Essential information on each bill is below. For more details, click on the bill number – e.g., “SB 5000.” The new page will show the progress of the bill, videos of debate, and the link to send a comment to your legislator about the bill.
-
Taxes
Investing in Washington families by restructuring the business and occupation tax on high grossing businesses and financial institutions.
Bill Summary
House Bill 2045 is another tax increase on businesses that hurts families. It’s advertised as a way to “invest in Washington families,” but in reality the bill damages the state’s economy by penalizing success and discouraging business investment. In turn, that hurts families by discouraging high-quality jobs that families need to survive and thrive. Specifically, this legislation imposes an additional 1% tax on businesses with over $250 million in taxable income, on top of what they already pay under Washington’s unique gross receipts tax system. The state’s Business & Occupation (B&O) tax is already one of the most burdensome in the country, taxing revenue instead of profits—even when businesses operate at a loss.
By layering new taxes on top of this flawed system, HB 2045 discourages large employers from expanding or even remaining in Washington. Companies that generate high revenue but operate on tight margins—like retailers, distributors, and tech firms—could face significant hardship under this change. It penalizes volume over profit, ignoring the realities of how different sectors operate. The bill also targets financial institutions with a steep tax hike from 1.2% to 1.9%, one of the highest such taxes in the nation. These institutions may pass the cost on to consumers in the form of higher fees, reduced credit access, or limited services—hurting everyday Washingtonians, not just banks.
In sum, this bill singles out a narrow class of employers, risks driving jobs and investment out of state, and lacks basic accountability. Citizens should oppose HB 2045 and call for tax cuts that encourage growth and prosperity for all businesses, not merely grow the size of government. Punishing success is not a sustainable way to support families or grow Washington’s economy.
-
Taxes
Creating fairness in Washington’s tax by imposing a tax on select financial intangible assets.
Bill Summary
Here is another new tax. While proponents say it will tax “only the ultra-wealthy,” House Bill 2046 is in fact a tax that will hurt ordinary citizens, too. As Rep. Peter Abbarno (R) states in opposition to the bill: “While these taxes are marketed as targeting the wealthy, they have far-reaching consequences for employers who rely on capital investment to expand, innovate, and create jobs.” Though it may seem like a tax only on the ultra-wealthy, its implications reach far beyond that because it impacts job creation, which impacts families and ordinary citizens.
Specifically, the bill proposes an $8 per $1,000 tax—effectively a 0.8% annual wealth tax—on certain financial assets like publicly traded stocks, bonds, mutual funds, and exchange-traded funds held by Washington residents with over $50 million in such holdings. This new form of wealth taxation that punishes investment success. This could drive high-net-worth individuals and investors out of the state, taking with them capital, business activity, charitable contributions, and tax revenue. States that have embraced wealth taxes in the past, such as California and New York, have faced pushback and even out-migration as a result. High taxation incentivizes people to leave the state and reside in low-tax states such as Idaho or Texas. Citizens of Washington need to defend themselves against a greedy government aiming to increase its own size and pay for its own reckless spending. They can do so by rejecting HB 2046.
Bill Summary
House Bill 2047 eliminates the Employee Ownership Program—an initiative barely off the ground—that was created to help businesses transition to employee ownership models. Specifically, the program was designed to help business owners looking to retire, or close, or sell to out-of-state firms, by giving workers a chance to become owners themselves. In fact, the Employee Ownership Program is a pro-worker initiative that offers a powerful tool for preserving small businesses, retaining local jobs, and building long-term wealth for workers. Employee ownership—through models like Employee Stock Ownership Plans (ESOPs), cooperatives, and employee ownership trusts—has been shown across the country to boost worker satisfaction, reduce layoffs, and build more resilient companies, especially during economic downturns.
In a time when small businesses are struggling to stay afloat and thousands of baby boomer business owners are retiring, Washington should be investing in innovative, community-rooted solutions, not scrapping them. HB 2047 throws away a promising effort that aligns with economic equity, local economic development, and job stability. Citizens should reject HB 2047 to preserve and build upon the Employee Ownership Program, which has the potential to transform how businesses are passed on and how workers build wealth in our state. Please register CON.
-
Taxes
Investing in the state’s paramount duty to fund K-12 education and build strong and safe communities.
Bill Summary
House Bill 2049 is a direct attack against homeowners across our state. While it may be framed as an investment in K–12 education, in reality it represents a major property tax increase that places a heavy and lasting burden on Washington homeowners, renters, and small business owners. By changing the current 1% property tax growth limit to allow annual increases up to 3% based on inflation and population growth, this bill opens the door for aggressive and automatic property tax hikes—even when wages stagnate or the economy slows. This bill worsens a system that’s already pushing people out of their homes. HB 2049 “does not fix our broken system,” says Rep Jim Walsh (R). “It makes it worse. We need real reform—based on market value, not government greed.”
For working families, this could mean significantly higher tax bills with little to no guarantee of improved educational outcomes. The bill’s removal of key special education safeguards, including the enrollment funding cap and specific protections for high-need communities, also risks harming the very students it claims to support. Redirecting a flat 30% of basic education funds to special education, regardless of a student’s individual needs, may sound fair in theory—but it reduces flexibility for schools and could create funding shortfalls elsewhere.
In essence, HB 2049 offers no strong accountability for how increased revenues will be used, no assurance of better student performance, and no protections for property taxpayers who are already facing rising costs of living. Citizens should reject HB 2049 to prevent unchecked property tax growth and demand smarter, more equitable solutions that put fiscal responsibility and real educational improvements first.
Bill Summary
House Bill 2050 is a back-end budget trick that will harm schools, especially in rural communities. It modifies the monthly schedule by which the state distributes education funds to districts, redistributing payments in ways that could delay critical resources during the school year. For example, it reduces the amount of funding schools receive in key operational months such as February, March, and April, while pushing a larger chunk of funding to late summer (August)—a time when many schools are preparing to reopen and most annual expenses have already been incurred. This seemingly minor accounting change could create cash flow problems for districts, particularly smaller ones without large financial reserves. Schools rely on consistent, predictable funding to pay teachers, staff, and vendors. Altering the timeline—even slightly—could force them to take out short-term loans, pay interest, or delay critical purchases and repairs, all under the guise of “efficiency.”
Additionally, the bill tweaks the formula for Local Effort Assistance (LEA), which is a lifeline for districts with low property values. While it aligns terminology and formulas, it does not include significant new support for struggling districts—it merely adjusts existing definitions without expanding real aid, potentially complicating how districts forecast funding. HB 2050 also undermines budget transparency by making complex financial adjustments without addressing core funding issues, such as student enrollment volatility or rising special education costs. These cosmetic fixes do not solve the real funding gaps in public education but rather paper over them with timing tricks and formula tweaks.