March 04, 2010
State Income Tax Proposal gets a Hearing

WA Senate Democrats are holding a hearing today on a bill to impose a state income tax. The top rate would be 6% for married couples earning over $120,650.

The bill would also reduce property and sales taxes, but the Fiscal Note projects a net increased transfer of $4 billion from personal income into state coffers in FY2012-2013 and a total of $23 billion through 2019.

The income tax would be contingent upon voter approval of a Constitutional Amendment that would be placed on the ballot this November.

UPDATE Senate Dem leader Lisa Brown is talking up a different income tax, presumably as an amendment on the aforementioned bill:

lower the sales tax to 6 cents on the dollar, and in its place approve a "high earners" income tax.

The tax would be on 4.5 percent on all income over $200,000 for individuals, $300,000 for heads of households, and $400,000 for married couples.

Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at March 04, 2010 02:29 PM | Email This
Comments
1. SURPRISE, surprise!!! :)

Posted by: Duffman on March 4, 2010 02:43 PM
2. The hearing will be on a subsitute bill that is not yet available - "let them eat cake!"

Oh, and the original fiscal note calls for, gulp, 500 new state employees by the end of the next biennium. Go Unions!

Posted by: Sonya on March 4, 2010 02:55 PM
3. The hearing will be on a subsitute bill that is not yet available - "let them eat cake!"

Oh, and the original fiscal note calls for, gulp, 500 new state employees by the end of the next biennium. Go Unions!

Posted by: Sonya on March 4, 2010 02:56 PM
4. If there was any doubt that Olympia is out of touch with reality, this removed it.

Posted by: Andy on March 4, 2010 03:07 PM
5. It's way past time to start voting out democrats. They've proven beyond the shadow of a doubt that they are clueless when it comes to governing.

Posted by: Pete on March 4, 2010 03:21 PM
6. I give credit to Lisa Brown. Going with the incrementalism approach is going to win over more people to her side. Liberals love to soak the rich, especially when it doesn't affect their own bottom line. And they are so naive that they don't believe that once implemented, government won't extend the taxes to the middle class as well.

Posted by: Palouse on March 4, 2010 03:40 PM
7. Which other states don't have income tax?

Posted by: PeggyU on March 4, 2010 04:09 PM
8. Tennese and Texas, lower sales tax, too. No B&O tax.

Posted by: Gus on March 4, 2010 04:13 PM
9. What a disgusting idea! How long does anyone think that the tax will be only on the "rich?"
Before you know it, we'll be like California with a sales tax, income tax and property tax. And there still won't be enough to appease the tax masters who think they know what's best for the voters.

Voters in Washington state would be stupid to change the constitution and let the Democrats get their hands on an income tax. This state would be the laughing stock of the rest of the states for caving into the Democrats who never met a tax they didn't like. The unions would have a hayday trying to see who can get the biggest increases in wages, pensions and health care payments.

Posted by: Clean House on March 4, 2010 04:34 PM
10. I think it's a laugh riot that Lisa Brown is an Economics professor.

I just called the legislative hotline (800-562-6000) and asked what economics classes my senator (Sen. Prentice) has taken and what economic model she's basing this ludicrous idea on. The phone operator (which last time I checked was technically suppose to take messages, not offer up smart remarks) had the gall to tell me that, well, it still had to be voted on by the people. Gee, thanks lady, what are my choices again? Would I like to be robbed at gunpoint or knife point? What a deal!

Posted by: Mark Griswold on March 4, 2010 04:37 PM
11. So, the bush tax cuts expire and the "rich" pay another 4 to 6 percent. To prop up health care they pay another few %, to prop up the state another 4%. What's paying 60+% of your earnings in taxes between friends? What could go wrong?


Posted by: Cecil on March 4, 2010 04:40 PM
12. Let the weasels get their feet in the income tax door and we'll never see the end of the tax tunnel again. And, yes I'm certain the state employee unions, career welfare bums, DSHS, school districts and all the other taxpayer-draining leeches are licking their chops for all that new revenue. Let's not only say no but vote the Dimocrat scum out in Nov.

