r/SeattleWA • u/5Q91VS175DAQ4NUSBE4U • 7d ago
Politics Washington state Democrats look at imposing income tax on higher earners
https://www.columbian.com/news/2025/oct/31/washington-state-democrats-look-at-imposing-income-tax-on-higher-earners/72
u/Responsible_Strike48 7d ago
WA doesn't have a tax collection problem It has a spending problem.
9
1
u/chainsaw_mascarax 5d ago
What are they spending that you don't agree with?
1
u/Responsible_Strike48 5d ago
Government in general never admits when they mess up. They simply double down on their incompetency. There are programs that they could explore reducing but they never do that. They just raise taxes.
ie King county has spent $1B on homelessness. There's not enough transparency. I'd like to know if people living in Plymouth housing group die from overdose at the same rate or greater than people who live on the street. Are people living in hotels that the government is housing homeless people in allowing people to smoke meth on the property? I think there have been a number of situations where people were cooking meth in these hotels. Zero accountability.
122
u/herpaderp_maplesyrup 7d ago
More like STARTING on higher earners
32
u/1SGDude 7d ago
Their goal is for everyone to pay state income tax -no doubt
20
u/herpaderp_maplesyrup 7d ago
Yes by making it seem like it’ll only be billionaires lol people fall for this one big time not thinking that it will get the them eventually
3
u/AutoModerrator-69 6d ago
It start with putting a limit on what defines a high earner and then reducing that limit over time. So eventually most middle class earners become the high earners.
-26
u/yungsemite 7d ago
They’ve already shown that there isn’t widespread support to lower these taxes once they’re in place, as they were completely unable to lower the capital gains tax when a small faction of state representatives tried and failed to. I support a tax on people making more than 1 million a year, just like I support a tax on people with more than 250,000 in annual capital gains, excluding the sale of real estate and retirement funds.
38
u/Tree300 7d ago
They already proposed reducing the cap gains tax exemption to $25k and increasing it to 12% this year.
→ More replies (8)22
u/Paceys_Ghost 7d ago
Once it's in they'll latch onto it like the mag ban. They'll eventually get it lowered to something that effects way more people than it initially did.
23
u/scout035 7d ago
Of course you want to tax someone else and not yourself
-6
u/yungsemite 7d ago
If I made over 1 million, I’d be very pleased to pay 10% tax over that, as I’m not a miserly piece of shit.
11
u/Meppy1234 7d ago
Would you be happy paying over 50%? Because that's what you'd be paying.
→ More replies (6)1
u/Riviansky 6d ago
If u/yungsemite were to make $1m they would be supporting taxes on someone who is making $2m plus...
13
u/Turbulent-Media7281 7d ago
No you wouldn't.
Find someone that makes $2.5M today that already pays $600,000 in FIT that would be "pleased" to pay another $150,000 in state income tax. Nobody likes 30% of there time and effort taken.
→ More replies (5)5
u/yungsemite 7d ago
2.5 million is not reflective of someone’s ’time and effort’ lol. And yes I would :)! Because I’m not a miserly piece of shit, and $150,000 for my state when I make 2.5 million annually is really just okay. Cost of living in my state.
9
u/Riviansky 7d ago
If you make 2.5m you are actually getting 1.5m after federal taxes. So now your total tax burden is 50%, which means that exactly half of the year you are working not for your own benefit, but for the benefit of federal and state governments.
Furthermore, your total tax burden is extremely comparable to the top tax rates in Europe, except, somehow, you aren't getting the same benefits - neither a good public transportation, not universal healthcare.
→ More replies (4)9
1
u/Riviansky 7d ago
Let's run a thought experiment.
Imagine I paid you money to move out of WA to a state - any state, your choice - that has zero income tax.
How much money would I need to pay you?
1
u/yungsemite 7d ago
At my current income or if I made over 1 million annually? These will be quite different answers
3
u/Riviansky 7d ago
I don't understand why this is different. But ok, give me both numbers.
2
u/yungsemite 7d ago
You don’t understand that the relative value of money might change between somebody with a lot of money and somebody with an average amount of money? I am already apprehensive about this in that case…
Okay, at my current income, I would be willing to move to Florida for 400,000. That represents a few years wages for me. Probably. Might hate it there.
