Tag Archives: taxes

Schoesler impressed by opposition to property-tax increase bill

This is no April Fools’ Day joke: A proposal introduced by Senate Democrats that would significantly raise property taxes in Washington saw more than 43,000 people sign in to oppose it, more than four times the opposition received for any previous bill to receive a public hearing in the Senate.

Senate Bill 5978 would eliminate the 1% cap on annual property-tax increases by state and local governments without requiring voter approval. Future rate increases would be tied to inflation and population growth, potentially raising property taxes by 8% to 9% annually.

Sen. Mark Schoesler, who as a member of the Senate Ways and Means Committee sat through Monday’s public hearing on SB 5978, said the record number of people reaching out to the Senate to express opposition to the measure is a crystal-clear sign from the public that it strongly opposes efforts to raise property taxes. The video of the public hearing on SB 5798 can be viewed here.

“Throughout this session, the strongest opposition that my office has received on any tax-increase legislation has been on bills to raise property taxes, especially the bill we heard in Ways and Means Monday night,” said Schoesler, R-Ritzville. “I already knew how unpopular it would be to raise property taxes. But the hearing on SB 5978 was very historic when you realize that over 43,000 people – which is greater than Martin Stadium’s seating capacity at WSU and almost would fill up T-Mobile Park in Seattle – signed up to say they are against this terrible bill.”

Despite the record-shattering public opposition, Democrats on the committee are expected to pass SB 5978 during its meeting on Thursday. If that happens, the proposal will advance to the Senate Rules Committee, the final hurdle before SB 5978 can reach the Senate floor for a full vote.

“Not a single constituent in my 9th Legislative District has told me they support this bill. In fact, everyone I’ve talked to about this bill has clearly said they don’t want to have more taxes on their home. It’s really disappointing the Democrats on the Ways and Means Committee don’t seem to respect the public’s wishes by killing this bill. When over 43,000 people take time to tell committee members they oppose a certain bill, you’d think those members would listen and think twice about passing it. Unfortunately, the Democrats’ overzealous desire and commitment to squeeze more money out of hard-working Washingtonians knows no bounds,” said Schoesler.

Schoesler blasts Senate operating budget for out-of-control spending, record-setting taxes

The new two-year state operating-budget proposal passed by Senate Democrats today needlessly increases spending and raises taxes by a record amount, says Sen. Mark Schoesler.

The Senate’s operating budget was passed 28-21, with Schoesler and all other Republicans and two Democrats voting against it.

The Senate Democrats’ operating budget has a total price tag of $78.6 billion, a 9% spending increase over the current two-year budget.

“There are two main problems with the Senate Democrats’ operating budget: It raises taxes and overspends, despite the state facing a budget shortfall of more than $6 billion,” said Schoesler, R-Ritzville. “In fact, their budget adds an obscenely large amount – $12.1 billion – in new policy spending. At a time when state government should live within the existing revenue, Democrats again are insisting on unsustainable spending, putting our state on a path that eventually could hurt the vulnerable. It even spends nearly all of the state’s rainy-day fund, which is risky in itself since that money is meant for true budget emergencies, not to cover the Democrats’ unending desire to grow government, at the expense of hard-working Washingtonians.”

Schoesler points out the Senate Democrats’ operating budget would impose over $21 billion in new or higher taxes, including a hike in the amount state and local governments can raise property-tax rates annually without voter approval.

“Keep in mind Democrats last year planned to triple the allowable growth rate for property taxes to 3% annually, from 1%, but they backed off due to strong public opposition. The Senate Ds’ new plan would eliminate any cap. You and other property owners could face annual property-tax increases of 8% or higher. Such a large hike in property taxes year after year could force many homeowners and renters out of their homes at a time when housing is already a challenge for many in Washington,” said Schoesler.

On top of their proposed tax hikes, Senate Democrats want to increase fees that would hit many families. They have proposed raising tuition by $3,000 a year per family, which flies in the face of the tuition freeze that the Senate Majority Coalition Caucus (Republicans plus two Democrats) achieved many years ago, as well as eliminating financial aid for about 17,000 students. Democrats also want to double long-term care fees, adding $90 million in costs that will be passed on to Washington residents who pay privately for long-term care insurance, which makes the WA Cares program even more costly.

During debate on the operating budget, Republicans tried to pass a floor amendment that would have replaced the Democrats’ operating budget with the Republican budget proposal, which would not require any tax increases while maintaining spending levels for essential state services.

“Our Republican plan avoids the false argument that you either have to significantly raise taxes or drastically reduce spending to balance the state operating budget. Our plan offers a sensible third way to address the budget shortfall. Unfortunately, the floor amendment to use the Republican budget was rejected by majority Democrats on a party-line vote,” said Schoesler, who pointed out that the Republican budget plan also would allow the Discover Pass fee and hunting and fishing license fees to remain untouched.

“The majority budget is going to tax the people who fish and hunt to help the general-fund budget. That is just wrong. Our friends and neighbors should not be treated like they are millionaires to get more money out of them,” said Schoesler.

The House of Representatives is expected to pass its version of the operating budget on Monday. After that happens, Senate and House budget leaders will meet to work out differences between the two proposals and agree on a compromise budget.

 

Republican senators question timing, purpose of proposed payments to farm-fuel users

Sen. Mark Schoesler

OLYMPIA… The two state senators who farm in eastern Washington say they’re not sure what to make of a proposed offer of money for farm-fuel users who got stuck paying a surcharge on their fuel purchases because of the state’s cap-and-trade law.

The payments, which could amount to no more than pennies per gallon for many farming operations, are offered in the state Senate’s supplemental operating-budget proposal.

