Seattle's most loved and loathed coffee company weighed in on Seattle's controversial head tax this week and—surprise—they are against it.

“We share the same concerns of every other major employer and small employer in Seattle and are opposed to the tax, but are more concerned that we’re missing the opportunity to reform and to focus on a compassionate need of hundreds of children sleeping in cars in Seattle,” S Bucks executive John Kelly told the Seattle Times yesterday just before he headed in to talk to the Mayor about the tax.

Starbucks joins Amazon, Zillow, Dick's, and other businesses in its opposition to the tax, which would charge the city's biggest businesses a $500 levy per employee per year. Starbucks has at least 10,000 employees in Washington state.

Big business hates this tax, which would raise $75 million in affordable housing and other homelessness services. Amazon actually stopped construction on a tower in downtown Seattle to protest it (although, as Mudede said the other day while cackling over his laptop, this could be as much a message to the next city Amazon plans to colonize as it is to Seattle). But not all business owners are opposed: Dan Price, the CEO of Gravity Payments (who got famous a few years ago as the Jesus-looking fellar who raised the minimum salary for his own employees to $70,000) wrote in The Stranger, "As an entrepreneur who has dedicated his career to helping small businesses save money, I know that even small expenses can be burdensome, but I believe the task force’s proposal addresses these concerns in the most reasonable way possible. I also believe that the long-term benefits of supporting such a bill far outweigh any costs. When people don’t have to worry about where they’re going to sleep tonight, they are free to focus on other things, like finding a job. And when more people are able to join the local labor force, the economy as a whole will benefit. I also believe that taking care of our neediest residents will make the city more prosperous for both its businesses and citizens."

Venture Capitalist Nick Haneaur seems in favor too, if this tweet is any indication:

These are the kind of rich guys we need more of: Ones who look beyond their own bank accounts (and beyond their shareholders). As I've noted before, there are some legitimate reasons to oppose the tax. If you are a business with high revenue, high overhead, and low profit (say: restaurant groups, grocery stores), this could certainly hurt your bottom line, and if I were dictator of this town, I'd tax only businesses that make hundreds of millions a year. And if those businesses want to pack up all their tens of thousands of employees and move them out of state, fine. Those of us left will have the run of the place. There will be a sea of empty condos to squat in, traffic will disappear, and you'll always find a seat on the bus. Sounds great!

Of course, this would never happen. Amazon might stop building new towers and adding new employees (and I'm hard-pressed to see how slower growth in Seattle is a bad thing), but they aren't going to relocate their entire workforce. Jeff Bezos's fortune can buy him almost anything. But it can't buy him that.