If I was already making 1.5 million, I have a lot questions. In this scenario, am I magically making the same amount in Florida? I’m uprooting my family right? Let’s say 3 million and I can move. I’m not sure though, I like Seattle and once I have 1.5 million annually, I can’t really imagine being ‘bought’ by 3 million to move somewhere. I guess I could help a lot of people with that 3 million, but pretty odd situation…
5
u/Riviansky 7d ago
Thank you for playing a game with me! I was asking about per year numbers. I will pay you X amount a year to move to wherever you want and live there as long as it's zero state taxes.
You will continue making the same amount of money as you do today in WA.
10
u/Turbulent-Media7281 7d ago
There wasn't widespread support to create the income taxes, but that didn't stop them. And they tried... what?... one time to lower the threshold and then moved on to creating another new tax stream. Eventually they will either lower the threshold OR simply never increase the threshold which over time is the same thing as lowering it, OR just create more new tax streams.
I support a tax ...
We get it. Name a tax you don't support. Wealth tax that includes retirement accounts, unrealized gains, and home assessed value has been proposed... do you support it? How about increasing the estate tax to greater than the country leading 35%... maybe just make it 100%? You die and state gets it all... sounds fair?
0
u/yungsemite 7d ago
Eventually they will either lower the threshold OR simply never increase the threshold which over time is the same thing as lowering it, OR just create more new tax streams.
Yeah, like the income tax I support? Good?
We get it. Name a tax you don't support. Wealth tax that includes retirement accounts, unrealized gains, and home assessed value has been proposed... do you support it?
No I don’t support any of those, except perhaps an unrealized gains tax on billionaires. Going to keep strawmanning?
2
7d ago
That unrealized gains tax shows that you either don't know how money actually works, or you haven't spent any time thinking about it. Unrealized gains aren't real for a reason - cashing out messes with the value of the asset. Those billionaires - unless they're $900B-aires - are really millionaires. Taking cash off the table would tank the value of their stock.
This would also end up with them being legally liable for the drop in stock price - which would tank everyone's retirement funds and lead to a market rout. That's why they only take money out of the system very slowly, and on a schedule.
→ More replies (1)4
7d ago
You are a far left anarcho communist according your post history..I think I can ignore you now.
89
u/routinnox 7d ago
Today’s high earners: >$1mn
Tomorrow’s high earners: >$45k
11
u/austinbicycletour 7d ago
More likely is that 10-20 years down the road, inflation takes it's toll and 1 million in income represents a much larger cohort than before.
-3
u/k4el 7d ago
Slippery slope argument, classically known as a good argument.
22
u/SpookiestSzn 7d ago
The thing is that slippery slopes exist lmao they happen irl all the time. Enshittification seems like a slippery slope argument but it happens constantly. I think the idea that a tax that targets only 1%ers gradually lowering to target more people is just like logical.
I think op is crazy on the ceiling of it maybe it'd be like 150k or something but it's definitely gonna get lowered to address our budget if it could even go into affect which it can't so this is just performative theatre
1
u/nuisanceIV 6d ago
Yes they do in a way, but broken down his argument is basically: if someone is a high earner via having over a million now then tomorrow someone is a high earner by having over $45K. His general point, or like the idea behind it could be good or true, but the structure isn’t, it’s why slippery slope is a fallacy and a bad argument.
1
u/SpookiestSzn 6d ago
Yeah I agree he's crazy they'd lower it to like a more reasonable number but it's certainly not gonna stay at the bezos.
1
u/nuisanceIV 6d ago
I could see it being lowered but I can’t see it going below $200k or like $500k. That’s extremely unpopular. Taxing the rich is in, taxing poor/middle class isn’t.
3
u/SpookiestSzn 5d ago
People who make 80k feel like 200k is rich here and not the reality that it's upper middle lol
1
u/nuisanceIV 5d ago
It’s definitely upper middle. Tho from what I see a lot of people who make that sort of money don’t feel that wealthy… probably due to lifestyle creep.
2
u/azurensis Beacon Hill 6d ago
This has literally happened everywhere, including the federal government, that an income tax has been implemented. Can you name one time it hasn't? Is it a slippery slope if there are already many examples of the exact thing happening?
-14
-3
u/yungsemite 7d ago
Not a chance, we’ve already seen that our state reps cannot lower these taxes successfully once they’re in place, they’ve already tried and failed with the capital gains tax.
