Less than half a percent of residents will owe anything at all.
In a state long defined by its absence of income tax, Washington has chosen a different path — one that asks its wealthiest residents to contribute while shielding everyone else from the burden. Governor Bob Ferguson signed into law a 9.9% tax on individual earnings above one million dollars, touching fewer than half a percent of the population, yet projected to generate three billion dollars annually by 2028. The revenue is earmarked not for abstraction but for tangible relief: school meals, tax credits for working families, and the removal of sales tax on everyday essentials. It is, at its core, a wager that targeted obligation at the top can produce shared dignity at the bottom.
- Washington has broken a long-standing tradition, becoming the first of nine no-income-tax states to introduce one — a move that carries both political weight and legal risk.
- Republican lawmakers have moved swiftly to challenge the law, citing constitutional concerns and warning that high earners may simply leave the state, hollowing out the very revenue the law depends on.
- The 2028 implementation date buys time, but also suspense — the law's survival through legal challenges and potential ballot referendums is far from guaranteed.
- Nearly half of projected revenue is designed to flow back to residents in the form of expanded tax credits, free school meals, and relief from sales taxes on basic goods.
- For families like that of single mother Athena Dunn, the expanded Working Families Tax Credit is not a policy abstraction — it is the margin between stability and hardship.
Washington state has done what nine other states have long declined to do: it has created an income tax. But the law Governor Bob Ferguson signed carries a deliberate asymmetry. Residents earning under one million dollars a year owe nothing. Only those whose income crosses that threshold will pay — and only on the dollars above it, at a rate of 9.9%. Fewer than 30,000 households, less than half a percent of the state's population, will ever see a bill.
The law will not take effect until 2028, giving the state time to build the necessary infrastructure and giving affected residents time to plan. Once active, it is projected to bring in more than three billion dollars a year. The design of that spending is as deliberate as the tax itself: in the first year, over 40% of revenue returns directly to residents through expanded credits and relief, rising to nearly half by the second year. Sales tax on baby diapers will be eliminated. Free school meals will reach every K-12 student. The Working Families Tax Credit — which already returns a portion of sales taxes to lower-income households — will expand to benefit roughly 460,000 additional families, with annual payments ranging from $300 to $1,300.
The human stakes are real. Athena Dunn, a single parent, credits the existing tax credit program with making it possible to stay in school while raising her children. She graduates this June. For families navigating that kind of edge, the expanded program is not a footnote — it is a lifeline.
Opposition has arrived quickly. Republican lawmakers call the tax unconstitutional and warn that wealthy residents will simply relocate, eroding the revenue base before it can deliver on its promises. Whether that fear proves founded remains an open question. What is settled is that Washington has made its bet: that a narrow tax on the few can fund meaningful relief for the many.
Washington state has taken a step that nine other states have long resisted: it has introduced an income tax. But this one comes with a sharp distinction. Governor Bob Ferguson signed Senate Bill 6346 into law on Monday, creating what supporters are calling a "Robin Hood" tax—one that leaves nearly everyone alone while asking the wealthy to contribute more.
The mechanics are straightforward. Anyone earning under $1 million a year pays nothing to the state in income tax. They keep what they make. But residents whose income exceeds that threshold will owe 9.9% on every dollar above the million-dollar mark. The tax applies only to earned income; homes, property, and other assets are excluded from the calculation. The state estimates that fewer than 20,000 to 30,000 households—less than half a percent of Washington's population—will actually owe anything under this system.
The law will not take effect until 2028, giving the state time to prepare its tax infrastructure and giving affected residents time to adjust their planning. When it does begin, the state projects it will collect more than $3 billion annually. That money has a specific purpose. In the first year, 41.3% of the revenue will flow directly back to residents through expanded tax credits and relief. By the second year, that share rises to 47.3%. The state plans to eliminate sales tax on essentials like baby diapers, provide free school meals to all K-12 students, and expand the Working Families Tax Credit program—a federal model that returns part of the sales tax paid by lower-income residents each year. About 460,000 additional low- and middle-income families are expected to benefit from expanded tax credits, receiving payments between $300 and $1,300 annually.
The human impact is already visible. Athena Dunn, a single parent, credits the Working Families Tax Credit with allowing her to stay in school while raising her family. She is set to graduate with her bachelor's degree this June. For families like hers, the expanded program represents genuine breathing room—money that can mean the difference between staying afloat and falling behind.
Washington joins a small group of states that have long operated without a personal income tax: Alaska, Florida, Nevada, New Hampshire, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, and Wyoming. But this new law marks a departure from that tradition. Supporters argue it will help close the state's budget deficit while easing pressure on the middle class and small businesses. The revenue will also fund education, healthcare, and other public services that have faced chronic underfunding.
Opposition has been swift and vocal. Republican lawmakers argue the tax is unconstitutional and warn that it could drive wealthy residents out of the state, potentially undermining the revenue projections that justify the entire scheme. Whether that concern is warranted remains to be seen. What is clear is that Washington has chosen to break with its tax-free past, betting that a narrow, targeted tax on high earners can fund broad relief for everyone else.
Citações Notáveis
The expanded tax credit allowed her to stay in school and complete her degree while raising her family as a single parent.— Athena Dunn, beneficiary of Working Families Tax Credit program
A Conversa do Hearth Outra perspectiva sobre a história
Why did Washington wait until 2028 to implement this? That's nearly two years away.
It gives the state time to build the tax infrastructure and gives people time to adjust. It's also a political buffer—lets the initial controversy cool before the actual bills arrive.
So only 20,000 to 30,000 households pay anything. That's a tiny slice of the population.
Right. Less than half a percent. But that slice is where the money is. Three billion dollars a year from a sliver of earners—that's the math that makes the whole thing work for everyone else.
What happens if wealthy people actually leave the state?
That's the real risk nobody can quantify yet. If even a few thousand high earners relocate, the revenue projections collapse. The whole structure depends on them staying put.
And the money goes to school meals and tax credits. That's not abstract.
No. It's direct. A family gets $300 to $1,300 back. A kid gets a free lunch. Those are real things people can feel immediately.
Why call it the Robin Hood bill?
Because it's explicit about what it's doing—taking from the wealthy to give to everyone else. There's no pretense of trickle-down theory or growth incentives. It's redistribution by design.