Supreme Court tosses estate tax
The AP intro says it best:
But at least one legislator was welcoming it: the son of a Tim Eyman ally, state Sen. Dan Roach, embraced the ruling. He called it "a big win for taxpayers."
"No question it will make it harder to balance the budget, but they shouldn't have collected it in the first place," Roach added.
They shouldn't have collected it in the first place? Oh - that's right. We forgot. Low income families are supposed to bear a majority of the tax burden in this state. They should sacrifice what little they have while the people who already have more than enough shouldn't have to make a significant contribution.
People like Dan Roach evidently don't care about the fact that our state has a regressive tax structure; they're only interested in reducing taxes for wealthy people and catering to special interests - because the estate tax is mainly levied on the wealthy. Their priority is not the average citizen. But Dan Roach is a Republican, and Republicans are in the minority.
The state's estate tax was thrown out on a technicality. It should be properly reinstated so we can regain the revenue stream that has just been taken away. This is lost revenue that we simply need to restore. It's not going to be a new tax. Lawmakers should have taken action on this earlier, but unfortunately in years past, Republicans have controlled the state Senate.
Not this year. Democrats control both houses. The bottom line is that legislators need to recognize the severe damage this ruling will cause if nothing is done to restore the revenue that has just been taken out. And they should act quickly so that the state's budget crisis doesn't needlessly get worse.
The state Supreme Court threw out Washington's estate tax Thursday, causing a potential loss of $430 million over the next two years at a time when lawmakers already are facing a $1.8 billion spending gap.Great. Surely Governor Gregoire and our state's lawmakers will welcome this unfortunate ruling as it deals a huge blow to their plans to come up with a budget for the next biennium.
But at least one legislator was welcoming it: the son of a Tim Eyman ally, state Sen. Dan Roach, embraced the ruling. He called it "a big win for taxpayers."
"No question it will make it harder to balance the budget, but they shouldn't have collected it in the first place," Roach added.
They shouldn't have collected it in the first place? Oh - that's right. We forgot. Low income families are supposed to bear a majority of the tax burden in this state. They should sacrifice what little they have while the people who already have more than enough shouldn't have to make a significant contribution.
People like Dan Roach evidently don't care about the fact that our state has a regressive tax structure; they're only interested in reducing taxes for wealthy people and catering to special interests - because the estate tax is mainly levied on the wealthy. Their priority is not the average citizen. But Dan Roach is a Republican, and Republicans are in the minority.
The state's estate tax was thrown out on a technicality. It should be properly reinstated so we can regain the revenue stream that has just been taken away. This is lost revenue that we simply need to restore. It's not going to be a new tax. Lawmakers should have taken action on this earlier, but unfortunately in years past, Republicans have controlled the state Senate.
Not this year. Democrats control both houses. The bottom line is that legislators need to recognize the severe damage this ruling will cause if nothing is done to restore the revenue that has just been taken out. And they should act quickly so that the state's budget crisis doesn't needlessly get worse.
