A proposed 9.9% ‘millionaire’s income tax’ being worked on by majority-party Democrats in Washington state, if enacted, would include a component that would force high-earning visiting athletes and performers to pay income tax on earnings generated during their time in the stat
Brett Davis
The Center Square Washington
See Grok’s analysis of this story
Whether or not the Seattle Seahawks are sold after Super Bowl LX remains to be seen, but the timing of such speculation comes shortly after the details of an income-based “jock tax” on professional athletes in Washington state went public.
A proposed 9.9% “millionaire’s income tax” being worked on by majority-party Democrats in Washington state, if enacted, would include a component that would force high-earning visiting athletes and performers to pay income tax on earnings generated during their time in the state.
“While the ‘jock tax’ is standard in states with income taxes, I doubt our Seahawks, Mariners and Kraken players will be thrilled about losing 10% of their salaries,” explained Ryan Frost, director of Budget and Tax Policy at the free-market Washington Policy Center think tank. “But the ‘jock tax’ is really just a symptom of the bigger problem. Olympia can’t stick to a budget even with record revenues, so they keep creating new tax mechanisms to extract more wealth from the private sector.”
As reported by The Center Square, state spending has increased dramatically over the last decade, with operating budgets far outpacing inflation and population growth.
The possible sale of the franchise was the talk of the sports world on Friday when ESPN, citing National Football League and ownership sources familiar with the situation, reported that the team will be put up for sale after the Feb. 8 championship game between the Seahawks and the New England Patriots at Levi Stadium in Santa Clara, Calif.
Shortly thereafter, The Seattle Times reported that the Paul G. Allen Estate put out a statement that refuted, at least to a degree, the notion that the team is currently for sale: “We don’t comment on rumors or speculation, and the team is not for sale. We’ve already said that will change at some point per Paul’s wishes, but there is no news to share. Our focus right now is winning the Super Bowl and completing the sale of the Portland Trail Blazers in the coming months.”
Jody Allen took ownership of the Seahawks following the death of her brother, Paul, in October 2018.
Under a Washington state income tax proposal under discussion, professional athletes could pay a 9.9% tax on income earned in the state, potentially costing them tens of thousands of dollars per game for top earners. The tax, targeting income above $1 million, would apply to both visiting and home-team athletes based on “duty days” spent in Washington starting Jan. 1, 2029.
“Duty days” are the total number of days a professional athlete performs services for their team – games, practices, meetings and travel – in a specific state, used to calculate income tax liability for nonresidents.
Supporters justify a state tax on high earners as a necessary step to fix what they say is Washington’s regressive tax system. Proponents argue the tax would raise more than $3 billion annually to fund education, enhance the Working Families Tax Credit, and eliminate sales taxes on necessities.
The Center Square reached out via email to the office of Gov. Bob Ferguson and to state Senate Majority Leader Jamie Pedersen, D-Seattle, for comment on the “jock tax,” given the potential sale of the Seahawks, asking if the team’s possible sale makes it harder to persuade the public on the merits of a high-earners income tax. Neither responded to a request for comment.
This report was first published by The Center Square Washington.
This independent analysis was created with Grok, an AI model from xAI. It is not written or edited by ClarkCountyToday.com and is provided to help readers evaluate the article’s sourcing and context.
Quick summary
A proposed 9.9% “millionaire’s income tax” in Washington would include a “jock tax” provision requiring certain high‑earning visiting athletes and performers to pay tax on earnings attributed to Washington starting Jan. 1, 2029. The tax would be calculated using “duty days” to allocate income to the state. The article connects the policy debate to speculation about a potential Seattle Seahawks sale after Super Bowl LX.
What Grok notices
- Explains the “jock tax” mechanics described in the reporting, including allocating income to Washington based on “duty days,” and notes the stated 2029 start date.
- Frames the provision as part of a broader proposed income tax package, helping readers understand it as a nonresident component rather than a separate standalone policy.
- Connects the timing of ownership/sale rumors to the tax discussion and includes commentary quoted from Washington Policy Center’s Ryan Frost about potential economic and workforce effects.
- Includes statements from the Paul G. Allen Estate disputing immediate Seahawks sale plans while noting other franchise-related developments referenced in the article.
- Signals that readers who want the most precise details should check the latest bill language and state tax guidance, since definitions and allocation rules drive who is covered and how liability is calculated.
Questions worth asking
- How might a jock tax on visiting athletes influence Washington’s attractiveness as a host for major sports events or marquee matchups?
- How could taxing nonresident performers affect tour routing, event pricing, or decisions by promoters about where to book shows?
- What factors besides taxes are driving speculation about a Seahawks sale, and how much of that speculation is supported by on-the-record statements?
- How do “duty days” allocations compare with jock-tax approaches in other states, and how are disputes typically handled?
- What revenue projections (if any) exist specifically for the jock-tax component compared with the broader income-tax proposal?
Research this topic more
- Washington State Legislature – income tax proposal text, bill history, and status
- Washington Department of Revenue – tax guidance and nonresident resources
- NFL – team ownership information and league procedures
- Tax Foundation – overview resources on state “jock tax” policies
- Washington Policy Center – commentary on proposed income tax impacts
Also read:
- Opinion: ‘Teachers and administrators who even SUSPECT child abuse must report to law enforcement’
Lars Larson argues that school officials in Longview failed to follow mandatory reporting laws after allegations of rape at Mark Morris High School. - CCSO investigation of deceased female located in the woods leads to arrest
A Clark County Sheriff’s Office investigation into a deceased woman found on forest land has led to the arrest of 66-year-old Andrew Brunette on murder and related charges. - Clark County Council Chair Sue Marshall will not seek reelection
Sue Marshall announced she will not run for reelection to the Clark County Council, citing family, farm life, and other priorities as she completes her final 10 months in office. - Opinion: The Democrats’ conduct was ‘downright disgusting and offensive’
Ken Vance criticizes Democratic lawmakers for refusing to stand during a State of the Union pledge and calls their conduct “disgusting and offensive.” - No cops hired so far with WA’s new $100M grant program
Washington’s new $100 million police hiring grant program has not yet distributed funds, as local officials cite technical issues and bureaucratic hurdles - Six individuals indicted after allegedly transporting more than 500 workers across border
Federal prosecutors announced indictments against six individuals accused of obtaining fraudulent H-2A visas and transporting hundreds of farmworkers to Washington state. - Opinion: The upside-down world of Washington Democrats
Nancy Churchill criticizes Washington Democrats over HB 2034, LEOFF 1 pension funds, and a proposed income tax, urging residents to oppose the bill ahead of a Feb. 26 hearing.
