Reports
Learn more about the Cook County property tax system in the experts' reports:
An Evaluation of Progress on Residential Assessment Fairness in Cook County
The University of Chicago Harris School of Public Policy, Center for Municipal Development; The University of Chicago Mansueto Institute for Urban Innovation
​
This report evaluates the changes in property assessments made during Fritz Kaegi's first six years as Cook County Assessor, 2019 to 2024. Under Kaegi's administration, regressivity — where lower-priced homes are assessed at disproportionately higher rates than more expensive homes — was dramatically reduced compared to the prior administration.
As a result, owners of middle- and lower-priced homes saw more than $1 billion in aggregate tax savings relative to what they would have paid under the old system, and Cook County reached industry standards for assessment fairness for the first time in years. The report also finds that while Kaegi increased assessments on commercial properties, much of the intended shift of the tax burden away from homeowners was reversed by assessment reductions granted by the Cook County Board of Review.
​
Analysis of Commercial Valuation Practice in the Cook County Property Tax System
Joshua Myers; David Cornell, MAI, CAE; Rick Rape, MAI, CAE; Josh Myers Valuation Solutions
​
This report examines how commercial property assessments and appeals work in Cook County, focusing on the roles of the Cook County Assessor’s Office and the Cook County Board of Review. Using industry-standard statistical methods, the analysis evaluates assessment accuracy, uniformity, and the impact of appeals across multiple assessment cycles.
The findings show that commercial property valuations often fall short of professional standards for consistency and accuracy, with widespread non-uniformity and values that tend to be below true market levels after the appeals process, specifically following Board of Review decisions. While appeals are frequent and commonly result in reductions, particularly at the Board of Review level, they do not consistently improve overall valuation quality.
​