Since the Big-tech-Boom, Washington has become a hotspot in the universe of large businesses who call the state home. Along with the growth of companies like Microsoft, Amazon, and TMobile (all of which call the Seattle area home) comes a natural increase in the state’s population with young professionals eager to advance their careers in the marketplace. A growing workforce, combined with a reduction in federal funding to the state, has forced lawmakers to re-evaluate how Washington financially supports its citizens. 

Amid heated controversy, senators within the state narrowly approved what they call a “capital gains tax” on residents with the most earning potential in the state. This comes at the same time that lawmakers are pushing for a 1% “wealth tax” and in the aftermath of 2017 legislation introducing local income taxes on those who earn more than $250,000/year (people who fall within the top 5% of all contributors). Citing federal budget cuts that resulted in reduced funding to the state as their primary justification for these taxes, those who support them feel that the burden of responsibility in offsetting the cutbacks rests in those who can most afford it in the state, the wealthy. The problem is that Washington state is one of nine in the US that does not tax the income of its residents and taxing the income of only five percent of the workforce is in direct contradiction to that long standing policy. 

The idea of taxation on the profits from the sales of taxes, bonds, and property are not a new concept within the country. In fact, many states take advantage of their right to tax citizens under these tax codes each year. The issue with the state of Washington imposing similar measures is that they are considered, by the IRS, as ‘income tax’, which is in direct contradiction to the state’s “no income tax” policy for its residents. This is problematic because this type of taxation only targets a certain demographic (those who can afford stocks, bonds, and property). This same argument, of unfair taxation, can be made in the case of Seattle’s 2017 legislation that imposed a 2.5% income tax on individuals who make more than $250,000 per year. America was founded upon the ideals of “equal taxation and equal representation” but both of these measures contradict the latter part of the equation. 

Potential legislation doesn’t just impact the top five percent of earners in the state, however. Washington’s proposed “wealth tax” would target just four individuals in the state; Jeff Bezos, Bill Gates, Steve Ballmer, and Mackenzie Scott. The proposed 1% tax on these individuals would mean big money for the state but are they single handedly responsible for financially supporting their state’s economy just because they happen to live there? With all three tax measures, the state would derive its funding from people who’ve worked hard to earn it, at what cost? 

All earners, regardless of their earning potential or status, should be taxed equally. The whole notion of taxing the top five percent of individuals, or those who have worked hard to afford stocks and bonds, or only the wealthy creates a system that abuses those who have earned the dollars they are entitled to keep. Each policy is in direct violation of the state’s long standing history of being income tax free and is a desperate attempt to grab extra money for state budgets. Lawmakers, rather than unfairly targeting people they think can “afford” it, should buckle down and look at how they can reduce the overspending that’s bleeding them dry.