Elizabeth Hovde of the Washington Policy Center explains why lawmakers should be interested in repealing both paid family and medical leave and the long-term-care program and payroll tax
Elizabeth Hovde
Washington Policy Center
As expected, a decrease in pay is on the way for most W2 workers. The payroll tax rate for Washington state’s paid family and medical leave is going up to 0.8% in January — a 33 percent increase in the tax rate.
Workers already saw a tax increase for the social program last January when it grew to 0.6% from the 0.4% state lawmakers and the public were sold when the law for paid leave was enacted. The program isn’t paying its way and isn’t expected to in the future. The Employment Security Department said in a mailing to employers, “To keep pace with more people using the program, and as required by law, the premium rate will increase in 2023.”
Add this tax increase to a 0.58%-plus payroll tax promised for a state-mandated long-term-care program that’s on the way in July, and $1.38 of every $100 most people earn will be taken for new social programs that many Washington workers won’t benefit from and that aren’t reserved for low-income workers. In fact, in some cases, low-income workers will be funding paid time off of work for child bonding or family-member care for people who make more money than they do and who might not need taxpayer dollars.
Social program via payroll tax is no way to treat Washington workers: Penalizing work isn’t wise.
Lawmakers should be interested in repealing both paid family and medical leave and the long-term-care program and payroll tax. They aren’t set up for people in need, they have solvency problems and they unfairly take wages from workers who may never need, use or want the program.
Elizabeth Hovde is a policy analyst and the director of the Centers for Health Care and Worker Rights at the Washington Policy Center. She is a Clark County resident.
Also read:
- Letter: Public school vision
Clark County resident Larry Roe urges a deeper community discussion about public school priorities, levy funding, and the long-term affordability of education for local families. - Opinion: House Bill 1834 would create a regulatory nightmare and restricts parental control on social media
Mark Harmsworth argues that House Bill 1834 would undermine parental authority and create sweeping regulatory and legal risks under the guise of protecting minors online. - Opinion: HB 2100 – Tax employers for paying people well? It’s for the needy, sorta
Elizabeth New (Hovde) argues House Bill 2100 would raise costs, discourage job growth, and expand state spending power under the banner of helping people in need. - Opinion: IBR’s evasive, misleading and dishonest excuses for higher cost
Joe Cortright argues the Interstate Bridge Replacement Program has withheld detailed cost estimates while offering contradictory explanations for rising costs tied to the I-5 Bridge project. - Opinion: The limits for drug-impaired driving
Target Zero Manager Doug Dahl explains how Washington law defines drug-impaired driving and how officers are trained to recognize impairment beyond alcohol limits.