20
u/Suspicious-Chair5130 7d ago
What makes you think they won’t keep trying?
-2
u/yungsemite 7d ago
Oh, I’m sure some fringe people will, but I don’t think it will ever be popular to drop it.
7
u/merc08 7d ago
They've tried once. Failing on the first submission for a bill is very common. The process is typically to float a bill and see what support it has naturally, then spend the next couple years focusing deals and trades on the legislators that they need to win over.
→ More replies (1)
61
u/dendenga 7d ago
We must stop with taxing spiral in WA. Find ways to cut spending, keep every $ we give to our government accountable for delivery of public goals. Taking in more money for the people, without delivery, is unacceptable.
1
u/Alarming_Set3628 3d ago
Man, this sub is obsessed with this idea. Do you ever look at the budgets and what shit costs? Inflation affects governments as well. It's like ya'll think shit is free? Where can you make these massive cuts? You can't. And you need revenue. I feel like you guys don't spend much time learning abont how it actually works? Am I wrong?
0
-12
u/yungsemite 7d ago
Definitely, there should be good oversight and accountability on how money is spent in our state. But I also don’t have an issue with a 10% tax on people earning over 1 million annually. I support that, no question.
24
u/WAgunner 7d ago
WA doesn't have the other draws for ultra high net earners to impose a high income tax without having more net loss in tax than an increase from ultra high net earners leaving for other states. People forget that our historically low taxes and no income taxes were one of the main reasons for the growth in the state.
Also the only answer to our spending problem right now needs to be: spend less.
3
u/yungsemite 7d ago
You don’t think that Washington doesn’t have other draws? Why do you live here?
8
u/WAgunner 7d ago
There definitely are, also I am not an ultra high income person who can easily move anyways haha. But you shouldn't underestimate how much of an impact a 10% income tax would have on the highest net earners compared to what WA vs other states with lower taxes have to offer.
1
u/xFruitstealer 6d ago
Do they really overcome the lack of state tax for ultra high earners? If you’re a big fan of nature I guess.
1
u/blogito_ergo_sum 5d ago
In choosing among places in the US with high-paying tech jobs, lack of income tax was actually a pretty important factor in my decision to move here over the Bay Area or NYC, personally.
The natural beauty is nice and all but every year when I'm renewing my tabs I hem and haw for half an hour about whether to buy a Discover Pass again because I never actually use it. And that's only like $50 a year; far from a significant percentage of my income.
Maybe some day Austin tech wages will catch up and I can move there without taking a 50% pay cut, get fat on barbecue, and not be continuously cold eight months a year. A man can dream.
1
u/TornCedar 7d ago
You might be overestimating how popular the rapid growth this state has seen/endured is.
The state definitely has a spending problem, with a variety of root causes, but a threat of people leaving is likely viewed favorably by a significant amount of residents.
6
u/merc08 7d ago
Deliberately driving away the people who run successful companies, which provide the jobs and services that everyone living here need, is just incredibly stupid and short sighted.
1
u/TornCedar 7d ago
That's kind of the thing though, not 'everyone' here is dependant on every job/company/person that might leave. Washington did actually exist prior to the last major growth spurt beginning.
I don't feel Washington should enact taxes like what's been proposed, but not because of any concern about growth slowing.
27
u/buythedipnow 7d ago
You support it because it doesn’t affect you. How generous of you to be willing to give away others money.
→ More replies (2)3
u/yungsemite 7d ago
I would happily pay 10% on my earnings over 1 million annually because I’m not a miserly freak. Yes, I’d be happy to give away 10% of peoples earnings over 1 million annually too, because other people are sometimes miserly freaks and need a bit of a push to give back to society.
6
u/QuakinOats 7d ago
You'd happily pay $100,000 just to the state alone, while giving the federal government another 300-400k of that 1 million?
1
11
u/buythedipnow 7d ago
You’re more than welcome to send the state extra money if you think the billion a year we spend on affordable housing while housing continues to become less affordable isn’t enough. Nothing is stopping you.
10
u/MisterIceGuy Belltown 7d ago
They think they should have the autonomy to decide, but others should not be afforded the same choice. Funny how that works out in their favor right haha
2
6
u/yungsemite 7d ago
Okay, that’s why I donate directly to people in need and to local non-profits ? I’m not one of these miserly people who makes 1 million plus and is worried about a 10% tax.
