Mark Harmsworth says the state has increased spending significantly over the last 12 years and needs to control costs, reduce government waste and not increase taxes to fund lawmakers’ non-essential projects
Mark Harmsworth
Washington Policy Center
House Bill 1334 (HB 1334), introduced by Representative Pollet (D), would increase the amount a municipality could raise property taxes by changing the way inflation is calculated and adding up to an additional 3% based on population.
Under HB 1334, The inflation calculation would change from the implicit price deflator to the Consumer Price Index (CPI). The implicit price deflator, is calculated on the goods and services the US produces, CPI is calculated using a selection of commonly purchased products by consumers over time and is the most widely used number for calculating inflation in the US. The CPI calculation typically results in a higher percentage, 2-2.4% per year which would increase the maximum ceiling to which a municipality could increase taxes.
The result would allow property taxes to be increased by a potential 5% to 6% depending on the CPI increase and population growth.
Last year Senate Bill 5570 (SB 5570), sponsored by Senator Pederson (D), failed to pass the Senate. SB 5770 would have removed the 1% cap on property tax increases, overturning voter approved initiative 747 that passed in 2001.
HB 1334 will increase property taxes on Washington residents, both homeowners and renters, who are already struggling with high inflation, high food, gas and utility costs and should not be passed.
The state has increased spending significantly over the last 12 years and needs to control costs, reduce government waste and not increase taxes to fund lawmakers’ non-essential projects.
Mark Harmsworth is the director of the Small Business Center at the Washington Policy Center.
Also read:
- Opinion: The income tax proposal has arrived
Ryan Frost of the Washington Policy Center argues that a proposed Washington income tax creates a new revenue stream rather than delivering tax reform or relief. - Opinion: ‘If they want light rail, they should be the ones who pay for it’
Clark County Today Editor Ken Vance argues that supporters of light rail tied to the I-5 Bridge replacement should bear the local cost of operating and maintaining the system through a narrowly drawn sub-district. - POLL: If a sub-district is created, what area should it include?
Clark County residents are asked where a potential C-TRAN sub-district should be drawn if voters are asked to fund light rail operations and maintenance costs. - Opinion: IBR falsely blaming inflation
Joe Cortright argues that inflation explains only a small portion of the IBR project’s cost increases and that rising consultant and staff expenses are the primary drivers. - Letter: The Interstate Bridge Replacement Program’s $141 million bribe can be better spent on sandwich steel-concrete tubes
Bob Ortblad argues that an immersed tunnel using sandwich steel-concrete tubes would be a more cost-effective alternative to the current Interstate Bridge Replacement Program design.
