Washington Votes Forum

 STOP!  "Equitably" reduce spending by the 8 Billion dollars it was increased in the last 4 years to stabilize the essential services of the state government.  We are already taxed too much to support this overspending.   

 This has been defeated several times before... NO NEW TAXES... that includes a state income tax that the voters do not want.   You are Nuts!!!!

 STOP blaming voters for your own fiscal mismanagement!! Enough is enough. Cut the fat in Olympia just like we all have to do at home!! Thank you!

Accounts Receivable Tax

B&O Tax

BIA Tax
Building Permit Tax
CDL license Tax

Cigar Tax
Cigarette Tax

City B&O Tax

Convention and Trade Center Tax
Corporate Income Tax

County/Parish Tax

Concealed Pistol License Tax

Dealer’s Tax

Dog License Tax

Employee Hours Tax
Excise Taxes
Federal Income Tax
Federal Unemployment Tax (FUTA)
Fishing License Tax
Food License Tax

Food & Beverage Tax
Fuel Permit Tax

Gambling Tax
Gasoline Tax (currently 44.75 cents per gallon)
Gross Receipts Tax

Hazardous Substance Tax

Hospital Tax
Hunting License Tax
Inheritance Tax

Insurance Agent Commission Tax
Inventory Tax
IRS Interest Charges

IRS Penalties(non-deductible tax on top of tax)
Liquor Tax

Marriage License Tax
Medicare Tax

Motor Vehicle Sales and Lease Tax
Personal Property Tax

Petroleum Products Tax

Police District Tax
Property Tax

Radioactive Waste Cleanup Tax
Real Estate Tax
Service Charge Tax
Social Security Tax
Road Usage Tax
Sales Tax
Recreational Vehicle Tax

Restaurant/Hotel Tax

RTA Tax
School Tax

State Disability Tax

LET'S NOT ADD STATE INCOME TAX!

State Unemployment Tax (SUTA)

Syrup Tax
Telephone Federal Excise Tax
Telephone Federal Universal Service FeeTax
Telephone Federal, State and Local Surcharge Taxes
Telephone Minimum Usage Surcharge=2 0Tax
Telephone Recurring and Non-recurring Charges Tax
Telephone State and Local Tax
Telephone Usage Charge Tax

Tire Fee

Transaction Tax

Use Tax
Utility Taxes
Vehicle License Registration Tax
Vehicle Sales Tax
Watercraft Registration Tax
Well Permit Tax

Wireless State Enhanced 911 Tax
Workers Compensation Tax

No to income taxes.  We were promised no new taxes by Governor Gregoire and the Democrat Party to get our votes - is there no integrity or shame left with these people?  Responsible government is the answer, not more tax sources.  Any perceived financial 'crisis' was created by runaway spending on questionable programs especially in the last four years.  We have repeatedly voted against state income taxes.

 I agree on the spending side as being the solution. But the party is the Democratic party. We didn't change the name, Comedian Rush Limbaugh and his ilk, did.

I hope that everyone understands that one legislature (such as the 2009 Washington State Legislature) can not bind a future legislature (such as the one in 2011) so that the wording in Part XII Section 1201 is an empty promise.  This is probably why the writers use the term "may" instead of the mandatory term "shall."  The promise to eliminate the property tax is as empty a promise as any other politician's promise.

The reason that all taxpayers (except politicians) are afraid of the income tax is that is is so easy to raise the rates from 2.2% to 2.21% and then to 2.22% etc. forever.  I actually agree that an income tax would be a better and more fair way to raise the revenue needed for essential state government functions (with of course the knowledge of "essential state government functions," in the eyes of the legislators, is limited only by the amount of OUR money that they can exrtact from us.)  The only way to effectively create a supportable income tax, in my mind, is to enshrine the tax rate as well as the taxable income that it is applied to, into the State Constitution itself, such that it may not be tampered with (i. e. increased) by subsequent legislators.  (Just remember the lessons of the federal income tax which started at 2% before "essential federal government functions" exploded.)  Actually there might be another way and that would be to limit the entire take of the income tax as Mr. Eyeman did for property taxes to the total amount of the property tax today with CPI and population inflators.

We, of course, have to add the provision eliminating the property tax into the State Constitution also, or the legislature will gradually bring that back as their concepts of "essential state government functions" expands.

 Way do we need this when we pay a sales tax?

Go figure that the State wants MORE money.  How about the State stop spending money on how to figure out how to make us pay more money.