Posted by: Saltherring on March 4, 2010 04:54 PM
13. The bill states:
For every married individual who makes a single return jointly with his or her spouse and for every surviving spouse, the tax is determined in accordance with the following table:
If taxable income is: The tax is:
Not over $49,900 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.2% of taxable income
Over $49,900 but not over $120,650 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $1,098 plus 3.5% of the excess over $49,900
Over $120,650 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $3,574 plus 6.0% of the excess over $120,650

So if you are married it is $3574 plus 6% for everything over $120,650. For a family making $200K the tax would be $9574, or actually 5% of the total income. But at $120,650 /$3574 is actually only 3% tax on income, so the wealthy do pay more in overall taxes.
Looks like I will have to cut back working and get into a lower tax bracket, because I surely am not going to give her majesty and the court jesters more money to waste.

Posted by: hard worker on March 4, 2010 05:04 PM
14. When "high earners" in the State of Washington move to other states to avoid this tax, they take their potential income tax revenues (and all other tax revenues) with them.

That's why these projections are always way too rosy. We'd be lucky to pass this tax increase and remain revenue neutral.

Laffer Curve, anyone? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fIqyCpCPrvU

Posted by: AD on March 4, 2010 05:14 PM
15. I will be voting no. If you let them have one more dollar they will want ten more. Sadly, people here are pretty stupid and will fall for the "lower sales tax" ploy.

Posted by: Marmstro on March 4, 2010 05:43 PM
16. HA! When I960 was overturned, we put our house on the market... that very day. This state will not see another dime from us.

Posted by: John on March 4, 2010 06:10 PM
17. I was afraid this would happen after Oregon's initiatives. Ask voters to levy a tax on others. This will be the new way of soaking us.

We need to get rid of them all. As I just told Gregoire, Chopp and Brown; I'm mad as HELL and I am not taking it anymore.

Posted by: Bob on March 4, 2010 06:12 PM
18. It will take a concerted campaign from Eyman and others to turn back this proposal, because a majority of the voters are too naive. The anti-tax campaign had better start up soon !
Many voters don't understand that this will eventually lead to higher taxes for all, even though a temporary tax break for middle and lower class in thrown out there as chum bait for chumps.

The Dems are banking on voters taking the lower tax bait, knowing full well in the back of their minds that the sales tax will move back up to current levels and an income tax will gradually increase in a matter of 3-8 years. Think that it is time to vote these wankers out ? The other alternative for reducing the deficit is decreasing the size of State Government, which will not happen anytime soon.

Posted by: KDS on March 4, 2010 06:49 PM
19. Every time Government proposes new taxes I always wonder what it costs to administer that new tax.

A whole new department of revenue or expansion of the existing one. Lots of new employees. One way to claim job creation I suppose.

Everything in government is a slippery slope. I was there when the head of the State Patrol said they did not want more things to pull people over for. They asked that the legislature NOT make seat belts a primary offense. Now they do emphasis patrols. Why? Because they get more money for doing that.

Income tax on the rich. Always the battle cry. Now look where every state, and the nation are with income taxes. The most invasive, anti productive taxation there is. People keep claiming we need to change the tax structure of this state. Problem is they wont. They will only add new taxes. They have no discipline to actually fix the problem of government micro managing every aspect of everyones lives.

Shut down the state government for a month and nobody with a real job will care.

Posted by: Vince on March 4, 2010 07:16 PM
20. Again, let's penalize people that exceed and give their hard earnings to the less fortunate. Wake up people, this is communism plain and simple. Taxes are a necessary evil but this is getting ridiculous. When are we gonna say enough is enough? What else does the government have to do to us to let us know that our concerns don't matter! It's time to stand up.

Posted by: fake on March 4, 2010 07:40 PM
21. Again, let's penalize people that exceed and give their hard earnings to the less fortunate. Wake up people, this is communism plain and simple. Taxes are a necessary evil but this is getting ridiculous. When are we gonna say enough is enough? What else does the government have to do to us to let us know that our concerns don't matter! It's time to stand up.

Posted by: fake on March 4, 2010 07:40 PM
22. And be aware that the sales tax as seen at the register would only drop a percentage point or two, because the shifty Democrats use the 6% numbers to talk about the reduction, without noting that is only the state's portion of the sales tax, and not the entire tax including the local tax. So dumb voters aren't going to get much a sales tax reduction, and it won't start until 2012.

