This is good news. Especially when an nth percenter needs to avoid paying back anything to the local taxpayers who supported his monopoly until it strangled their economy.


Disappointing, but might be better to pass nothing than something poorly thought out. Odd to complain about our regressive tax structure and then champion a tax bill that does pretty much nothing about it. Makes a good deal of sense to use at least some of the revenue to reduce the sales tax.


@1 care to guess what percentage of capital gains in WA go to people with income under $100K?


So yeah, normal people save paying taxes on 4.7%, lose revenue from rich people's 95.3%, have to pay for services with regressive taxes instead, how fortunate.


Sorry, my spoiler spacer failed.


@6 We're living in a society here.


@4 Pretty sure the tax was not going to apply to 'normal people' and also pretty sure Raindip knows this full well.

That said capital gains taxes are absurdly low. Income from doing nothing. They should be raised across the board, speaking as someone who even derives a (meager) benefit from the current low rate.


Sadly to get to Socialism you must tax everyone at 80%. Then maybe we can achieve the glorious Socialist Promise


The irony is, Democrats could come up with a balanced tax that removes many of the regressive taxes in Washington. Reducing sales tax, reducing property tax for some while increasing others.
Instead they only offer new taxes. A new job killing Head Tax that would charge Dick's burgers the same per employee fee as Amazon... an unconstitutional income tax that no one ever expected to get passed but would rile the masses for political ends.
Comprehensive tax reform has a chance of passing. Ridiculous soak the rich unconstitutional taxes passed in a Tim Eyman-esque manner knowing they will be thrown out but at least will put their names in the paper is the game.


@13 What's 'unconstitutional' about it David in Shoreline? You're a real sharp one right, surely you can tell us?

Now a tax directed solely at meathead right-wingers who draw voluminous benefits from living in a society with robust institutions and public services but are constantly bloviating about how being required to contribute to a system that they benefit immensely from is 'theft', well that might be unconstitutional.


Skyrocketing property taxes are a concern for most of the middle class in WA, who also are in favor of taxing the wealthy. Wanting to offset regressive property and sales taxes with a progressive capital gains tax seems rather logical in that context.


@9 The proposed capitol gains tax would have applied to the sale of ownership interest in a business. Lots of "normal people" are self-employed in their own business, and most of those folks would resent the idea that you consider sweat equity they've built in those businesses "income for doing nothing."


@16 I see that you are up on your right-wing think tank talking points. Somewhat of a dubious assumption that a wobbly precedent established in 1933(?) would be upheld by today's Washington Supreme Court however. Actually rather improbable.


Rich, PLEASE actually read HB 2158 in its entirety. If you get to the end, where the new taxes are described, you'll find that MANY small businesses, not just big tech, are getting hit with the surcharge. Like your independent insurance agent, your neighbor who is a graphic designer, the accountant who runs his own business. Just another regressive tax.


@19 I don't know, how often does stare decisis prevent right-wing judges from coming up with whatever ludicrous decision they want? I'm all for testing a (well designed) capital gains tax in the courts. If you are confident it would be deemed unconstitutional then I would think you should not be too concerned about it, yes?


Were Senators Mullet, Takko, Hobbs, and Palumbo held at gunpoint by Cambodian sellout, Thug Ericksen and his doting parents, the NRA and the gluttonous fossil fuel industry?




@16 "All taxes shall be uniform upon the same class of property" I don't see how that clause proscribes a graduated tax. "property worth $10" and "property worth $100k" seem like different classes of property to me.

Please wait...

Comments are closed.

Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.

Add a comment

By posting this comment, you are agreeing to our Terms of Use.