Sen. Perry Dozier

“I don’t know anyone in the agricultural sector who would view this as a solution to the fuel-surcharge issue we’ve been fighting more than a year, since cap-and-trade was fully implemented,” said Sen. Perry Dozier, R-Waitsburg.

“These payments wouldn’t come close to making up for what farm-fuel users have been forced to pay because the executive branch of state government failed to uphold the promise made in the cap-and-trade law – that farm diesel and fuel used by the maritime industry would be exempt from the surcharge this new program would create,” said Sen. Mark Schoesler, R-Ritzville.

Schoesler serves on the Senate Ways and Means Committee, which held a public hearing yesterday on the proposed supplemental operating budget. The budget appropriation doesn’t refer to the payments as rebates or reimbursements, and routes them through the state Department of Licensing – not the Department of Ecology, which is responsible for implementing the cap-and-trade law.

“Are these payments a way for the state to ease its guilty conscience for failing so badly on upholding the promised fuel-surcharge exemption? Does the timing have anything to do with the certification of the initiative to repeal the cap-and-trade law? Are the supporters of cap-and-trade just looking to throw a bone to agriculture? No one who buys farm fuel by the truckload would come up with this,” said Dozier.

Dozier and Schoesler are the sponsors of Senate Bill 5728, introduced in 2023. It would basically force Ecology to develop a process for implementing the promised exemptions. The bill has been ignored, and a task force set up by Ecology during the summer failed to completely resolve industry concerns.

Given that background, the senators were surprised to see a $30 million appropriation, buried on page 564 of the new Senate budget proposal, “solely for payments to support farm fuel users and transporters who have purchased fuel for agricultural purposes that is exempt from the requirements of the Climate Commitment Act… but paid a surcharge or an additional fee.”

The payments would be made by the Department of Licensing to “noncorporate farms” first – a term not defined in the budget bill – depending on annual farm-fuel consumption. The first tier, those using less than 1,000 gallons annually, would receive $600; the second tier, between 1,000 and 4,000 gallons consumed, would get $2,300; and those using 4,000 gallons or more a year would receive $3,400.

“It’s a lame proposal because most farms of any size operate as a corporation,” said Schoesler. “On top of that these tiers make no sense, except they’re consistent with the whole premise of cap-and-trade – or ‘cap-and-tax,’ as it should really be called. This law is about punishing people who use fossil fuel. It’s as though they think there are electric combines down at the farm-equipment dealer.”

Dozier agrees the tiered approach is not realistic. “One tractor pulling a heavy load can go through 25 gallons of fuel an hour. At that rate just one week of 10-hour workdays will blow past the 1,000-gallon threshold.

“It’s not difficult for a farm to go through 30,000 gallons of diesel in a year. Under this proposal, that’s 11 cents per gallon. Adding more tiers based on 10,000-gallon increments would be a slight improvement, but if the intent is to honestly compensate users who have been paying the surcharge, the payments to them should really be gallon for gallon, with no tiers at all.”

The Senate budget proposal also includes $35 million to provide low-income households with energy utility bill assistance. Like the payments proposed for farm-fuel users, those subsidies would be funded with proceeds from the cap-and-trade law, which has enabled state government to rake in about $1.8 billion in the past year from auctioning “carbon allowances.”

“In December the governor proposed using cap-and-trade money to subsidize low-income households. It wasn’t a surprise to also see it in the Senate budget. But this money to pay farm-fuel users feels like something thrown in at the last minute by people who don’t understand agriculture,” said Schoesler.

“This is a pretty responsible budget proposal overall, and I appreciate that Republicans had a fair amount of input about the priorities,” said Dozier, “but it needs some work to be a budget that truly respects the needs of agriculture.”

Three Schoesler bills move ahead before key Senate deadline

In the hours before a key voting deadline this session, the Senate unanimously passed three bills introduced by 9th District Sen. Mark Schoesler, R-Ritzville.

Today is the first “floor cutoff” of the 2024 legislative session. Senate bills not approved by the Senate by 5 p.m. today are considered dead for the year. Bills that are deemed necessary to implement the state supplemental operating, capital and transportation budgets are exempt from this deadline.

SB 5344 – Helping school districts with construction-project costs

Senate Bill 5344 would create a public-school revolving fund that would be used to issue low-interest or interest-free loans to qualifying school districts for capital projects.

“We all know what a great success the state’s public works trust fund is,” said Schoesler, the Republican leader on the Senate capital budget, speaking before the vote on SB 5344. “We’re replicating that with this approach and hopefully improving access to very low-cost financing for at least a portion of our school construction. This will be good for small schools, medium-sized and bigger schools. It creates a place where we can place our money in the future and keep it recirculating back for school construction all across our state.”

SB 6162 – Excessive fees for locating abandoned property

Senate Bill 6162 would add a penalty for excessive fees for locating abandoned property held by a county. Under the proposal, someone who violates the prohibition on excessive fees for locating and recovering unclaimed property held by a county would be guilty of a misdemeanor and would face 90 days jail, a fine up to $1,000,  or both.

Schoesler dubbed it a “technical clean-up measure” that is a fix to an unclaimed-property law from 2023 in which the penalty for predatory practices on unclaimed property was inadvertently left out.

SB 6215 – Improving tax and revenue laws

Senate Bill 6215 would make administrative and technical changes to the state’s tax and licensing codes.

“This is my annual clean-up bill for the state’s tax and licensing codes,” said Schoesler. “We always seem to discover a few codes here and there that need to be updated and this is the latest clean-up measure for those codes.”

All three Schoesler bills move to the House of Representatives for further consideration.