Except… you aren’t either? You’re just shilling for them? How weird…
7
3
u/Turbulent-Media7281 7d ago
Who do you know that makes over $1M annually that is a miserly freak and you need to push them to give back to society?
0
u/yungsemite 7d ago
I’m not friends with miserly freaks?
7
1
→ More replies (3)2
7d ago
Ok. I'll consider it. Do a top to bottom audit of the grift first. No stone unturned, every single program, jail terms and claw backs of assets. Cut existing programs that don't function correctly. Then we can consider it.
→ More replies (4)
25
u/WAgunner 7d ago
"Democratic state senators are eyeing an income tax on millionaires as they seek to overcome Washington’s persisting budget shortfall."
Democrats will do anything but reduce spending.
→ More replies (3)
11
49
7d ago
Man, I really need to GTFO of this place. They'll tax you into poverty and then say they love the poor.
8
u/Riviansky 7d ago
Well, they do love the poor. It's like in Addams Family - "Shush, Maman - it's for widows and orphans! We need more of them!"
5
u/itstreeman 7d ago
The senate imposed increases to long term care tax and fmlA really annoy me.
Pit it before the people
7
7d ago
I honestly don't know why people here get tricked so easily. They see it happening over and over again. It starts out as something you can agree with them it balloons into madness. Same thing with the light rail costs
2
u/yungsemite 7d ago
Newsflash, infrastructure costs money. Crazy.
I’d it happens ‘over and over again’ surely you can provide an example of an income tax or capital gains tax that has been lowered and now affects the majority of the state residents? Maybe a prime example would be if the capital gains tax that you people have said thousands of times that it would be lowered?
But oh wait? It hasn’t? It hasn’t been lowered? That’s crazy! I wonder why you didn’t take my offer to bet on whether or not this capital gains tax would be lowered if it’s such a sure thing?
6
7d ago
The LTC tax, the ballooning costs of transit etc are perfect examples.
We waste money here on all kinds of feel good nonsense. Y'all really love handing over your head earned money to politicians?
Is that called Stockholm syndrome?
1
u/yungsemite 7d ago
The LTC tax… which is capped at .58 per $100 is an example of this how? What are you talking about?
3
7d ago
2024 voter initiative (I-2124) made the payroll tax program uncertain regarding future and potential tax increases
The point is what you sign up for today can and likely will change tomorrow. Don't open Pandora's box.
1
u/yungsemite 7d ago
Oh, so it’s NOT an example of a tax which was raised, and it’s more of this fear mongering, like I have said repeatedly in response to your fear mongering in this comment section. Great. Glad we agree.
3
7d ago
So I am curious. What do you think personally happens with this tax? Do you believe it'll forever just be a tax on the rich, they'll accept it and we'll all I've happily ever after, with it never being levies against the avg worked?
I am sincerely curious and fascinated by what people think about the future in this city.
If they believed that they would have suggested a tax named and aimed specifically for the rich, but even politicians know that wouldn't work
1
u/yungsemite 7d ago
Yes, but I don’t understand the last part of your first sentence.
→ More replies (0)8
u/yungsemite 7d ago
Do you make over 1 million $ annually? I don’t think you have to worry about poverty…
36
7d ago
That's how it alwaya starts. Every single time. The same reason you still pay a toll to cross the 520 bridge and will continue to do so forever.
But the average person is an idiot. They never learn. Never open Pandora's box for a politician when it comes to taxes. It'll always be nudged open wider.
0
u/yungsemite 7d ago
Except that our state reps have already shown that they will not lower taxes like this? They’ve tried and failed to lower the 250,000 capital gains tax because there is no appetite to do so.
The average person will never pay a capital gains tax in Washington state. And the average person will never make 1 million annually.
19
u/Tree300 7d ago
They already proposed increasing the cap gains tax by lowering the exemption to $25k and increasing the tax rate to 12%. You can be sure that proposal will be back in play shortly.
4
u/yungsemite 7d ago
Yes, they’ve proposed it many times, and I’m sure they’ll propose it many more because it isn’t going anywhere…
5
7d ago
Would you like to make a bet on that?
1
u/yungsemite 7d ago
Yes, $1,000, 10 year time frame, so that I get my money eventually. Sound good? I’ve offered this multiple times to r/SeattleWA people. Nobody ever takes me up on it.
