Washington lawmakers consider uncapping tax on big tech companies to fund higher ed
The Suzzallo Library at University of Washington. (Getty Images)
A battle is brewing in the Washington Legislature over a Democratic bill that would hike a tax on large technology companies to raise more money for higher education, including student financial aid.
The 'advanced computing surcharge' applies to firms with global revenue above $25 billion — think Microsoft and Amazon. But the amount each taxpayer owes is limited to $9 million a year.
House Bill 1839 would eliminate that cap. It's a move that could more than triple the collections seen from the surcharge in each of the past three years, pushing up revenue by around $200 million annually, according to estimates attached to the legislation.
The surcharge stems from a package of higher education programs lawmakers approved in 2019 that included the Washington College Grant — touted by supporters as one of the most generous state tuition assistance programs in the nation for low- and middle-income students.
Proponents of uncapping the tax say it could strengthen the grant program and provide a needed boost for other higher education spending.
'It's just getting rid of an arbitrary and unnecessary giveaway to some of the biggest technology companies in the world,' said Carolyn Brotherton, who works on tax issues for the progressive Economic Opportunity Institute.
'Higher education is one of the first things on the chopping block every time there's a revenue shortfall,' she added.
But even backers of the legislation acknowledge it could be a tough sell this year as lawmakers deal with a multibillion-dollar budget deficit that may pull Democrats in the direction of more general tax increases, rather than ones where revenue is dedicated to specific programs.
Still, supporters of the bill say it is a serious proposal. Rep. April Berg, D-Mill Creek, chairs the House Finance Committee and is a co-sponsor. 'It's a real discussion,' she said after the committee held a hearing on the bill last week. 'It's absolutely still in play.'
Business groups are already staking out opposition. Republicans, too.
Senate Minority Leader John Braun, R-Centralia, described the bill as 'counterproductive' and an 'attack' on one of the state's key business sectors. He and other GOP lawmakers paint the proposal as one in a slate of misguided tax ideas from Democrats.
Democrats hold majorities in both chambers of the Legislature and have been contemplating options for new or higher taxes since late last year. They need to write a budget in the weeks ahead that solves a shortfall estimated to be $12 billion to $15 billion over four years.
For now, they say their attention is focused on finding savings and leaders have not thrown their weight behind specific tax bills.
But Senate Majority Leader Jamie Pedersen, D-Seattle, cast doubt last week on whether raising the advanced computing surcharge to fund higher education would be the right move.
'I think we have broader problems than higher ed,' he said. 'So probably, as we think about tackling revenue, we're going to be looking for bigger and broader solutions.'
A list of tax ideas that surfaced in December after a Democratic policy retreat included a proposal to remove the cap.
'Companies are not thrilled about the overall tax conversation right now,' the bill's lead sponsor, Rep. Julia Reed, D-Seattle, told the Standard after testifying on the bill in the House Finance Committee. 'If this was a normal year, and we were talking just about the ACS surcharge and not about that plus other ideas, maybe they would be a little bit more excited.'
Reed said she felt confident since her bill got a hearing, but added that it will have to be considered in the context of the overall revenue package Democrats put together. She said that if the tax increase were to win approval, it could allow for expanding eligibility for full awards under the college grant program.
'It will generate meaningful revenue and allow us to achieve some of our goals that we've been working towards for a long time,' she said.
Between fiscal years 2021 and 2024, collections of the surcharge totaled between $55 million and $68 million annually, according to figures from the state's Department of Revenue. But which companies have been paying the tax is not clear.
The advanced computing surcharge was one of the taxes adopted to support the Workforce Education Investment Act, a 2019 law focused on strengthening student financial aid and better-preparing students for careers in science and technology fields and other in-demand professions.
In 2020, lawmakers reworked the package of taxes that support the law, partly due to concerns revenue would be inadequate to cover the cost of the grant program. It was at this time that the advanced computing surcharge took on its current form as a 1.22% tax with a $9 million cap. Pedersen sponsored this bill to retool the taxes.
Notably, Microsoft was a key supporter of the Workforce Education Investment Act. A spokesperson for Microsoft said Tuesday that the company had no comment on the bill to uncap the advanced computing surcharge.
