Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

WA income tax clears House after 24-hour debate

seattletimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 193 posts

Re: WA income tax clears House after 24-hour debate

#151

Post by thewebguyd »

pc86 wrote: post #138
thewebguyd wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The best example I can think of for >$1M W2 earners are highly specialized physicians, and maybe some even more specialized (and prolific) attorneys. Aren't they already contributing a lot? That depends on how much they are consuming within the state and paying sales tax. If they are W2 earners, they aren't contributing via B&O tax like businesses do, and so essentially they just contribute the same as anyone else…

> they aren't contributing via B&O tax like businesses do Well they're not businesses so that makes sense. > "just" proportional to how much money they spend (emphasis mine) Yeah, which for most of them is going to be a lot more than someone earning a fraction of what they earn, so they do actually contribute more in absolute terms, even if for some reason you think that their contributing less on a percentage basis…

Prior to the tax, the bottom 20% of Washington earners pay between 13-17% of their income in state and local taxes through the regressive tax system. The top 1% of earners pay closer to 3%.

In absolute terms, yes, of course someone making $2M/year will spend a lot more money than someone earning $40k, but they don't spend 50 times more. They don't need 50 times more food, or 50 times more gas, etc.

For the $2M earner, any surplus likely isn't spent locally but is invested instead, which leaks the money out of the state into global markets.

And that's the problem with regressive tax codes in general, the tax base is disconnected from the state's actual wealth growth. Washington's regressive tax system makes the state fund itself using only money from the working class while the state's largest pool of potential revenue remains locked away in global markets.

Re: WA income tax clears House after 24-hour debate

#152

Post by _b »

alkonaut wrote: post #147
_b wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Washington's constitution says: "The word 'property' as used herein shall mean and include everything, whether tangible or intangible, subject to ownership". That is extremely broad, and there is 90 years of precedent affirming income is include here as something intangible and "subject to ownership."

So if one has income tax and property tax separate (which I guess happens now) then presumably one has also codified that income is _not_ property (which I guess is the more common state of affairs )?

If ordinary laws could redefine words in the constitution, then every constitutional right and protection you care about is undercut.

Re: WA income tax clears House after 24-hour debate

#153

Post by thewebguyd »

alkonaut wrote: post #148
thewebguyd wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Wouldn't such a change have to be made by the same legislature with a similar majority? Yes. The legislature voted on the additional language and it did not pass. > The WA constitution doesn't seem to have anything to say on income tax, just a lot about property tax? Washington state treats income as property, and property taxes must be uniform and flat within a specific property class. Technically, this law does r…

But simply changing the constitution to just allow an income tax is politically impossible? The majority isn’t big enough?

Yeah, majority isn't big enough.

To modify the state constitution, you need 2/3 vote in both the house and the senate, and it also must be approved by a simple majority of voters in the next general election.

Since republicans are always unified against an income tax, dems only hold a 30-19 majority in the senate, and a 59-39 majority in the house, missing 3 and 7 votes respectively.

The plan for this tax is basically to have it challenged on purpose and leave it up to the state supreme court to re-interpret the constitution, and consider this an excise tax, which is the same way they were able to pass the state's capital gains tax.

Re: WA income tax clears House after 24-hour debate

#154

Post by lostmsu »

garbawarb wrote: post #127
lostmsu wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We settled on Canada for their decent PISA scores. Singapore would have been the top choice, but it has very high immigration barriers.

Are drugs in high schools really a problem in WA? Where are you in Canada and how does it compare?

There's no direct data on high school prevalence, so I am assuming overall drug statistics are a decent proxy. Overdose deaths are really bad in WA even relative to US on average.

Canada is significantly better in this regard. We are picking between Ontario and Alberta with a possibility of Quebec if they issue an invitation.

Re: WA income tax clears House after 24-hour debate

#155

Post by SecretDreams »

rayiner wrote: post #99
SecretDreams wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The income disparity between Germany and California is gargantuan as you approach the top percentiles. In the 1%, average income in Germany is 272k usd. In California, it's north of 1mil usd. At 0.1%, it's 1.1 mil usd in Germany and 3.2+ mil in California. The distributions between high and low income earners are much flatter in Germany because it is harder to abuse the system to get to such salaries. No so in Americ…

You’re comparing to California, but we’re talking about this proposed Washington tax. California’s tax schedule is actually much more like Germany’s than this proposed Washington income tax. In California, the big jump comes at $72,000, where the 9.3% rate kicks in. The $742,000 rate is only a little higher, at 12.3%. That’s similar to Germany where 42% kicks in at 70,000 euros (top 15%) and the top rate is only a li…

California and WA are similar in income distributions to what I quoted. Seattle is more extreme. Very affluent at the top.