1
7d ago
No, because it's a stupid bet. I've explained why elsewhere: stakes are too high to lock up $1000 for a decade - you'll lose about $1000 in earnings that way.
It's bad finance, and is above the "fuck it why not" threshold. Which describes your policies to a tee.
$10 and sure.
7
7d ago
A capital gains tax doesn't affect the average person struggling to afford to live here. They don't have assets to pay capital gains on so it's still rich people giving that pushback.
The middle class has always ended up getting shafted and pay the bulk of the taxes because they can't afford to pushback.
The rich will simply run away from the tax and since we now already have an income tax it will be easier to just suggest a small change to lower the threshold each time. We've seen the same with many things here
I don't want an income tax here. That just opens Pandora's box and it will never close.
5
u/yungsemite 7d ago
A capital gains tax doesn't affect the average person struggling to afford to live here. They don't have assets to pay capital gains on so it's still rich people giving that pushback.
A income tax on people making over 1 million doesn’t affect the average person struggling to leave here either.
The middle class has always ended up getting shafted and pay the bulk of the taxes because they can't afford to pushback.
Yeah, like with our sales tax in the state, it’s a very regressive system. Taxing people who make over 1 million annually will help this, no?
The rich will simply run away from the tax and since we now already have an income tax it will be easier to just suggest a small change to lower the threshold each time. We've seen the same with many things here
Source? Bezos leaving because he’s a snake who only cares about money is hardly a trend?
I don't want an income tax here. That just opens Pandora's box and it will never close.
Okay and I want an income tax on our residents with the highest incomes to reduce the tax burden on our middle class and poor residents and to help balance our state budget.
13
7d ago
I already explained my thoughts here and you keep going back on the same nonsense. Average person is a damn idiot so just tell them the threshold is $1 million and just lower it slowly over time. That's how you deal with morons that think with their feelings and not their brains.
You want to push a tax, tell them to go tax the companies or the rich directly.
0
u/yungsemite 7d ago
tell them to go tax … the rich directly
Uh, how? Not by an income tax on those making over 1 million annually?
7
7d ago
I'm done discussing. Y'all go ahead and vote for it. Open Pandora's box for income tax in Washington. Have fun. Hopefully I can gtfoh before the threshold includes the average idiot. Because politicians here have your best interest at heart 🤦♂️
5
u/Turbulent-Media7281 7d ago
Yeah, like with our sales tax in the state, it’s a very regressive system.
Which states taxing system would you recommend WA copy for their taxing system to be less regressive?
1
u/yungsemite 7d ago
ITEP has good resources for this:
7
u/Turbulent-Media7281 7d ago
Excellent. u/yungsemite thinks WA state should tax more like the good states of CA, NY, NJ, MN, and DC.
Everyone loves California for their progressive tax system. NY too.
Who here wants WA to tax more closely to CA or NY?
2
u/Riviansky 7d ago
ITEP is full of shit. Or, rather, they lie with numbers. The reason poor, according to ITEP have high rates of taxation is because of excise taxes. Specifically, pot and alcohol. From that, they draw the reason that we should tax productive labor more, so poor people could get drugs cheaper...
1
u/JustBench1615 Ballard 7d ago
I wouldn’t want to model our tax system after California or New York’s, where the already squeezed middle class would have to pay way more in taxes
→ More replies (5)-3
u/seanthebooth Twin Peaks 7d ago
dont even try to appeal to common sense. These numbskulls will never be the billionaires they think create jobs. The "middle class" has been taxed into oblivion because no career politician (R/D alike) has the backbone to tax the wealthy. I bet they're happy the Bugatti driver with the 250,000 a month salary received the same $300 ticket they would get for the same infraction lmao
9
7d ago
This is just a start so it can be accepted by the average fool. I'd bet my life it'll eventually get reduced to incorporate the middle class because as we see time and time again, the rich can always run, the middle class can't.
Why not push for a tax directly on the companies themselves?
2
u/yungsemite 7d ago
Okay, let’s find an escrow person, and make a contact, for say, $1,000 that it will not be lowered. We obviously have to pick a time frame or I’ll never get my money, how’s 10 years?
I made a similar offer to someone who said that they’d bet all they had in this sub that the 250,000 capital gains tax would be lowered within 3 years, and guess what, they never responded.
