Lawmakers Admit Taxes Drive Wealth Out, Then Vote for an Income Tax
On Monday, the Washington State Senate advanced SB 6346, the latest attempt to impose a state income tax in Washington, and sent it to the House despite bipartisan opposition. The proposal is framed as a narrow tax on the “wealthy,” but as we’ve outlined before, this is a fundamental shift away from century-old constitutional and Washington Supreme Court precedent.
Supporters insist this time is different. That it’s targeted. That it won’t affect most Washingtonians. We’ve heard that before. In fact, Senate leadership refused to include any language keeping it legally targeted in the future.
What’s different this time is the growing, increasingly bipartisan opposition. Seattle-area investor Charles Fitzgerald warned in GeekWire that Washington risks becoming “the next Cleveland” if lawmakers continue piling on high-end earners and entrepreneurs. Even Democrat State Rep. Addison Richards (D-Gig Harbor) publicly broke ranks in The News Tribune, raising serious concerns about the direction his own party is heading on taxation.
And that brings us to the most revealing development of all.
While the Senate was advancing a state income tax, bipartisan opposition was simultaneously mounting against Washington’s estate/death tax, which is the highest in the nation. On Sunday, The Seattle Times Editorial Board forcefully criticized the state’s “out-of-whack” death tax for driving residents out of Washington. The very next day, the paper followed up with reporting that Democrats are considering retreating on the estate tax out of fear of a wealth exodus.
That fear isn’t hypothetical. Senate Majority Leader Sen. Jamie Pedersen (D-Seattle), the chief sponsor of the income tax bill, admitted to The Seattle Times that “there are a lot of people looking at redomiciling themselves” because of the estate tax.
Let that sink in. On Monday, the Washington Senate voted to advance a state income tax on high earners and, in a separate effort, to reduce the estate tax amid concerns that wealthy residents are leaving. Many of the same senators sponsored and voted for both measures.
So which is it? Are high taxes on the wealthy good public policy that promotes fairness and stability? Or do they drive the very taxpayers who fund a disproportionate share of state services to pack up and leave? Lawmakers cannot have it both ways.
If the estate tax is severe enough to cause redomiciling and force legislative retreat, why would a state income tax not produce the same outcome? Are the very individuals contemplating leaving over the death tax supposed to shrug at a new annual income tax layered on top? Of course not.
And here’s the deeper concern: if the Legislature acknowledges that tax policy can drive wealth out of state — and if they are already reconsidering one major tax increase because of those consequences — what assurance do Washingtonians have that an income tax wouldn’t be expanded once enacted?
Today, it’s pitched as a tax on “the wealthy.” But if revenue projections fall short because “high earners” relocate, the pressure to broaden the base will be immediate and intense.
Importantly, while supporters insist new “progressive revenue” is necessary for public investment, taxpayers see little evidence of meaningful results from the investments already made. Homelessness and drug addiction continue to rise. Repeat offenders receive lighter sentences while defenseless citizens bear the consequences. Academic achievement in our public schools declines as other states move ahead in national rankings. Credible concerns about financial mismanagement in state grant programs continue to surface. And when it comes to the Climate Commitment Act, agencies have struggled to provide clear, timely compliance reporting that demonstrates whether the billions collected are delivering measurable environmental or consumer benefits.
Taxpayers are increasingly skeptical of promises unaccompanied by accountability — and less willing to buy what state leaders are selling.
The question now before the House is simple but consequential.
Will lawmakers double down on a new income tax while simultaneously admitting their existing tax structure is pushing residents away? Or will they recognize that stability, competitiveness, and constitutional guardrails matter?
The income tax bill is now scheduled for a House committee hearing on Tuesday, February 24, at 8 a.m. Opponents of the bill in the Senate set a record with more than 60,000 CON sign-ins, making it the most unpopular bill in the history of Washington.
Let’s send a powerful message to lawmakers and break that record again! Here’s what you do:
- Before 7 am on Feb. 24, sign-in on SB 6346 here.
- Register your position as CON
For generations, Washington has never relied on a state income tax. If lawmakers want to fundamentally change that system, they should explain why the concerns now surfacing over the estate tax wouldn’t surface again under an income tax.