The press conference on the steps of Washington’s Capitol Building was lowkey hostile. After Rep. Shaun Scott announced his bill to create a statewide payroll tax for high-earners, right-wing journalists peppered him with whataboutisms.

Scott introduced a small package of bills to make up for the cuts in Trump’s “Big Beautiful Bill,” but the “Well Washington Fund” is the centerpiece. The payroll tax is similar to Seattle’s, which raked in more than $1 billion over its five-year existence and kept the city above water in the pandemic years.

Like Jumpstart, a payroll tax on Seattle employees earning $150,000 or more, Scott would tax US-based companies with more than 20 employees and $5 million in total income. The bill would put a tax on salaries above $125,000 a year. Scott compared it to the Medicare payroll tax that high-earning employees already pay. The only difference is this time, their employer is on the hook.

Scott says the tax could raise up to $3 billion each year. Of that, 51 percent will be distributed to “higher education, energy and economic development, food assistance via the supplemental nutrition assistance program (SNAP), and health care.” The remainder will pad the state’s general fund. We could use the money. Washington is facing a $390 million budget shortfall this year, and a $1.1 billion hole in the two year budget cycle in between 2027 and 2029.

The state also has big beautiful cuts to worry about—cuts to higher education, the environmental sector and clean energy, food stamps, and Medicare, $50 billion over the next decade in Washington alone, Scott said.

“The way for Washingtonians to fight back is to build a bolder Washington, a Washington that defends the programs that people depend on, while the other Washington defunds them,” Scott said. He mentioned his bill could be a step forward toward fixing Washington’s regressive tax code. At mention of the regressive tax code, a baby in the crowd wailed. 

Still broken by Boeing’s departure, Republican lawmakers, immune to the screams of babes and vulnerable to the cries of the moneyed, worry businesses will pack up and leave.

“Do you understand that there is a likelihood that businesses could decide—Microsoft just said they would—to move jobs out of the state. Are you concerned about that?” asked right-wing influencer Brandi Kruse.

It’s a familiar refrain. 

“We have seen many times in the state legislature, the threat of jobs being relocated hung over the head of state lawmakers,” Scott said. “[Boeing] shook the state legislature down for the single largest corporate welfare package that was granted by a state government in the history of the Republic. And then they moved the jobs anyway.”

Emily Vyhnanek, an advocate for tax and economic justice at the Budget and Policy Center, says when facing new taxes, it’s common for companies to threaten an out of state move. They also lobby. Last year, when Democrats introduced a suite of progressive taxation bills to alleviate a budget shortfall between $12 to $16 billion, six of the largest companies in Washington—including Amazon, Microsoft, and T-Mobile—poured $2.1 million into a political action committee opposing the bills. 

But it’s an empty threat. It’s not that easy to pick up and leave our talent pool behind. Life here is pretty good, in-part because of state funded-infrastructure like public transportation, affordable early learning programs, and paid family and medical leave. 

Vyhnanek said the 2019-era Workforce Education Investment was a prime example of the support that keeps people here. 

“It includes a wide range of workforce development programs, including scholarships and career connections designed to encourage students in technical and community colleges to pursue degrees and certifications in high-demand fields,” Vyhnanek says. 

Additionally, the tax burden on the top percent of companies wouldn’t be felt as hard because of Trump, according to Vyhnanek. The Big Beautiful Bill included $148 billion in tax breaks for ultra-wealthy companies including locals like Microsoft, Amazon, and Meta. 

“The perspective that you are speaking from,” Scott said to Kruse, “frankly is very well represented in the state legislature by the major corporations that have spent millions over the years lobbying the state legislature, and they expect a return on investment.” 

That well-represented point of view threatens the Well Washington Fund’s survival. That, and some residual tax shyness. Last session, Democrats pushed through billions in new taxes, including higher business taxes, more sales taxes, and a broadened nicotine tax this past session to balance a very unbalanced budget. 

Similar legislation floundered then, too. Sen. Rebecca Saldaña, who is co-sponsoring Scott’s bill, introduced legislation that attempted to do the same thing as the Well Washington Fund—adopt a statewide high-earners payroll tax. Despite making it to the Senate and House floors, the bill sputtered out and died. 

Scott believes this time it’ll be different. He’s had a few “promising” conversations. Additionally, he said part of why Saldaña’s bill failed was because legislators didn’t know the full economic impact of Trump’s “Big Beautiful Bill” and other federal funding cuts. 

“Now that we have that policy making context…my hope is that there's going to be an added sense of urgency,” Scott said.