So much for "A CHANGE"

 One should never be taxed on productivity, but on consumption. An income tax is the most regressive tax because it taxes productivity. Bottom line its time for government to tighten its belt and not add any new taxes.

 Apparently Sen. Rosa Franklin, (D-Tacoma) did not listen to Gov. Christine Gregoire, during the debates, when she said, "Now is not a time to talk about raising taxes!"

Olympia's reckless spending during good times, has led to the billions of dollars in budget shortfalls we are experiencing now in this economic downturn.  It seems that Olympia legislators just want to keep the spending party going, and are looking for their next source of funding. Instead they should be focusing on cutting the wasteful spending.

We all need to tighten our belts during hard times, and our legislature needs to learn how to do the same. After all they should represent us all, and not just their special interests, and pet projects.

Washingtonians' need to write their legislators' and tell them "NO NEW TAXES!" and to Vote NO on SB 5104 - 2009-10 

Sen. Franklin may have listened very closely.  During the debates and prior to the election is not the time for any politician, esp. a Democrat to talk about raising taxes.  Now the election has been completed, the Democrats won and they don't have to face the (notoriously subject to long-term (> 1 year) memory loss) for two more years so this (post November) is precisely the time for Democrats to talk (and act) about raising taxes; in fact, this is the only time for career politicians to talk about raising taxes, or even worse, restructuring taxes to allow them virtually unlimited raises in the future.

The sales tax started at 2% and has been raised to 9% now with incremental increases proprosed this session.  How long do you think it will take before the proposed income tax rate would reach 10%?  The populace, however, has been smart enough to soundly reject the politicians' attempts at an income tax.  Unfortunately, if Mr. Eyeman (loud booing from the politicians) were to craft an income tax proposal, the courts would toss it because the limitations on the politicians ability to raise the rates would eliminate the benefits to them.

Normallly a regressive tax is thought to be one that is paid more by the poor than by the wealthy.  Thus a sales tax on consumption is regressive because the poor pay a higher percentage of their income on stuff than the wealthy.  An income tax, especially with graduated rates and large personal deductions is not regressive.

 Why does this not surprise me in the least???  as with most politicians, they have a very easy time of developing alszhimers faster than  the medical professon can predict!!!!  This is a prime example of taxing people to death as to why no new big business come into our state and those that are here get out!!!!!  Wake up you politicians who are suppose to be working for "WE THE PEOPLE"  not yourselves!!!!!

Actually it often take a term of office or two before they figure out that the most important thing is getting re-elected.  First and second term representatives often still think of us poor taxpayers but, of course, they have no power in a seniority system.  The only real solution is term-limits.  Three (or max four) for a Rep. and absolute max of two for a senator.  Then they should be required to leave state employment (and lobbying) and get REAL jobs.

If the state legislature is too tough to learn in six to eight years, we (they) need to simplify it (have it not do so much to us) so they can learn it.

Normally, yes. However, the regressive nature of a sales tax can and has been mitigated in WA. There is no tax on food, rent, medicine, medical services and many other services. People making more money pay more sales tax on consumption. This applies to all consumer goods - cars, recreation, luxury services, and steep rates on rental cars and hotels. Those that buy more expensive stuff pay more sales tax. A lower income person may not even buy a car and hence does not pay tax. A higher income person probably buys one or more costly cars and pays a significant amount of tax with no possibility of offsetting deductions. So the regressive sales tax effectively has a large exemption for basic costs of living - food, shelter and medical care and people with ever more disposable income pay increasingly more tax.

An income tax is the gateway to taxation abuse.

"2009 Senate Bill 5104 (Creating a State Income Tax ) Introduced by Sen. Rosa Franklin, (D-Tacoma) (D) on January 13, 2009, creates a Washington state income tax for the stated purpose of providing the necessary revenues for the support of vital state services on a more stable and equitable basis "

The stated intent is to make it easier to increase revenue. What's needed is to evaluate just what are "vital state services". The expenses come from the cost of the services provided plus the enormous cost of State of Washington payroll. I would propose to reduce the number and scope of services and greatly reduce state employment. There is an easy test from my point of view whether a stateservice is needed. That is, ask the question for each service, would reducing or eliminating this service cause me to have toleave the state? An income tax would be the straw that broke the camel's back. You would soon have taxes at California levels.

