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 the state’s paramount duty to fund K-12 education and build strong and safe communities.
Bill Summary
Senate Bill 5812 is another property tax. At its core, the bill alters the long-standing property tax growth limit from a fixed 1% to a more complex formula of 100% plus inflation and population growth, with a cap at 103%. This change would erode critical protections for taxpayers and open the door to escalating property taxes, especially in fast-growing regions. Homeowners, especially seniors and low-income residents on fixed incomes, would be increasingly burdened with unpredictable tax increases tied to demographic shifts and economic inflation, rather than to community need or voter approval. The bill is wrapped in “Let’s fund education” language, but make no mistake that this tax is a direct attack against homeowners and renters, too, since their rent will likely increase.
Furthermore, SB 5812 removes the ability of taxing districts to override inflation-based limits through a public process—a quiet but significant erosion of local control and transparency. The bill also creates a complex workgroup under the Superintendent of Public Instruction to recommend further funding formula changes, but its scope is capped by the very revenue growth the bill initiates, artificially restricting long-term innovation and real reform. In effect, SB 5812 represents a massive, top-down expansion of property tax authority and state control over local education funding without sufficient voter oversight or safeguards. Citizens should reject SB 5812 in favor of more balanced, community-driven solutions to funding public education.
-
Taxes
Increasing funding to the education legacy trust account by creating a more progressive rate structure for the capital gains tax and estate tax.
Bill Summary
Senate Bill 5813 increases the capital gains tax rate. The bill would impose an additional 2.9% tax on long-term capital gains exceeding $1 million, on top of the existing 7% capital gains tax, creating a punitive 9.9% total rate. This kind of tax structure targets individuals who have invested wisely or built wealth over decades, including small business owners and retirees who may experience a one-time windfall.
Moreover, the bill dramatically increases the top marginal estate tax rate to 35%, while only modestly raising the exemption threshold to $3 million. This change effectively punishes family-owned businesses, farms, and generational wealth transfers, forcing heirs to liquidate assets simply to pay tax liabilities. Washington already has one of the few standalone state-level estate taxes, and this bill would make it among the most burdensome in the nation. Such a structure could drive successful residents to relocate to states with more favorable tax climates, ultimately reducing the state’s long-term tax base.
While it is true that many voters supported the original capital gains tax in 2024, this bill exceeds that mandate by dramatically expanding the tax burden and scope. It opens the door to further tax increases by rebranding them as “progressive” or “just,” even when they fall heavily on middle-class families with inherited property or small business assets. Washington should pursue broader tax reform that does not rely on punishing productivity, savings, and intergenerational success.
-
Taxes
Modernizing the excise taxes on select services and nicotine products and requiring certain large businesses to make a one-time prepayment of state sales tax collection.
Bill Summary
House Bill 5814 is one of several bills that collectively impose taxation on citizens of all ages and socioeconomic backgrounds. Notably, it targets nicotine products, a recurring theme in recent legislative initiatives, including HB 1203, HB 1534, and HB 2033. Similar to other bills (e.g., HB 2033), HB 5814 may impose a burden on consumers seeking safer alternatives to cigarettes, such as nicotine pouches and non-combustible products, as a means of cessation.
Furthermore, the bill taxes businesses, those who create employment opportunities, by requiring them to make a one-time prepayment of state sales tax collections. This request is particularly concerning as it demands businesses not only serve as their tax collectors but also pre-pay sales tax on uncollected revenue. This practice raises serious questions about the government’s intentions and the potential impact on businesses and job creation. The primary sponsor of HB 5814, Senator Noel Frame (D-Seattle), is widely recognized for being among the most tax-increasing legislators in the Legislature. Therefore, it is imperative for citizens to register against this legislation that threatens businesses and job opportunities.
-
Taxes
Modifying business and occupation tax surcharges, rates and the advanced computing surcharge cap, clarifying the business and occupation tax deduction for certain investments, and creating a temporary business and occupation tax surcharge on large companies.
