Home | About Joshua | News & Media | Email Updates | The Ledger | Contact
Dear Friends and Neighbors,
This week marked an important turning point in Olympia: policy cutoff. In simple terms, that means any bill that does not affect the state budget must clear its policy committee to remain alive this session. It is one of those moments where the pace quickens, priorities come into clearer focus, and we start to see which ideas are moving forward and which are falling away.
With that backdrop, I want to share an update on two major fronts: a proposed state income tax and where my bills stand as we head into the next phase of session.
A proposed state income tax and why this matters to you
There is a major push underway to enact Washington’s first state income tax under Senate Bill 6346. The majority party is leading everyone to believe this is a “millionaires tax” that they promise only impacts the wealthy. But the fine print tells a very different story.
Let me be direct: this legislation establishes a permanent income tax structure in Washington state.
Once that framework is in place, history shows what happens next. Rates rise. Thresholds expand. Promises disappear.
We have already seen this pattern play out. Capital gains taxes were increased just four years after their creation. Estate taxes were ratcheted up to the highest top rate in the nation. Document recording fees jumped from $5 to $300. Property taxes were temporarily reduced through a levy swap, only to be raised again in the very next session.
Even the majority party has already acknowledged what comes next. Earlier this year, a Democrat lawmaker was asked whether the public should assume this would stay limited to millionaires. His answer was blunt: “You shouldn’t.”
Once this door is opened, future legislatures can easily lower thresholds, raise rates, and expand who pays.
Despite the rhetoric, this proposal does not just affect the wealthy.
The $1 million threshold applies to combined household income, not individual income. That creates a built-in marriage penalty and treats a family of four the same as a single filer for basic subsistence needs.
Many small business owners report income through their personal tax returns. That means job creators and family-run businesses would be directly affected, not just large corporations.
This proposal also threatens Washington’s competitiveness.
Over the past five years, states without income taxes have consistently outperformed states with income taxes.
- Gross domestic product is 28% higher.
- Population growth is 82% higher.
- Personal income growth is 67% higher.
- Job growth is 28% higher.
These are not abstract statistics. They translate directly into jobs, opportunities, and whether families can afford to stay in Washington.
Under this proposal, Seattle would rank among the cities with the highest combined state income and payroll tax burdens in the nation. That makes it harder to attract employers, harder to keep investment here, and easier for jobs to move elsewhere.
And all of this comes just one year after the largest tax increase in state history.
Which brings us to the real issue.
Washington doesn’t have a revenue problem. Washington has a spending problem.
Instead of practicing budget discipline and prioritizing core services, this bill doubles down on higher taxes and long-term financial instability. Income taxes fluctuate sharply with economic cycles, making state budgets less predictable and increasing pressure for future tax hikes during downturns.
This proposal also ignores voter intent and constitutional protections. Washingtonians have rejected taxes ten times. Courts have consistently treated income as property under our Constitution, requiring uniform taxation. This bill attempts to bypass both legal precedent and the will of the people by redefining income taxation.
The bottom line: SB 6346 would establish Washington’s first state income tax. It breaks longstanding promises, weakens constitutional protections, threatens jobs, and shifts our state toward a tax system that even its supporters acknowledge is likely to expand over time.
Families, small businesses, and Washington’s economic future deserve better.
What are your thoughts on this proposal? Share them here by clicking on Share your story.
Policy cutoff update | Where my bills stand
With policy cutoff behind us, here is where my legislation currently sits. Here are the bills moving forward.
House Bill 2200 is now in the House Appropriations Committee for budget review. This bill brings transparency to Washington’s developmental disabilities system by requiring an apples-to-apples comparison of safety and stability across state-run and contracted residential settings. Right now, families and taxpayers lack consistent data on emergency calls, placement failures, and staff retention for most community placements. This bill turns on the lights by directing an independent review of outcomes and creating ongoing public reporting, so that decisions are based on real data rather than anecdotes.
House Bill 2203 is moving to the House floor for a full chamber vote. This legislation creates the offense of reckless interference with emergency operations. In simple terms, it holds drivers accountable for ignoring road closures in dangerous conditions, putting first responders and vulnerable passengers at risk. It also allows public agencies to recover the cost of emergency rescues when someone knowingly bypasses safety barricades.
House Bill 2331 is also in the House Appropriations Committee. This bill protects access to pediatric primary care and behavioral health by preventing reimbursement cuts when statewide wait times exceed 30 days. It prioritizes patient services over bureaucracy during budget shortfalls and ensures children do not lose access to critical care simply because the state fails to manage its finances responsibly.
These bills are still alive, and I will continue advocating for them as we move into fiscal discussions.
Unfortunately, several bills did not advance before cutoff.
House Bill 2187 would have helped address Washington’s affordability crisis by supporting employers who provide child care assistance to their employees. It created a targeted tax credit to help small and mid-sized businesses offer child care benefits, allowing employers to pool resources and expand access to care. With child care costs already among the highest in the nation and a major barrier to workforce participation, this was a practical solution that would have helped working families stay employed and small businesses stay competitive.
House Bill 2202 proposed a dental care pilot at Rainier School, allowing individuals with developmental disabilities who cannot access community dental providers to receive treatment there, including cases requiring anesthesia or deep sedation. This bill focused on meeting urgent medical needs for some of our most vulnerable residents when no other options are available.
House Bill 2280 ensured legislators could access state-owned, licensed, and contracted facilities in a timely manner. Oversight only works when lawmakers can see conditions firsthand. This bill simply required agencies to facilitate visits within 10 business days and prevented denying access due to administrative inconvenience.
House Bill 2314 expanded access to dental services at residential habilitation centers for individuals with developmental disabilities living in community settings. Like House Bill 2202, it focused on providing critical care to people who often face significant barriers to basic medical services.
While not every proposal makes it through, I remain focused on advancing policies that improve affordability, strengthen accountability, and protect vulnerable communities.
Looking ahead | Fiscal cutoff and House floor action
Fiscal cutoff is Monday. That is the next major deadline, when bills with budget impacts must clear their fiscal committee.
In next week’s update, I will share more about my work on the House Appropriations Committee as an assistant ranking member.
Next week also marks the start of House floor action, where we will begin debating and voting on bills in the full chamber.
As always, thank you for staying engaged. Your input matters, and I am honored to represent you in Olympia.
Sincerely,
Joshua Penner
