New Washington ‘Millionaires Tax’ Lawsuit Challenges Ballot Language

Taxes | July 27, 2026

New Washington ‘Millionaires Tax’ Lawsuit Challenges Ballot Language

A lawsuit challenges the constitutionality of the public investment impact statement that will appear on the November ballot alongside an initiative to repeal the state’s “millionaires tax.”

By Shauna Sowers
The Seattle Times
(TNS)

A lawsuit filed Thursday challenges the constitutionality of the public investment impact statement that will appear on the November ballot alongside an initiative to repeal the state’s “millionaires tax,” opening a new legal front over the tax since it was signed into law by Gov. Bob Ferguson.

The lawsuit, filed by open government advocate Arthur West in Thurston County Superior Court, names Secretary of State Steve Hobbs and Attorney General Nick Brown as defendants.

Rather than disputing the tax itself, West’s lawsuit asks whether lawmakers can require government-written language to a citizen initiative to be added to an initiative after the petition process is complete. The case could have broader implications for how Washington’s citizen initiative process operates.

Under state law, the attorney general’s office must prepare impact statements for initiatives that would repeal or change taxes and fees in ways that could affect state revenue. Those statements are added only after signature gathering has ended and an initiative has been certified for the ballot, appearing on the ballot between the initiative description and the question presented to voters,

The attorney general’s office released the statement for the repeal income tax initiative, I-645, Thursday. It says: “This measure would decrease funding for public K-12 education, higher education (including universities and community colleges), and human services (primarily healthcare).” West argues that statement also violates the law’s own requirement that impact statement remain neutral and not prejudice the outcome of the election.

Supporters of the repeal initiative are also considering a separate legal challenge to the disclosure. Let’s Go Washington, which is running the I-645 campaign, in a news release Friday, argued the statement is inaccurate because the tax revenue has not yet been collected or allocated, making it impossible, in the group’s view, to decrease funding that does not currently exist.

Recommended Articles

The requirement to add a statement is relatively new. Democratic lawmakers approved the law in 2022, and then-Gov. Jay Inslee signed it that March. It took effect in June 2022.

West said he supports an income tax on high-earners but worries lawmakers may eventually lower the income threshold—a concern he said prompted him to sign I-645 while supporters were collecting signatures.

West said the state could publish the information elsewhere, such as in the state voters’ pamphlet, but argued placing it directly on the ballot too “heavy-handed.”

Mike Faulk, a spokesperson for the attorney general’s office, said the requirement “ensures voters receive information about initiatives they are asked to decide,” and added that the office looks forward to defending it.

“I’m not doing this to derail the initiative or to promote the initiative,” said West. “I’m doing this to support the people’s right to petition and to adopt laws independent of the Legislature.”

West also contends the 2022 law violates the separation of powers by allowing the Legislature to interfere with a constitutional right.

West points to a 2023 Change Research poll that found public investment impact statements reduced support for ballot measures by 15-19 percentage points.

The disclosure requirement has been challenged before. In 2024, Rep. Jim Walsh, R-Aberdeen, sued to block the statements from appearing on the ballot. Courts rejected the case, saying he used the wrong legal process and that the challenge needed to be brought through a lawsuit seeking a court declaration and an order requiring action.

West, a prolific litigator in the state, is seeking that type of relief in the new lawsuit, asking the court to declare the 2022 law unconstitutional and prevent the state from including the statement on the ballot.

_______

© 2026 The Seattle Times. Visit www.seattletimes.com. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency LLC.

Sign in to get access to this free resource, and all of our whitepapers and reports.

Download this content today!

Register to get free access to this content, as well as newsletters, continuing education, podcasts, and more…

Leave a Reply