Illinois Compiled Statutes

30 ILCS 230/1 (2026)

Application of Act; exemptions

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section IL-ILGAilga.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
(30 ILCS 230/1) (from Ch. 127, par. 170)
    Sec. 1. Application of Act; exemptions. The officers of the Executive Department of the State Government, the Clerk of the Supreme Court, the Clerks of the Appellate Courts, the Departments of the State government created by the Civil Administrative Code of Illinois, and all other officers, boards, commissions, commissioners, departments, institutions, arms or agencies, or agents of the Executive Department of the State government except the University of Illinois, Southern Illinois University, Chicago State University, Eastern Illinois University, Governors State University, Illinois State University, Northeastern Illinois University, Northern Illinois University, Western Illinois University, the Cooperative Computer Center, and the Board of Trustees of the Illinois Bank Examiners' Education Foundation for moneys collected pursuant to subsection (11) of Section 48 of the Illinois Banking Act for purposes of the Illinois Bank Examiners' Education Program are subject to this Act. This Act shall not apply, however, to any of the following: (i) the receipt by any such officer of federal funds made available under such conditions as precluded the payment thereof into the State Treasury, (ii) (blank), (iii) the Director of Insurance in his capacity as rehabilitator or liquidator under Article XIII of the Illinois Insurance Code, (iv) funds received by the Illinois State Scholarship Commission from private firms employed by the State to collect delinquent amounts due and owing from a borrower on any loans guaranteed by such Commission under the Higher Education Student Assistance Law or on any "eligible loans" as that term is defined under the Education Loan Purchase Program Law, or (v) moneys collected on behalf of lessees of facilities of the Department of Agriculture located on the Illinois State Fairgrounds at Springfield and DuQuoin. This Section 1 shall not apply to the receipt of funds required to be deposited in the Industrial Project Fund pursuant to Section 12 of the Rehabilitation of Persons with Disabilities Act.
(Source: P.A. 99-143, eff. 7-27-15.)

    
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 65 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1994–2024 · leading case: Caveney v. Bower, 797 N.E.2d 596 (Ill. 2003).
Caveney v. Bower, 797 N.E.2d 596 (Ill. 2003). · cites it 2× “Seeking a return of the amounts paid under protest, plaintiffs filed suit under the State Officers and Employees Money Disposition Act (30 ILCS 230/1 et seq. (West 2000)). Plaintiffs first argued that they qualified for the tax credit under the version of section 201(k) that was…”
Parmar v. Madigan, 2018 IL 122265 (Ill. 2018). · cites it 3× “Finally, the appellate court held that, because plaintiff paid the taxes involuntarily, *1008 he was not required to seek recovery under the State Officers and Employees Money Disposition Act (Protest Moneys Act) ( 30 ILCS 230/1 et seq. (West 2014) ). 2017 IL App (2d) 160286 , ¶…”
NDC LLC v. Topinka, 871 N.E.2d 210 (Ill. App. Ct. 2007). · cites it 3× “NDC filed a multiple-count complaint against defendants, Judy Baar Topinka, as Treasurer of the State of Illinois (Treasurer), and Jesse White, as Secretary of State of Illinois (Secretary), pursuant to the State Officers and Employees Money Disposition Act (Protest Act) (30…”
Parmar v. Madigan, 2018 IL 122265 (Ill. 2018). · cites it 3× “Finally, the appellate court held that, because plaintiff paid the taxes involuntarily, he was not required to seek recovery under the State Officers and Employees Money Disposition Act (Protest Moneys Act) (30 ILCS 230/1 et seq. (West 2014)). 2017 IL App (2d) 160286 , ¶ 40.”
Wexler v. Wirtz Corp., 809 N.E.2d 1240 (Ill. 2004). “Wexler claims the State Officers and Employees Money Disposition Act (30 ILCS 230/1 et seq. (West 2000)) provides such authorization in this case.”
Metro. Life Ins. Co. v. Hamer, 2013 IL 114234 (Ill. 2013). “¶5 In July 2008, MetLife filed its complaint for an injunction and for declaratory judgment under the State Officers and Employees Money Disposition Act (30 ILCS 230/1 et seq. (West 2010)). It sought a declaration that the Department was not entitled to assess double interest.”
Hartney Fuel Oil Co. v. Hamer, 2013 IL 115130 (Ill. 2013). · cites it 2× “¶ 11 Hartney paid the assessment and sued for a refund under the State Officers and Employees Money Disposition Act (Protest Monies Act) (30 ILCS 230/1 et seq. (West 2008)) in Putnam County circuit court.”
Best Buy Stores, L.P. v. Dep't of Revenue, 2020 IL App (1st) 191680 (Ill. App. Ct. 2020). “Best Buy paid this amount on May 31, 2017, and then filed a complaint under the State Officers and Employees Money Disposition Act (commonly known as the Protest Monies Act) (30 ILCS 230/1 et seq. (West 2016)). In November 2018, the parties filed a joint stipulation of facts,…”
A.B. Dick Co. v. McGraw, 678 N.E.2d 1100 (Ill. App. Ct. 1997). · cites it 2× “As a result of the audit the Department determined that Acceptance owed a deficiency of $2,450. Acceptance paid that amount under protest, and filed a verified complaint in the circuit court of Sangamon County pursuant to the State Officers and Employees Money Disposition Act…”
Parmar v. Madigan, 2017 IL App (2d) 160286 (Ill. App. Ct. 2017). · cites it 2× “- 10 ­ 2017 IL App (2d) 160286 ¶ 28 Defendants point to the State Officers and Employees Money Disposition Act (the Protest Fund Act) (30 ILCS 230/1 et seq. (West 2014)). The Protest Fund Act, as the supreme court has noted, “allows taxpayers to recover voluntary tax payments if…”
State Ex Rel. Beeler Schad & Diamond, P.C. v. Ritz Camera Centers, Inc., 878 N.E.2d 1152 (Ill. App. Ct. 2007). “tter of law, is it necessary that a false statement be submitted to or actually relied upon by the State?” Question 3 “Does the application of the general provisions of the Whistle-blower Reward and Protection Act, 740 ILCS 175/1, to enforce the sales and use tax laws improperly…”
Town Crier, Inc. v. Dep't of Revenue, 733 N.E.2d 780 (Ill. App. Ct. 2000). · cites it 2× “, a Wisconsin corporation, filed a complaint under the State Officers and Employees Money Disposition Act (30 ILCS 230/1 et seq. (West 1998)) against the Illinois Department of Revenue, Kenneth Zehnder, in his capacity as the Department’s Director, and Judy Baar Topinka, in her…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.