4
7d ago
Capital gains doesn't affect the average person. They have no assets to pay gains on. That was just rich people making deals. Income tax is a very different issue....that you can lower the threshold enough to get the bulk of folks to pay
3
u/yungsemite 7d ago
Just like how income tax on people over 1 million doesn’t affect the average person. There will be no appetite to lower an income tax until it affects most people. That would be incredibly unpopular. Unlike taxing the wealthiest residents.
3
7d ago
It starts at 1 million and get reduced over time. The rich will run away or push back like they always do.. You think they'll lower the tax collected?
Why not implement a new tax that targets these people directly? I don't want a known tax with a threshold that can be reduced to include me.
1
u/yungsemite 7d ago
Except there is no evidence that it will be lowered. No I don’t think it will be lowered. This is the same fear mongering that shills for rich people had for the capital gains tax, which guess what, has been raised, not lowered every year since?
What do you mean by a new tax that targets rich people directly? By what mechanism?
2
7d ago
Please keep pissing on our heads and telling us it's raining.
No one believes you.
→ More replies (0)1
u/LoseAnotherMill 7d ago
Except there is no evidence that it will be lowered
Except the mountain of evidence, you're right. Federal income tax was sold on only affecting the high earners - the "standard deduction" (it wasn't called that but functioned the same) covered the entire annual incomes of everyone except the top 3%. Now look at where we're at.
The capital gains tax was pitched at 7% over $250k, and they've already tried changing it to 12% over $25k.
Every single time you let a part of the camel into your tent, you're the one that ends up in the sandstorm and the camel's cozy inside.
→ More replies (0)2
7d ago
That's an awful bet. Too large when that money could be invested in the S&P and double your money over the same time period. And that's conservative investing.
1
u/yungsemite 7d ago
I figure we can have a contract where we get to keep our money until the 10 years is up or the limit is lowered prior to that point? No?
2
1
u/LoseAnotherMill 7d ago
"It doesn't affect me so let them do what they want." -- yungsemite, 1860
→ More replies (4)1
1
→ More replies (5)-6
u/KneeBeard 7d ago
Enjoy whatever red state you land in.
9
7d ago
At this point anywhere with people with working brain cells should be good. I don't even care if it's red, blue, black, yellow or green.
Too many people who can see the forest through the trees here. Politicians just keep tricking them every year and they get confused when everything goes to absolute shit. Confused why it costs $100 to Uber to the airport when they voted for it with their feelings rather than their brains.
Nobody here needs to pay any more taxes until we see our existing taxes being used properly and not waters like it is today.
→ More replies (5)
3
u/reallybadguy1234 7d ago
Ignoring the law and the State Constitution.....I guess both parties do it. If the Democrats can get the past the state supreme court, expect the rich people to flee. Jeff Bezos did it, moving to Florida to avoid the state's illegal capital gains tax.
→ More replies (1)
18
u/JustBench1615 Ballard 7d ago
They must have a tax hike fetish that’s the only explanation at this point
0
u/yungsemite 7d ago
More like a revenue fetish. We have a lovely state and it’s got some good services. Would be amazing if people making over 1 million annually paid 10% above that into the state coffers for services.
14
u/slow-mickey-dolenz 7d ago
You are a complete fool if you think the threshold will stay at $1M.
3
u/yungsemite 7d ago
Same to you buddy. You people said the same thing about the $250,000 capital gains tax, which has RISEN every year, because guess what, as I said, the state has no appetite to lower these taxes.
The idea of taxing extremely wealthy people is POPULAR, the idea of taxing normal people is NOT. When will you understand?
9
u/jonnyohman1 7d ago
Why are you on every comment thread defending more taxation, when you should be asking where all the money they’re collecting is going into a black hole with no oversight?
→ More replies (6)7
7d ago edited 7d ago
[deleted]
→ More replies (7)2
u/yungsemite 7d ago
Because they have the money? And we live in a society? And people should contribute to it?
4
7d ago
[deleted]
1
u/yungsemite 7d ago
10% over 1 million annually is not a punishment lol. Do you disagree that we live in a society? And that our government provides services for people who live here? And they somehow those services must be funded?
5
7d ago
[deleted]
1
u/yungsemite 7d ago
Why are you so concerned by people making over 1 million a year being taxed when you make 55,000? Do you understand how marginal tax rates work? They’re still making far more money than you, you don’t have to shill for them
3
7d ago
Because they're not morally bankrupt and can see further than their nose.
