Washington millionaire-tax repeal heads to ballot as lawsuits challenge wording

Washington voters are scheduled to decide Nov. 3 whether to repeal the state’s new 9.9% tax on annual individual income above $1 million. Initiative 645 met the signature requirement and was certified for the statewide ballot by July 22, but two separate lawsuits are challenging how the measure’s financial and public-investment effects will be presented to voters.

The disputes do not currently amount to a court-ordered removal of Initiative 645 from the ballot. They concern the wording and disclosures that will accompany the measure.

What voters will decide

Initiative 645 would repeal the high-income tax approved by lawmakers in 2026. Under current law, the tax is scheduled to begin in calendar year 2028 and applies to annual individual income above $1 million.

The measure would also prohibit state and local governments from imposing taxes on individual income or taxes measured by an individual’s income. It would define income for purposes of those provisions. The official explanatory statement says that non-income-tax credits, exemptions and deductions enacted with the 2026 tax law would remain in place if Initiative 645 passes.

Two lawsuits, different claims

One lawsuit was filed by Let’s Go Washington, the political committee backing Initiative 645. The group argues that the state’s public-investment impact disclosure inaccurately describes what repealing the tax would do to Washington’s budget. Its challenge seeks revised language and contends that the state’s description could prejudice voters against the measure.

A separate lawsuit was filed by open-government activist Arthur West in Thurston County Superior Court. West argues that requiring the public-investment impact disclosure is unconstitutional because it interferes with the citizen-initiative process. He is seeking an injunction that would prevent the disclosure from appearing on ballots.

The cases are not a single consolidated challenge and do not seek identical remedies. The Initiative 645 campaign is contesting the substance of the state’s description, while West is challenging the legal requirement for the disclosure itself.

What is settled and what is not

The Washington Secretary of State’s signature statistics listed IP26-645 as certified after sponsors submitted more than the 308,911 signatures required for an initiative to reach voters. The secretary’s ballot-information page lists the measure’s full text, ballot title, explanatory statement, fiscal-impact statement and public-investment impact disclosure.

Those materials are separate from a court ruling on the lawsuits. As of July 29, no final ruling had been identified that removed Initiative 645 from the ballot or resolved the competing challenges to its wording.

The Washington Supreme Court’s May ruling provides earlier procedural context. The court rejected an effort to place a referendum against the income tax on the fall ballot, but opponents could still pursue an initiative. Initiative 645 is that separate initiative route; the May decision did not decide the current lawsuits over ballot disclosures.

Why the wording matters

Voters will rely on the official ballot title, explanatory statement and fiscal materials when evaluating whether to keep or repeal the tax. Washington law requires fiscal-impact statements to describe projected changes in government revenue, costs, expenditures or indebtedness if a ballot measure is approved.

The state’s fiscal-impact statement estimates that approving Initiative 645 would reduce state revenue by about $11.4 billion over state fiscal years 2027 through 2031. The statement says the projected reduction would affect funding available for services including public K-12 education, higher education and human services. Those are projections based on stated assumptions, not final budget outcomes.

The public-investment disclosure separately says the measure would decrease funding for public K-12 education, higher education and human services, primarily healthcare. Whether that wording remains unchanged could depend on the pending litigation.

A hearing in West’s case is scheduled for Aug. 7, according to the Washington State Standard. The next developments to watch are court orders, any revisions to the official ballot materials and the statewide vote on Nov. 3, 2026.

Sources

• Washington State Standard report on the two lawsuits
• Washington Secretary of State Initiative 645 ballot materials
• Washington Revised Code RCW 29A.72.025