Rose Feliciano, executive director in the Northwest for TechNet, a group that represents other large technology companies, including Amazon and Meta, said during testimony that the current funding structure for the Workforce Education Investment Act works as is. And she emphasized that it was established with involvement from companies that are paying the taxes.
She said these businesses were not consulted before the legislation to uncap the surcharge was introduced this year. Feliciano added that some of those companies are now cutting jobs. 'This would send a signal that Washington is not welcoming to these industries,' she said.
The Association of Washington Business is also against the bill. Emily Wittman, a government affairs director for the association, said that the state has been falling short of its goals of increasing how many people attain college degrees and other post-secondary credentials.
Part of the thinking behind the 2019 law was that companies would have a more highly trained and qualified workforce in Washington to hire. 'Our businesses, especially those who are being taxed, are not currently seeing the benefit,' Wittman said.
She also noted that only about a third of the nearly $1 billion in revenue every two fiscal years from all of the taxes underpinning the Workforce Education Investment Act is going to the college grant program and suggested lawmakers could shift around existing funds if they want to prioritize student aid.
Groups representing college students from around the state are among those backing the bill.
Terrell Stalworth, legislative liaison for Associated Students of Tacoma Community College, told lawmakers that the state's financial aid program helped make college accessible for him. 'A student can't stay in school if they can't pay the rent, and students shouldn't have to choose between food or an education,' he said. 'Financial aid helps solve these issues.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
13 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Bill enacting nation's strictest limits on corporate health care influence signed by Gov. Kotek
A doctor works at a pharmacy. Corporate investors eyeing local health care facilities in Oregon could soon face one of the hardest markets nationwide. () Corporate investors hoping to take over local health care facilities in Oregon could soon face one of the hardest markets nationwide. Senate Bill 951, which was quietly signed into law by Gov. Tina Kotek on Monday, sets the strongest regulations on private and corporate control of medical practices in the nation, according to industry lawyers. A similar effort failed in the Legislature last year amid pushback from Republicans that prevented the bill from meeting key legislative deadlines. The governor told reporters at a news conference Monday that the bill should be a model for other states and for Congress. 'We need to make sure that our health care providers and our delivery system stays local and is controlled locally,' she said. 'That's what that bill is trying to do.' The legislation was opposed by companies such as Amazon and the statewide nonprofit Oregon Ambulatory Surgery Center Association, an industry group, where executives see private investment as vital to their business strategy. 'We universally agree that the way to protect clinics from closure and maintain the broadest patient access to outpatient care is to keep the existing, and multi-ownership models alive and well,' wrote Ryan Grimm on behalf of the association and the Portland Clinic, a private multispecialty medical group, in a March letter to lawmakers. 'In some communities, there is no hospital to swoop in to the rescue, or no hospital in a financial position to save a clinic,' he wrote. The bill does not go into effect immediately and it contains a three-year adjustment period for clinics to comply with the restrictions. Institutions such as hospitals, tribal health facilities, behavioral health programs and crisis lines are exempted. 'We're at an inflection point in this country when it comes to the corporatization of healthcare,' wrote House Majority Leader Ben Bowman, D-Tigard, in a statement May 28 following the bill's passage in the Oregon House. 'With the passage of this bill, every Oregonian will know that decisions in exam rooms are being made by doctors, not corporate executives.' The signature from Kotek deals a major victory to local providers and doctors, who sought to wrest back control over their practices in key decisions such as spending, staffing levels, physician ownership stake, and the price of services. The legislation would close what supporters say is a loophole in state law, which mandates that doctors hold at least a 51% stake in most medical practices, but which companies have taken advantage of by employing their own doctors — sometimes from out of state — and putting them down on paper as clinic owners. Then the company itself, or a hired management service, is brought in to handle payroll, accounting and other services, shifting away control and revenues from the clinic to the company, and from what was once a locally operated business. The bill limits the control such companies can have in a clinic's operations and would ban noncompete agreements used by companies to prohibit doctors from taking a job at a different practice. Support for the bill coalesced around the takeover of the Eugene-based Oregon Medical Group by the health care giant Optum, one of the nation's largest employers of physicians. The surrounding area lost dozens of doctors, leaving over 10,000 people without care, according to a Frequently Asked Question's document from Sen. Deb Patterson, D-Salem, after Optum required its doctors to sign non-compete contracts. Optum reversed course after pressure from lawmakers in May 2024. 'This bill is about preventing the kind of takeover that happened at the Oregon Medical Group in Eugene,' wrote state Rep. Lisa Fragala, D-Eugene, in a May statement. 'When we see consolidation in the healthcare market, we see three things happen: higher prices, negative effects on the quality of care and decreased access to care.' SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Yahoo