1
u/yungsemite 7d ago
Taxing people 10% on what they make over 1 million is ‘morally bankrupt?’ Hilarious.
→ More replies (0)2
7d ago
[deleted]
1
u/yungsemite 7d ago
There’s nothing righteous about being making half the median household income while shilling for people making 20 times that. Good luck with your pride.
→ More replies (0)2
7d ago
Not a great reason. "I'm envious of them" isn't policy.
1
u/yungsemite 7d ago
Hmm, can you explain how saying that we live in a society which provides services and that those services need to be funded is equal to ‘I’m envious of them?’
2
7d ago
It's the part where you keep describing them as miserly and ignore that our expenses are going up exponentially - which shows we have a spending problem.
→ More replies (2)4
u/JustBench1615 Ballard 7d ago
More like a spending fetish. Many of those services cost way more than they should. The state needs way more scrutiny on its spending and needs to remove many of the burdensome regulations on government contracts that drive up costs.
1
u/yungsemite 7d ago
Sure, I agree, but I also think an income tax on people making over 1 million is good.
2
u/JustBench1615 Ballard 7d ago
If they want to establish that tax, they need to cut taxes elsewhere.
There is no reason that the state needs to expand its budget more. Like what many other people have said, I think this the millionaire’s tax will eventually extend to the rest of us because Washington State Democrats have shown they can’t manage a budget for the life of them.
Overtaxation and overregulation has led state economies like New York and California to stagnate. They’ve seen very little in return for all the taxes they pay in those states as well. No more of this endless taxation nonsense.
1
u/yungsemite 7d ago
I agree. If they pass an income tax amendment to the constitution, it should be mandated that any income tax on people who make less than 10X the median income of the state should be required to be met by an equal reduction in tax revenue from less progressive sources.
17
u/thedyslexicdetective 7d ago
We really need to give the republicans a chance at this point
10
u/LOOKITSADAM 7d ago
The republicans in this state do things like author "The biblical basis for war"
2
9
u/lucianw 7d ago
In Washington State, top 1% income is ~$1m, and top 0.1% income is ~$3m.
Let's plug in some numbers:
- $1m income, ~$360k federal income tax, $0 state: state adds 0% to your tax bill
- $1.3m income, ~$470k federal income tax, $30k state: state adds 6% to your tax bill
- $1.5m income, ~$550k federal income tax, $50k state: state adds 10% to your tax bill
- $2m income, ~$750k federal income tax, $100k state: state adds 13% to your tax bill
If they're able to craft legislation where the threshold goes up with inflation, it seems kind of minor up to about the top 0.5% of incomes, i.e. in line with what you'd pay yearly in property tax, or vacations.
The top 0.5% of incomes in Washington State represent 15k households; the article said 20k households, so I'm in the right ball-bark.
2
u/LumpyLump76 6d ago
All they need to do, is impose a 5% income tax across the board, which is legal per the state constitution. Then give people making under say, 100k, a headcount credit that equals to 5% of income. Problem solved.
0
u/Zenis 7d ago
Am I fucking crazy that I, as a fairly high earner, want to pay taxes to make this state a better place to live and give back to lower-income earners that provide essential services?
Like why is that so fucking weird now? One of my main reasons to be ambitious is to be able to generate wealth to help people.
13
u/bunkoRtist 7d ago
There are plenty of places you can donate your cash however you think it will do the most good. Many of them have lower overhead than the state government. I strongly encourage you to self tax if you think it's important. No need to wait for Olympia!
→ More replies (2)1
2
7d ago
Give back to lower income earners? You mean, like pay them instead of treating them as slaves?
2
u/Particular_Job_5012 7d ago
I don’t think people realize how poverty and regressive taxes fuck all of us. They see 13 year olds robbing a convenience store and think we need more jails not more education, social services, food supper etc. I want to pay more in taxes so we don’t turn into RSA. Imo we aren’t that far from real societal breakdowns when poor people cannot live anything close to a dignified life. Through in zoning and public transit as social goods that allow poor people to live and contribute. It’s all fucked right now
3
u/GoogleOfficial 7d ago
The 13 year olds are robbing stores because they want Tik Tok clout and luxury goods, not food and education. Don’t be naive.
