decisions to do business elsewhere. I don’t want to be flippant, but conservative think tanks will fairly often put out white papers basically saying just this if there are tax increases proposed. It might make some sense in dispassionate theory, but break it down into specific situations a little bit, and people might find that some of those who might be affected by 87 don’t really fit neatly into an economic chart – for example if they need to or want to be in Colorado for given reasons, and have other factors beyond income tax rates to consider. I’m not saying the number of people making decisions on income tax would be zero, but I am suggesting that people might want to take certain partisan economic reports with grains of salt.

So, I’m just trying to say “don’t cast a careless vote” on this one. Voters who like Amendment 87 should definitely not vote for Prop 136, and those who aren’t yet sure about 87 might want to consider that if only 136 gets more than 50%, there’s no actual tax benefit except to about the top 3% of Colorado income earners.