It is with some fear that I use the Dark Side to ask a serious question. But, here goes.

As I understand the WA Constitution, state tax rate must be equal across all payers. That is, flat rate. Depending as much as we do on sales taxes makes planning difficult.

Why not have the following, based on Federal Tax Returns, using their definitions and actual Form Lines. Made up numbers, just for discussion. Tax earned income is taxed at 1%, interest and dividends at 2%, and capitol gains at 3%. The rates would be set by figuring how to just replace the state's portion of the sales tax. Also, eliminate the State's taxes (excise) on big sales such as cars, houses, etc.

Flame away.

Our government isn't good with math...except salary increases for their workers. Oh, and hitting poor people with a tax penalty for not being able to afford medical insurance....brilliant.

You want more stupid? Your Comcast internet goes down and you call them, you get a recording that says "you can find solutions to your internet problem by going online...." unfukkinbelieveable.

Snake

There are two questions here. Mine was how do we fund the government in a "fair" manner, a legal manner, and one that is reasonably stable and predictable.

The second is how should such funds be spent. What is the role of government and what should it do. A separate question. Equally necessary to discuss, though.

The idea has merit CM. However I think the movers and shakers who own the gov't. politicians will arrange it so that the rates are 3% on earned income and 1% for interest, dividends, and capitol gains. Nothing is more American than having the wealthiest pay the lowest tax rates.

That's true Salmo. I just find it odd that the Courts gave WA a way to do an Income tax and the folks who write laws constantly ignore it and prefer to spend money on court fights.

RCW 36.65.030
Tax on net income prohibited.
A county, city, or city-county shall not levy a tax on net income.
[ 1984 c 91 § 3.]


doesnt that right there mean that its illegal for them to do what they are trying to do?

I knew it was only a matter of time before the unemployed know it all chimed in.

shut up pussy....

County, city, or city-county. Question was about State.

thats what im asking... how can the state levy taxes in cities, and counties, if cities and counties cant do it according to the RCW?

if there is a state income tax, that includes all cities and counties...

It says that a city, county etc. "Shall not levy". Says nothing about the State's ability to levy. The act affect the local governments' ability to tax, not the State's.

they tried to do this in 2010...


https://www.atr.org/fyi-state-income-tax-washington-unconstitutional-a4845


http://www.seattletimes.com/opinion/proposed-state-income-tax-will-stymie-job-creation/

Again, the one proposed in 2010 was not fat-rate, across the board as is my proposal. Since the state Constitution does not allow non-across the board rates (and 0 is a rate) it is obviously unconstitutional from the get-go.

the law says net income they are going after gross income i think

PERMANENTLY abolish all state sales and excise taxes. Next, implement a flat state income tax, similar to what Carcassman suggests. Easy, fair, progressive, and sustainable... all the things that guarantee it will never happen.

A new, regressive income tax, on top of the existing, regressive taxes, becomes increasingly inevitable, the longer the Legislature lets us keep operating and investing with money that doesn't exist. The reason we are operating that way is that the current tax structure doesn't come close to paying for what existing programs require, let alone new programs and initiatives. Personally, I'd much rather pay my taxes right off the top than find out how much more I will be taxed in the future on goods and services to make up perennial revenue shortfalls. It would make finacial planning much, much easier. Simply add in inflation, and you have a pretty good idea what your taxes will look like in 5, 10, 20 years.