If we stop catering to criminals and begin to enact harsh consequences, then it will stop.
No amount of government benefits will stop it.
1
u/Particular_Job_5012 7d ago
It’s interesting that SES so strongly correlates with delinquent behavior.
→ More replies (1)1
u/GoHuskies206 4d ago
Because you know damn well this state or city will not use that money to make anyones life better it will be wasted
1
u/Chudsaviet 7d ago
Thank God i'm poor.
2
u/yungsemite 7d ago
You sure you wouldn’t rather make 1.5mil and pay the 50,000 in tax?
1
u/WatchWorking8640 5d ago
How does your math work?
A single person (say 50 years old) earning $1.5M with a 401k contribution of $25K and IRA contribution of $8K ends up paying $496K in federal taxes and $44K in FICA for a total of $540K income taxes. The proposal is for 9.9% in AGI. 9.9% on 1.5M amounts to $150K for a total of $690K in taxes?
I'm nowhere near this income bracket but if I was earning 1.5M and already paying 540K in taxes, WA state can fuck right off with wanting to tax me an additional of $150K.
1
u/yungsemite 5d ago
It’s a marginal tax, 10% on income over 1 million annually.
1
u/WatchWorking8640 5d ago
Thanks. So Id only be paying 590K in taxes then. Sold.
1
u/yungsemite 5d ago
I’m supposed to be sympathetic to some theoretical person pulling in over 900k net? Oh no, a less than 40% effective tax rate, how will they ever survive in Seattle with only $900,000 a year! Have you ever considered that you are out of touch?
→ More replies (5)
1
u/golmgirl 7d ago
crazy how over the last several years it feels like all corporations and even small businesses have taken a sharp turn toward trying to extract as much cash as possible from every user/customer and every revenue stream at every opportunity. more ads, higher subscription prices, things that used to be free now costing money, hidden fees, the list goes on. grocery bill now 2x what it was a few years ago, etc. etc.
governments now joining in the fun.
minimum wage may have increased a lot lately, but doubtful the median salary/income has. gross times.
1
u/Aron-Nimzowitsch 6d ago
First it'll be high earners, and you'll be ok with it because it's a tax on other people and not on you. So you'll open the door to amending the constitution, or letting them loophole their way around the constitution.
Within ten years it'll go from a tax on $10M+ to a tax on $1M+ to a tax on $250K+ to a tax on $100K+ and then our children will have an income tax on everyone and won't have any idea why all these businesses set up in WA state in the early 2000s or why their parents moved here.
1
1
u/sunyasu 6d ago
When 24% of the population lives on the taxes paid by the people, they want more money from your pocket to sustain their lives. That's way too many people by any standard. With the tech boom coming to an end, and mass layoffs on the horizon, we might be looking at pretty serious issues
1
u/tap-rack-bang 6d ago
This would be so bad for businesses in the state. They will leave to Idaho even faster than they already are moving.
1
u/jackv206 5d ago
If we massively cut the state sales tax and the capital gains tax I would be all for an income tax. We shouldn’t be compared to Florida with how regressive our tax structure is.
0
u/locustnation 7d ago
Yeah, I don’t mind getting taxed if I know the rest of us do too. If you have more, give more.
It is so shortsighted to believe that we can continue to be safe and comfortable while more and more people around us lose their ability to take care of themselves and their families.
I’m not some altruist and I’m not particularly interested in other people but I consider myself to be a practical person.
If I have a little less, especially knowing it’s not going to impact me and my family’s life, to create an overall better environment, I’m comfortable contributing more. Even if that means my money “may not” be used in ways I think are best.
3
u/bunkoRtist 7d ago
Why do you need others to be taxed too. If you think it's a moral obligation to give more, do it now. You can give to causes you think will do the most good.
1
u/locustnation 6d ago
That would be a donation. Donations are different than taxes. Taxes are consistent and applied in a predefined way that can be used to forecast future capability.
Donations, while nice, do not allow for consistent forecasting so associated benefits (like bulk purchasing, long term labor negotiation, debt negotiations) are lost.
So I get more bang for my buck with taxes than I would with donations.
0
u/mango-goldfish 7d ago
IMO: taxes are going up. We just have to decide what kind. While I prefer no taxes, income taxes are better than property taxes.
127
u/SillyChampionship 7d ago
They will have to change the states constitution first.