13 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Dozens of environmental groups sign letter opposing return of Utah public lands sale
People rally in opposition of Utah's lawsuit attempting to take control of federal lands at the Capitol in Salt Lake City on Saturday, Jan. 11, 2025. (Photo by Spenser Heaps for Utah News Dispatch) Organizations from around the country signed a letter on Monday urging U.S. senators not to include a controversial proposal to sell thousands of acres of federal land in Congress' budget bill. The letter comes in the wake of reports that Utah Sen. Mike Lee is considering reviving an amendment to the bill originally proposed by Rep. Celeste Maloy that would dispose of nearly 11,500 acres of Bureau of Land Management land in southwestern Utah, and about 450,000 acres in Nevada. Lee, when asked by a Politico reporter last week if he intended to reintroduce the disposal, responded, 'I gotta go vote, but yes.' SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX Lee's office did not respond to a request for comment on Monday, and it's unclear whether Utah's senior GOP senator is considering bringing back an exact copy of Maloy's amendment, or something different. But more than 100 organizations and nonprofits around the country are sounding the alarm, telling Senate leaders to 'heed how dramatically unpopular this idea is and reject any misguided attempt to get public lands sales back in this bill.' 'Decisions about the future of public lands should remain in public hands. Leaders in the House and Senate, extractive industry, and private developers are using the reconciliation process to sell off federal lands to pay for billionaire tax cuts. But such moves are deeply unpopular. Polling has repeatedly shown that the public — especially westerners — strongly believes in keeping public lands in public hands and, across partisan lines, rejects any efforts that would lead to the sale of these shared and cherished lands,' reads the letter, signed by Utah groups like the Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance, Conserve Southwest Utah, Save Our Canyons, Great Basin Water Network and Back Country Horsemen of Utah. Public lands sale may return to 'big, beautiful' bill with Mike Lee amendment The letter is addressed to Lee, who chairs the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, New Mexico Democrat Martin Heinrich, the committee's ranking member, Senate Majority Leader John Thune, a South Dakota Republican, and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, a New York Democrat. Maloy's amendment was dropped from the budget bill after it received pushback from all sides of the aisle. That includes Montana Republican Rep. Ryan Zinke, who previously said selling public lands is a line he would not cross and rallied support from a bipartisan group of lawmakers to strip the proposal from the bill. 'The public had no opportunity to participate in the process of identifying these parcels, let alone time to understand the long-term effect of selling off these public lands,' the letter reads. Maloy's proposal identified parcels owned by the Bureau of Land Management to sell to Washington and Beaver counties, the Washington County Water Conservancy District and the city of St. George. The land would have been used for water infrastructure (like reservoirs and wells), an airport expansion in St. George, new and widened roads, recreation and housing. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Yahoo
13 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Perfect storm as Trump's mass deportation drive collides with city of immigrants
This weekend, tensions boiled over in the Los Angeles area after a week of immigration sweeps in the region sparked violent protests against the Trump administration and the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agency. President Donald Trump's decision to send 700 US Marines and 2,000 National Guard troops to the Los Angeles area to support the federal response to the unrest has opened a volatile chapter in his mass deportation campaign. The location of the raids and subsequent protests – a liberal-leaning city in a state controlled by Democrats – also gave the White House an ideal public foil as it seeks to show progress on removing illegal immigrants and instilling law and order. Governor Gavin Newsom, a Democrat and prominent critic of the president, wrote on X that the troop deployment was a "deranged fantasy of a dictatorial President". The raids in America's second-biggest city are unfolding against the backdrop of an aggressive push to raise arrest and deportation numbers, as the administration has been disappointed with its current pace. ICE has ramped up its enforcement actions in recent weeks as it faces pressure to show progress on Trump's signature policy initiative. The agency arrested 2,200 people