Can't comment how total tax in Germany might compare to the current discussion.

Re: WA income tax clears House after 24-hour debate

#156

Post by SecretDreams »

rayiner wrote: post #133
abracadaniel wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don’t clear $50m a year by paying people what they’re worth. The wages are unfair, by definition, if there is someone able to skim away that much at the top.

Your definition of “unfair” is quite peculiar. By your logic, the same salary for the same work can go from being “fair” to “unfair” depending on how many employees you have.

No, it's as simple as income ratios between the lowest and highest paid employee in a company. Above a threshold starts to be completely divorced from their respective work ethics and general intelligences. It's more just an abuse of systems that have been built up over time specifically to allow for that level of exploitation.

Quoting supply and demand in labour is just insulting and indicative of someone maybe getting a bit too high on their own supply.

Re: WA income tax clears House after 24-hour debate

#157

Post by salawat »

adam_arthur wrote: post #81
salawat wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean, most property developers are playing shell games to avoid the requirement of having to build school districts anyway in Texas from my experience living there. Build small developments up to just short of the line where it's required, then continue development as a different legal fiction with what turns out to be ultimately the same beneficent owners. Texas education system leaves much to be desired.

I'm not familiar with that specific example, but I do know that independent players in any economic system will follow the incentives. Expecting companies, people etc to do the "right thing" when it's financially disincentivized usually doesn't work out. Same will happen in regards to all these new taxes reinforcing existing population migration trends.

The system is simple. Your development hits a certain size, you have to build and fund a school for the community through fees if you're renting. So they go just short of the line, and crap out two developments and no schools, and leave the populace to figure out the rest. That isn't following incentives. That's being an asshat.

Re: WA income tax clears House after 24-hour debate

#158

Post by rayiner »

SecretDreams wrote: post #155
rayiner wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You’re comparing to California, but we’re talking about this proposed Washington tax. California’s tax schedule is actually much more like Germany’s than this proposed Washington income tax. In California, the big jump comes at $72,000, where the 9.3% rate kicks in. The $742,000 rate is only a little higher, at 12.3%. That’s similar to Germany where 42% kicks in at 70,000 euros (top 15%) and the top rate is only a li…

California and WA are similar in income distributions to what I quoted. Seattle is more extreme. Very affluent at the top. Can't comment how total tax in Germany might compare to the current discussion.

> California and WA are similar in income distributions to what I quoted

Yes, but Washington’s proposed income tax is extremely skewed, while California’s is pretty flat.

Re: WA income tax clears House after 24-hour debate

#159

Post by rayiner »

SecretDreams wrote: post #156
rayiner wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your definition of “unfair” is quite peculiar. By your logic, the same salary for the same work can go from being “fair” to “unfair” depending on how many employees you have.

No, it's as simple as income ratios between the lowest and highest paid employee in a company. Above a threshold starts to be completely divorced from their respective work ethics and general intelligences. It's more just an abuse of systems that have been built up over time specifically to allow for that level of exploitation. Quoting supply and demand in labour is just insulting and indicative of someone maybe gett…

> income ratios between the lowest and highest paid employee in a company

What is the mathematical or economic significance of this ratio?

Re: WA income tax clears House after 24-hour debate

#160

Post by keybored »

mil22 wrote: post #111
abracadaniel wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The person earning $50m a year is profiting on the labor of hundreds of thousands of people. Rent seeking on their labor and skills, relying 100,000x more on the infrastructure that made them rich. No one makes $50m a year in a vacuum, they do so by utilizing the economy they live in and rely on.

If that's the way you see it, you are also free to do so. Labor is a market and the laws of supply and demand are at play just like any other market. Go start a company and hire some people. This is Y Combinator's Hacker News after all. The world needs more founders.

The comment you’re responding to claims that wage labor is exploitation on the part of the employer. That they can become exploiters themselves is usually not a convincing argument to them.

It’s also like telling someone with just eighty bucks to their name and debt up to their ears that they can try to win the lottery.

Post reply on HN