Newly uncovered records suggest Washington Democrats and senior attorneys in the state Attorney General’s Office were not simply drafting a “millionaire’s tax” to raise revenue; they were deliberately building a legal test case to try to overturn nearly a century of case law banning a graduated income tax in Washington.
According to nearly 1,000 pages of records obtained by The Center Square, Senate Majority Leader Jamie Pedersen, the sponsor of SB 6346, wrote in an email that he wanted to “force the Washington Supreme Court to reconsider its caselaw that considers income to be property.” The strategy matters because if the court overturns that precedent, the Legislature could potentially impose a broader progressive income tax by simple majority vote and avoid a constitutional amendment which has been voted down many times by Washingtonians.
Gov. Bob Ferguson signed SB 6346 into law on March 30. The measure imposes a 9.9% tax on income above $1 million, beginning in 2028. It is already facing a lawsuit from the Citizen Action Defense Fund, led by former Attorney General Rob McKenna and former Washington Supreme Court Justice Phil Talmadge, arguing the tax violates the state constitution because Washington courts have long held that income is property and property taxes must be uniform and capped at 1%.
On The Ari Hoffman Show on Talk Radio 570 KVI, Center Square investigative reporter TJ Martinell, who obtained the records, said what stood out was that the Attorney General’s Office was not merely advising lawmakers on whether the tax was legal under current law.
“What they were giving them counsel on was how to undermine it, how to get it overturned,” Martinell said. “The purpose of this millionaire’s tax … is not to collect revenue to fund certain programs. It’s to overturn a century of state Supreme Court rulings that have said that income is property.”
Martinell said the internal guidance appeared tailored to make sure the court would have to confront the issue directly.
“They’re trying to force the state Supreme Court to make a decision by the way that they crafted this bill,” he said. “They even called them, like, get rid of this marriage penalty thing and don’t call it an excise tax because then the state Supreme Court doesn’t have to address the issues.”
That matches what is now publicly known from the records. According to The Center Square’s reporting, attorneys advised against calling the measure an excise tax and instead recommended lawmakers “tee it up as a test case” to challenge the “income = property” line of cases.
Martinell also highlighted another key point: the use of the bill’s clause blocking a referendum challenge.
“When solicitor general was advising Senator Pedersen on his bill, he said, ‘Hey, there’s no emergency clause. You could have a referendum run against it,’” Martinell told Hoffman.
Critics have argued for weeks that Democrats structured the legislation to deny voters the fastest path to overturn it. The complaint filed in Klickitat County makes the same argument, noting that lawmakers declared the act “necessary” even though it does not take effect until January 1, 2028, with taxes not collected until 2029.
Martinell said the implications are far broader than a tax on millionaires.
“It means that everyone in the state could be subject to an income tax at any rate,” he said, adding that the so-called millionaire’s tax is “intended to overturn case law that prevents them from passing a progressive income tax on everybody by a simple majority vote rather than requiring a constitutional amendment in which voters get to weigh in on it.”
The revelations come as Washington is already dealing with signs of economic strain. The thread around the tax fight has included layoffs at Oracle, Meta, Microsoft, and Amazon, a visible shift of jobs from Seattle to Bellevue, rising office vacancy downtown, luxury home listings increasing after the tax passed, and warnings from business leaders that capital and talent are leaving the state. The lawsuit itself argues Washington’s lack of an income tax has long been a key competitive advantage and cites survey data showing 44% of business leaders are considering moving their personal residence out of state.
CADF executive director Jackson Maynard told The Center Square he was alarmed by the reported communications, saying the Attorney General’s role is to defend the constitution, not help lawmakers find ways around it.
Martinell said there may be more to come.
“This public records request is not done,” he said on KVI. “I’m still expected to get more records.”