But as we proved in 2008, a lot of people are dumb enough to vote for ambiguous promises like Hope and Change.

Posted by: Jeff B. on March 4, 2010 08:10 PM
23. "The income tax would be contingent upon voter approval..."

Now, they're ASKING for voter approval? How ironic, given that they've shown us three times in very recent history how much respect they have for what the voters approve.

Posted by: Zarro on March 4, 2010 10:46 PM
24. Many years ago Michigan voters approved removing the sales tax on food to "help the poor". The governor (a Republican) told the voters not to do it because the revenue would have to come from somewhere else. The legislature (controlled by liberal loons) raised the state income tax not long after because of a "budget crisis". This was followed by the usual assortment of taxing the rich, the big corporations, and the more successful counties to help poor, downtrodden Detroit. None of this has worked. Michigan now has one of the worst economies and highest unemployment rates in the nation.

If each of the 1.6 million voters who put Gregoire in office sent in $1000, half the deficit would be solved. So all of you who voted for Miss "I will not raise taxes", get out your checkbooks. You will be putting your money where your mouth is for once. The rest of the savings would come from not building any more useless transportation projects.

Posted by: Burdabee on March 4, 2010 11:00 PM
25.
Yet another way for Washington Lay-A-Bouts to milk the working public while polishing apples in its backyard.

Posted by: Patrick Henry on March 4, 2010 11:36 PM
26. I always laugh at the smug surety Democrats wrap the chains tighter around all of us. Cast off any responsibility and restraint...what paradise has ever been created out of this way of governing? Cuba was lucky it was a warmer climate.
In five years will you be thinking...First they taxed my boss now they are taxing me...

Posted by: Col. Hogan on March 4, 2010 11:51 PM
27. you might want to study up on New Jersey, around 1980, they didn't have an income tax, untill a school district(Newark) sued saying property tax to fund education was unfair an won, so the state started a income tax to offset property taxes, it seemed to work when it was first started, but now don't think so. well washingtion your next, if your are foolish to pass the income tax bill.

Posted by: Ron K on March 5, 2010 12:39 AM
28. "The top rate would be 6% for married couples earning over $120,650."

This is the "rich"!? Try adding another zero: 1,200,650. Should be called the bash Microsoft bill. OTOH, perhaps it will drive out the CA government retirees.$120K is about one-half their income.

Posted by: tehag on March 5, 2010 04:01 AM
29. Can someone explain how an income tax that only applies to certain people is in any way even constitutional? What happened to equal protection?

Posted by: jay on March 5, 2010 06:08 AM
30. As a CPA with lots of "rich guy" clients, I can assure you most have plans in place to either move their residence to another State and/or move their business & jobs too.

Look, California has experienced a Millionaire flight with each & every tax increase. It's worse than ever today...and a major, under-reported reason why California is in the mess they are in today.

The far-left Legislator's are naive. They live in a shoebox called Progressivism where they assume folks will stay and just take whatever they dish out "for the greater good". It's called collectivism. It sounds so good & easy to them on paper...but practically implementing this plan will backfire.

Look, the only reason they are proposing this is for a net TAX INCREASE..right? It's not about fairness. It's about more revenue. And when the reality hits them that there are negative consequences to this proposal...they will be forced to tax lower income folks and raise taxes on higher earners. It's a spiral they can never control.

They need to cut SPENDING. Hey, I read 60% of the State Budget is Salaries/Benefits of State Employees. What have they done with this White Elephant? Nothing that I can see. I was looking at a website the other day that showed all compensation for these State Employees. It include not just salaries, but the additional 50% for Benefits and paid time-off. It's ridiculous. That is where the Spending Reduction should obviously come from.

As these fools try to craft an income tax to punsih successful job-creators....rest assured there is an army of trained professional tax CPA's and Attorney's ready, willing and able to advise their clients how to legally avoid the Washington Income Tax.

Posted by: TaxGuy on March 5, 2010 06:46 AM
31. Dear WA,

We'll gladly take all of those troublesome rich people off of your hands, as we'll never have a state income tax.