 At one point our family considered a move to Oregon.  One of the major reasons we did not was because of the state income tax.  A sales tax, as Washington has, that exempts basic necessities is fair and progressive.  It rewards responsible fiscal management.  No wonder the legislature - not known for responsible spending - would want to add income tax to our burden. 

Has a state income tax kept California from reaching the brink of bankruptcy?  No.  In fact, things are going to get really UGLY down there as California will be issuing IOU's to residents who overpaid and are owed refunds.  I know it is difficult for you legislators to keep your hands in your own pockets and out of ours.  Try sitting on them and counting to ten before you leap to make this very damaging move!!!

Vote NO. Washington state has operated on sales tax revenue for the entire time I have lived here (more than 20 years). If the state government doesn't have enough money for operations now, it should do what I have to do: Economize. Make do with less. Do less.

I don't want more government, I want less tax and more individual liberty!

Vote NO!  Any tax increase proposal is an admission by the legislators that they are utter failures in managing the public trust, especially this one.

What part of NO do our elected officials not understand?  This state already has one of the heaviest tax burdens of its citizens in the nation.  Just look at the gas and property taxes to see our pain.  A state income tax would only further burden the working class of this state.  When was the last time the state had to live on a budget, i.e., get by with what's coming into the coffers like its citizens.  DISCONTINUE THE FEEL GOOD PROGRAMS THAT DO NOT DIRECTLY RELATE TO THE MAINTENANCE OF THE TRANSPORTATION INFRASTRUCTURE, THE ECONOMY, THE WELL BEING OF THE CITIZENS OF THE STATE, AND/OR PROVIDE FOR THE SAFETY AND/OR SECURITY OF THE CITIZENS.  Elected officials, behonest with your employers, the citizens and tax payers of the state. 

 Gregoire has been talking about pushing a state income tax since the day she took office.

Our elected officials understand NO to mean NO they will not listen to the voters if they do not like what we have voted on. NO to them means NO we will not be fiscally responsible. NO to them means we will always reward our election/re-election donors even if that means the taxpayers go broke. NO to them means we PRETEND to be concerned about the poor and working class but we will do everything in our power to confiscate more of the wealth of everyone in this state so we can feel good about ourselves.

Mr.Engr.:

Normally, yes. However, the regressive nature of a sales tax can and has been mitigated in WA. There is no tax on food, rent, medicine, medical services and many other services. People making more money pay more sales tax on consumption. This applies to all consumer goods - cars, recreation, luxury services, and steep rates on rental cars and hotels. Those that buy more expensive stuff pay more sales tax. A lower income person may not even buy a car and hence does not pay tax. A higher income person probably buys one or more costly cars and pays a significant amount of tax with no possibility of offsetting deductions. So the regressive sales tax effectively has a large exemption for basic costs of living - food, shelter and medical care and people with ever more disposable income pay increasingly more tax.

An income tax is the gateway to taxation abuse.

"2009 Senate Bill 5104 (Creating a State Income Tax ) Introduced by Sen. Rosa Franklin, (D-Tacoma) (D) on January 13, 2009, creates a Washington state income tax for the stated purpose of providing the necessary revenues for the support of vital state services on a more stable and equitable basis "

The stated intent is to make it easier to increase revenue. What's needed is to evaluate just what are "vital state services". The expenses come from the cost of the services provided plus the enormous cost of State of Washington payroll. I would propose to reduce the number and scope of services and greatly reduce state employment. There is an easy test from my point of view whether a stateservice is needed. That is, ask the question for each service, would reducing or eliminating this service cause me to have toleave the state? An income tax would be the straw that broke the camel's back. You would soon have taxes at California levels.

Some of the regressiveness of sales tax can be mitigated as in the examples  you mentioned, but poor people still have to buy diapers, cleaning supplies, clothing and God forbid they go out for a meal sometime. In so doing, they pay proportionally a much larger 'chunk' of their income in tax then do the rich. IT IS regressive. Is it fair? Well, they are using the same services, so their share too right? Maybe, but to some it's just 'not nice' that they have to. [:'(]

To illustrate my point, please see pg 110 of this study on tax systems for the 50 states. Washington is the most regressively taxed state in the nation.

http://www.iowa.gov/tax/taxlaw/PTC-50states.pdf

ACAC

 I too have seen studies about how Washington State has one of the most regressive tax systems. But how does adding a tax that is currently non existent (zero percent) help low income and moderate income people? There is nothing in the bill that says they will remove the sales taxes that you are referring to, and no guarantees that property taxes will go away either.