Bill Summary
Senate Bill 5815 targets large and high-revenue companies and seeks to raise additional revenue for public schools, higher education, health care, and social services by modifying Washington’s B&O tax structure. It raises existing tax rates, increases surcharges on large and high-income businesses, and adjusts caps and deductions to generate more state revenue. The increase in B&O tax rates applies to a wide range of sectors including R&D, insurance agents, broadcasting, cold storage, printing, financial institutions and airplane manufacturing.
While intended to raise revenue for public services, this legislation presents several concerns. SB 5815 raises B&O tax rates across many sectors and adds a new surcharge on companies with taxable income over $250 million. These increases may lead to higher operating costs, discourage investment, and ultimately result in higher prices for consumers. Raising the Advanced Computing Surcharge (ACS) from 1.22% to 5%, and increasing its cap from $9 million to $50 million, may deter growth and expansion of technology and innovation firms in the state. This could make Washington less attractive to large employers, particularly in high-tech industries. Furthermore, the new 0.5% surcharge on income above $250 million targets businesses based solely on revenue, not profit margins, which may unfairly penalize high-volume, low-margin enterprises. This risks undermining stable employers who provide a large number of jobs and contribute significantly to the state economy. Those businesses facing increased tax burdens may respond by reducing hiring, cutting wages, scaling back benefits, or relocating operations out of state—especially in highly mobile sectors like advanced computing and finance.
Additionally, the bill applies flat increases without fully considering the diversity of business models or financial resilience among affected firms. This one-size-fits-all approach could disproportionately impact smaller subsidiaries or in-state divisions of larger corporate groups. With economic recovery still uneven and inflation affecting operating costs, raising business taxes now could dampen economic growth and slow job creation across sectors. In summary, SB 5815 risks destabilizing key industries, weakening Washington’s business climate, and harming the very workforce and services it intends to support. A more targeted and balanced fiscal approach would better serve long-term economic and social goals. Please oppose this misguided bill.
Bill Summary
Senate Joint Memorial 8002 expresses opposition to the privatization of Medicare and advocating for reforms to strengthen Original Medicare. It highlights the efficiency of Original Medicare, which has low administrative costs, and raises concerns about the financial burdens imposed by privatized Medicare programs, such as Medicare Advantage, which can take a significant portion of funds for administration and profits. The memorial cites reports of fraudulent practices that have led to substantial overcharging of the Medicare trust fund and beneficiaries, urging the federal government to take action to protect vulnerable populations.
The memorial criticizes Medicare Advantage and other private Medicare-related programs, but many believe that privatization introduces competition, leading to better services and efficiency. Medicare Advantage often provides extra benefits like dental, vision, and wellness programs that Original Medicare does not cover. Although the memorial advocates for expanding Original Medicare to cover more services and eliminate copays, this will likely lead to higher government spending and potential tax increases. In addition, Medicare Advantage plans currently serve over 50% of Medicare beneficiaries. Rolling back privatization efforts or discouraging Medicare Advantage could force millions of seniors to transition back to Original Medicare, which may not cover all their needs. Expanding government control over healthcare could reduce innovation and responsiveness in the system.
The memorial suggests recouping funds from Medicare Advantage overpayments, but if private insurers exit the Medicare market, the financial burden of covering seniors could shift entirely to taxpayers. Cutting private involvement could also eliminate cost-saving strategies used by insurers to manage care more efficiently. Seniors should have the freedom to choose whether they want government-run Original Medicare or private Medicare Advantage plans. The memorial’s proposals could push more people toward a single-payer model, reducing competition and innovation in healthcare. Finally, while fraud and inefficiencies exist in both public and private programs, completely overhauling Medicare Advantage due to bad actors might not be the best approach. Instead of limiting private-sector involvement, stronger fraud prevention and accountability measures should be implemented.