We've found that these highly motivated folks tend to start businesses, give to local charities and the arts, improve their communities, and not surprisingly, pay their bills. Just the sort that we love to call our neighbors.

For each high wage earner you send to us, we'll give you one genuine Austin hippie that should manage to feel right at home in either Seattle or Olympia.


Sincerely,
The Great State of Texas


Posted by: Smoley on March 5, 2010 06:58 AM
32. As part of the so called "rich" class (yeah, right, 4 kids, 1 in college, another one soon going, we're just rolling in it), we've decided to move to the Boise area. There we will enjoy more freedom, less nannyism, lower taxes and less rain. We'll also be close enough to visit Seattle for Husky, Seahawk and Mariner games. I believe that this bill would lower tax revenue. People and businesses will flock to lower tax states and the democrats will be left wondering why there is a deficit.

Posted by: FarFarRight on March 5, 2010 07:30 AM
33. First it was the deca millionaires,
then it was the millionaires
then it was families earning 250 or more
then it was 200k.

uhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh you'd have to be a student in one of Gregoire's public schools to not recognize this trend.

Posted by: Andy on March 5, 2010 08:44 AM
34. Where are all the folks coming to the defense of this?! Come on, guys? This is a great plan! Mike BS, scottd, anyone? If anything this plan doesn't go far enough. I think, ideally, we should raise property taxes to 33%, sales tax to 33% and income tax to 33%. Think of all the good the government could do with all that money! We'd never have to worry about health care or food, we could give everyone a place to live and we could fully fund a newspaper, radio station and TV station. We could give everyone a job! It would be utopia! How do you know it won't work until we give it a try?

Posted by: Mark Griswold on March 5, 2010 09:50 AM
35. Smoley @ 31: I'll be in San Antonio next week...you can bet I'll be picking up some real estate information. If we don't beat this back I will be moving there.
FarFarRight @32: if this goes into effect, you can bet that either the M's or the Hawks will be gone in less than 5 years.

Posted by: Diogenes on March 5, 2010 09:54 AM
36. Tax Guy - what if all 50 states went progressive? There would be nowhere for rich scumbags to flee to.

Posted by: Crusader on March 5, 2010 10:14 AM
37. Crusader,

Who says you have to stay in the US? There are literally dozens of nations that welcome people with wealth, drive, ingenuity and the desire to create success...

Posted by: Shanghai Dan on March 5, 2010 01:01 PM
38. Shanghai Dan...
Absolutely true. And those modern, Western democracies almost all have HIGHER tax rates than we do here in the US.

Posted by: Proteus on March 5, 2010 11:45 PM
39. Proteus,

Who said anything about Western democracies? I'm thinking central America, south America, Asia, and Eastern Europe.

Most of Western Europe has fiscal problems equal to - or greater than - what we're facing. And their GDPs are suffering just as much.

Your financial and social future is a LOT brighter in Estonia or Poland or the Czech Republic rather than France or Germany or Spain.

China, Thailand, Malaysia are easy and open for business and incredibly affordable to live as compared to the US or Western Europe.

Chile or Costa Rica or Belize are wonderful places to live and work with low cost of living and an emphasis on growing business and economies.

I'm probably the only one on this board who's not only worked but actually created and ran businesses on four continents: Europe (Belgium), South America (Chile), North America (US) and Asia (China and Hong Kong). I've got the experience over the years, and have a pretty big web of contacts, clients, and acquaintances who have done like I did - close their US operations and start up overseas because the playing field is not just level but consistent.

In most of the world outside the US and Western Europe, being a businessman or business owner is an admirable position, not a badge of scorn. Creating wealth is desired, not seen as "not paying your fair share".

Posted by: Shanghai Dan on March 6, 2010 08:48 AM
40. When are the people in this State going to stand up and take back what is ours!!

Posted by: Concerned resident on March 6, 2010 07:17 PM
41. FarFarRight@32, I hope you enjoy Boise. I hear traffic is pretty light there. Don't forget to pay your Idaho state income tax! Or all your other taxes -- your new state has the 13th highest state/local tax burden in the nation. (That's according to http://www.retirementliving.com/RLtaxburdens.html. Washington is 35th.)

Posted by: Bruce on March 8, 2010 09:43 PM
Post a comment
Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments:


Remember info?