This is just the legislatures way of grabbing more tax dollars from all of us. Regressive or not, we will all pay more.

I don't disagree with you HMiller.

I was just posting up a link illustrating my point that our tax system is regressive. If you notice the poster I quoted mentioned offsets for the regressiveness -- I agree that there are quite a few, but the link I posted shows that Washingtonians still live in a highly regressive state. I don't think I said adding an income tax would help poor people. If I did I was wrong. 

Does the bill not repeal the state sales tax? Well that seems pretty dumb. I don't think those politicians would keep there heads if they simply added taxes without repealing others.

Here's the premise of progressive taxation enthusiasts, "tax ought to be based on people's ability to pay them." Is this true or false? 

 Unfortunately the bill does not repeal the state sales tax, instead it does lower some sales taxes, but reading through there actually is more increases in the sales tax, than there are reductions. There is some proposal to lower property taxes, but again no repeal. Certainly in all of these cases it can only address the state component of these taxes and can not reduce local taxes, and can not lower levies, etc.

That said, I compared my own property tax situation to that proposed, and find very little difference in the final amount I would pay. And remember they are only talking about the base tax, not including all the other elements that make up the aggregate of our property tax bills. Hey if they want to repeal the entire property tax, and repeal all sales taxes.....I might listen to an income tax bill. But that would never happen....they want more than one approach to removing money from our wallets to fund their wasteful spending.

To me it just appears that the senators' proposal is simply designed to decieve those who will not take the time to read and understand the bill, and/ or take the time to break out a calculator. The reality is that such reductions, as proposed do not significantly offset that which will be collected through the proposed income taxes for anyone.

The intent of the bill is to get more revenue in the states' coffers....and of course that will come at the expense of all of us.

 Exactly, if the measure didn't cost us more, and so bring in more revenue for the State, there would be no reason for them to enact it. It would make little sense to create more expensive buraucracy for no gain. We would need to lose in the long run.

And as several have posted above, this is how it starts. Year by year the state income tax can go up, up, up until it's like Idaho's where you take a 15% pay cut just for moving into the state. (Idaho has the triple-play of State, Federal and Sales taxes.)

Thanks for working the numbers for us, @ hmiller. It is useful to have my assumption confirmed. Oddly enough, I haven't received a reply from the good Senator Franklin.

 If they want an income tax, they need to repeal the sales tax, repeal property taxes, and just go with a flat tax based upon your gross income. Everyone would pay their fair share. No need to have a revenue service, or state income tax reports. Those would not be needed, except if you are self employed.

No, if they want the least bit of traction on an income tax, they must in the State Constitution, flatly prohibit the sales tax and/or property tax and limit the total revenue from the income tax to the current revenue of today with a nominal (maybe CPI) growth with inflators (and deflators) for inflation and population growth.  Of course, that is a non-starter in the legislature since this is not about tax-fairness but about increasing revenue without limits for legislators to spend, spend, spend (also without limits.)

I think that I would require that term limits be incorporated into the constitution before I would support an income tax.

Of course, if one were truly interested in "tax fairness." one would have to think about a net worth tax to catch those with small incomes but huge net worth; but there is no easy way to measure that or to extract money out of some one whose huge net worth consists of a large family farm or of a good sized family business (which is what is wrong with the estate/death tax.)

Ten is far too small a number.  Count to a billion (by ones.)

 What I cannot understand is why do people keep voting to elect and re-elect Democrats who everyone knows wants BIG GOVERNMENT which takes a lot of money to fund?

Every law they pass, every grant they make, every special interest they must appease, and every government worker they hire cost big bucks.

Gregoire, since she doesn't have a brain, has to create boards and commissions to study the socialist plans of the Democrats in the legislature which costs taxpayers even more money. Then when they come up with a new plan to extract more of our money, she is all for it.

Voters who voted for Gregoire and re-elected all the other brain-dead Democrats are the ones who we should be angry with. They are the ones who are responsible for the taxes, increased taxes, and stupid laws and regulations the Democrats always pass.

 What I don't understand is why many Republican ideologues do not see that 8 years of Republican rule in D.C. has resulted in the largest deficit in the history of the nation, quadrupling the debt in two terms.

Apparently ideology makes people immune to the facts. The US government reach and size has exploded under Bush, right down to their last 700 Billion dollar looting, and irresponsible distribution to the banking and Wall Street buddies.