on 4 June, according to NBC News, a record for a single day. The network reported that hundreds of those arrested were enrolled in a programme known as Alternative to Detention, which allows for the release and monitoring of individuals not deemed an immediate threat. Live updates from LA protests LA's unrest in maps and pictures White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller, the man widely seen as the intellectual architect of the deportation policy, has repeatedly said the White House hopes that ICE can scale up to 3,000 arrests a day, up from 660 or so during the first 100 days of Trump's presidency. "President Trump is going to keep pushing to get that number up higher each and every single day," Miller told Fox News in late May. Yet for much of the first 100 days of the administration, deportations were on par with, and at times below, those recorded during the last year of Joe Biden's presidency. The White House stopped publishing daily deportation figures early in 2020. "I'm not satisfied with the numbers," the administration's border tsar, Tom Homan, told reporters at the White House at the end of May. "We need to increase." Homan added that the Trump administration had "increased the teams a lot" and that "we expect a fast increase in the number of arrests". Several senior ICE officials - including Kenneth Genalo, its top deportation official - have left their roles at the agency in recent months. In February, ICE also moved two top officials overseeing deportations, as well as the agency's acting director, Caleb Vitello. At the time of the more recent reshuffle, the agency characterised the move as organisational realignments that will "help ICE achieve President Trump and the American people's mandate of arresting and deporting illegal aliens and making American communities safe". How LA erupted over a rumour Everything we know about the protests Analysis: A political fight Trump is eager to have The Department of Homeland Security said in a press release that the immigrants detained in the recent Los Angeles raids included individuals convicted of sex crimes, burglary, and drug related charges, among other offences. Local immigration advocates and community members, however, say that families have been torn apart and nonviolent immigrants detained. At a rally on Monday, Los Angeles City Councilmember Ysabel Jurado said that a Friday raid at a warehouse in the Fashion District "was not about public safety, it was a fear driven, state violence designed to silence, to intimidate, to disappear". While opinion polls show that Trump's immigration policies are popular with a majority of Americans, some of his backers have expressed concern about tactics. The co-founder of Latinas for Trump, for example, Florida State Senator Ileana Garcia, wrote on X that "this is not what we voted for". "I understand the importance of deporting criminal aliens, but what we are witnessing are arbitrary measures to hunt down people who are complying with their immigration hearings - in many cases, with credible fear of persecution claims - all driven by a Miller-like desire to satisfy a self-fabricated deportation goal," she added. Federal authorities have conducted more frequent immigration raids across the US, in states that lean both towards Democrats and Republicans. Some Republican-controlled states, like Tennessee, have assisted federal authorities. "California was willing to resist," said John Acevedo, an associate dean at Emory Law School, who studies free speech and protests in the US. Images of violence and resistance on the streets of Los Angeles gave Trump a catalyst for the deployment of the National Guard. "For his base, it does quite a bit. It shows he's serious, and allows them to show he will use all means necessary to enforce his [immigration] rules," Prof Acevedo said. Protesters in Los Angeles - which calls itself a sanctuary city, meaning it limits co-operation with federal immigration enforcement - did not relish the role they believed the administration had chosen for their city. "This is my people, you know, I'm fighting for us," said Maria Gutierrez, a Mexican-American who protested for two days in Paramount, a city in LA County that saw protests after residents spotted ICE agents in the area. The unrest there involved looting and at least one car burning. Authorities used rubber bullets and tear gas. She said there are some protesting in LA, including those in the nearby city of Compton, that share a belief that they were protecting the city from immigration enforcement and saw the Trump administration's threats as a challenge. Ms Gutierrez believed undocumented immigrants who commit violent offences should be targeted, but not those who she believes work hard and aspire to a better life. "This is our city. We're angry, we know how to protect ourselves and this isn't going to scare us," she said. But the community is not united in support for the protests that have captured national attention. Juan, who lives near Paramount, came to the US illegally and later became a citizen, but supports ICE's actions. "ICE agents have a job to do, just like you and I," said Juan, who asked the BBC to withhold his last name given the federal operations in the area. He said he worked for years as a day labourer, but gained citizenship and has four children who graduated from college. "It's hard," he said. "I have family who don't have papers, too. "But you can't really fight it if you're here and you're not supposed to be." "A crime is a crime," he said.