Micro-managemnt of personal affairs, federalizing even a family tragedy in the Terry Scheivo situation, warrantless wiretapping of all US communications, cell phones, emails, everything. This is the model of "small government"?

The bunch in Olympia have a lot to learn about balancing budgets but the Republicans have nothing to teach in that regard.

 I am not a Republican ideologe. I don't ike what the Republican Party in Congress has done in the last 8 years any more than you do. But at least you can say a few of them still believe in the principles of small government and individual accountability. Notice I said a few.

This thread is not about the federal government. It is about how state government which is controlled by Democrats and you cannot argue they are not for big government, higher taxes, and more government involvement in our lives. Yes a few Republicans are closet Democrats as well but our state government has been run by Democrats for decades so the problems we have were created by them.

 I wonder how people can jump to national level politics when we are addressing state or local level politics.  That is the problem with so many people in this state....their heads are not up in the clouds, but in a dark place.

Most local Republicans are sick and tired of what those so called Republicans in the other Washington have been doing.  They do not conduct business or uphold Republican ideology of government in any way.

Here on the local level, you cannot blame local Republicans for the mess that our over inflated state government is in, or the waste and fraud they have created.  This is firmly on the shoulders of the Democratic Party.  They are slowly destroying our state.  What a shame it is too.

Lots of puzzled Republicans on here. Maybe I can help.

That happens when a Freeper drone comes on and starts generalizing about "brain dead Democrats" and "big government", both bumper-sticker slogans which belong to the national GOP playbook. Oh I guess Dems are supposed to shut up and take it?

Reminds me of the kids who come out with a bucket of water in a suirtgun fight then go running off home, yelling "Mom says I can't get wet."

 So don't bring it up and it won't be an issue. The issue here is whether a State income tax is a good idea or not, not about failed Regan ideologies or insulting the intelligence of the majority of the population.Some folks seem inherently incapible of sticking to a subject without veering off into Limbaugh-speak, I see it all the time.

Maybe I could get behind a State income tax if I was convinced the money would go towards fixing, you know, actual problems.  But the State has proven they can't effectively handle the money they already have. 

 hardest part of advocating a state income tax , which would help pay benefits to the unemployed, is convincing the unemployed - who by definition (no income) would'nt pay it , to support it.  Go figure!

Reminds me of the kids who come out with a bucket of water in a suirtgun fight then go running off home, yelling "Mom says I can't get wet."So don't bring it up and it won't be an issue. The issue here is whether a State income tax is a good idea or not,

Actully I became  a republican when Reagan and his ideas were central to the republican party . I am proud to say I am a conservative .

I support a state income tax . The best thing about an income tax in my opinion is it is much more fair . Our state has a very regressive tax system where the poor pay way more then their share . My hardest problem with a state income tax is trying to convince my fellow conservatives to support it comes from their objections about the disingenious political machine that promotes so much concern for the poor here in Washington . But has continued to raise taxes in a manner that hurts the poorest of us on a larger percentage , while bellyaching about nationally how we are giving tax cuts to the rich .  Concern for education , while not paying for even basic education in this state  , support for minorities yet in King County the three largest minority organizations all JOINED IN and supported the Charter legislation that the politcal machine here stopped cold . Now they are closing schools down in Seattle , guess where , in minority neigborhoods .  Plus will not even go into the B&O Tax and what that does to businesses , and who knows how many decided to go to other states because of it . So keep up your drivel , it makes my promoting state income tax so much harder . You see my conservative friends know I care about the poor , those without ,  and from your comments their stereotypes of the left are only reinforced .  Yhe concern of the left here in this state appears to be based in sound bites .  Why blather about tax cuts for the rich when you raise taxes hereon the poor with sales and property taxes ?   In this state its so much that democrats run everything , its just we got the wrong ones in office .

Thanks for nothing .

 What part of NO doesn't the legislature understand.  This has been up for vote several times and has been shot down each time.

M_DragonKnight worries that the legislators don't understand the NO they have been told before.

Remember that the primary onjective of professional legislators is to get re-elected.  To best accomplish this, they need money to buy votes.  The easiest way to get massive amounts of such money would be to be allowed a state income tax whose rates can be raised forever.  They figure that it took five votes of the people for the Seattle power brokers to kill off the monorail but they finally managed it.  This issue is far more critical to our legislators.  Maybe they figure that after fifth or tenth vote on the subject, the people will be so tired of the subject that they will vote for an income tax just to get it off the ballot.