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


Hamilton Spectator
22 minutes ago
- Hamilton Spectator
Democratic governors will defend immigration policies before Republican-led House panel
WASHINGTON (AP) — As President Donald Trump spars with California's governor over immigration enforcement, Republicans in Congress are calling other Democratic governors to the Capitol on Thursday to question them over policies limiting cooperation with federal immigration authorities. The House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform posted a video ahead of the hearing highlighting crimes allegedly committed by immigrants in the U.S. illegally and pledging that 'sanctuary state governors will answer to the American people.' The hearing is to include testimony from Govs. JB Pritzker of Illinois, Tim Walz of Minnesota and Kathy Hochul of New York. There's no legal definition of a sanctuary jurisdiction , but the term generally refers to governments with policies limiting cooperation with federal immigration authorities. Courts previously have upheld the legality of such laws. But Trump's administration has sued Colorado, Illinois, New York and several cities — including Chicago and Rochester, New York — asserting their policies violate the U.S. Constitution or federal law. Illinois, Minnesota and New York also were among 14 states and hundreds of cities and counties recently listed by the Department of Homeland Security as 'sanctuary jurisdictions defying federal immigration law.' The list later was removed from the department's website after criticism that it errantly included some local governments that support Trump's immigration policies. As Trump steps up immigration enforcement, some Democratic-led states have intensified their resistance by strengthening state laws restricting cooperation with immigration agents. Following clashes between crowds of protesters and immigration agents in Los Angeles, Trump deployed the National Guard to protect federal buildings and agents, and California Gov. Gavin Newsom accused Trump of declaring 'a war' on the underpinnings of American democracy. The House Oversight Committee has long been a partisan battleground, and in recent months it has turned its focus to immigration policy. Thursday's hearing follows a similar one in March in which the Republican-led committee questioned the Democratic mayors of Chicago, Boston, Denver and New York about sanctuary policies. Heavily Democratic Chicago has been a sanctuary city for decades. In 2017, then-Illinois Gov. Bruce Rauner, a Republican, signed legislation creating statewide protections for immigrants. The Illinois Trust Act prohibits police from searching, arresting or detaining people solely because of their immigration status. But it allows local authorities to hold people for federal immigration authorities if there's a valid criminal warrant. Pritzker, who succeeded Rauner in 2019, said in remarks prepared for the House committee that violent criminals 'have no place on our streets, and if they are undocumented, I want them out of Illinois and out of our country.' 'But we will not divert our limited resources and officers to do the job of the federal government when it is not in the best interest of our state, our local communities, or the safety of our residents,' he said. Pritzker has been among Trump's most outspoken opponents and is considered a potential 2028 presidential candidate. He said Illinois has provided shelter and services to more than 50,000 immigrants who were sent there from other states. A Department of Justice lawsuit against New York challenges a 2019 law that allows immigrants illegally in the U.S. to receive New York driver's licenses and shields driver's license data from federal immigration authorities. That built upon a 2017 executive order by then-Gov. Andrew Cuomo that prohibited New York officials from inquiring about or disclosing a person's immigration status to federal authorities, unless required by law. Hochul's office said law enforcement officers still can cooperate with federal immigration authorities when people are convicted of or under investigation for crimes. Since Hochul took office in 2021, her office said, the state has transferred more than 1,300 incarcerated noncitizens to U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement at the completion of their state sentences. Minnesota doesn't have a statewide sanctuary law protecting immigrants in the U.S. illegally, though Minneapolis and St. Paul both restrict the extent to which police and city employees can cooperate with immigration enforcement. Some laws signed by Walz have secured benefits for people regardless of immigration status. But at least one of those is getting rolled back. The Minnesota Legislature, meeting in a special session , passed legislation Monday to repeal a 2023 law that allowed adults in the U.S. illegally to be covered under a state-run health care program for the working poor. Walz insisted on maintaining eligibility for children who aren't in the country legally, ___ Lieb reported from Jefferson City, Mo. Also contributing were Associated Press writers Anthony Izaguirre in Albany, N.Y.; Steve Karnowski in St. Paul, Minn.; and Sophia Tareen in Chicago. Error! Sorry, there was an error processing your request. There was a problem with the recaptcha. Please try again. You may unsubscribe at any time. By signing up, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google privacy policy and terms of service apply. Want more of the latest from us? Sign up for more at our newsletter page .

Yahoo
24 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Letter: Democrats should be careful about hyping election wins
The other day I saw several articles extolling the results of a special election for South Carolina's 50th House District in which a young Democratic candidate beat his Republican opponent by a 70% to 30% margin in heavily Republican South Carolina. Since this result appeared several times in my scrolling, I decided to find more information regarding this potential watershed event, perhaps heralding the beginning of a Democratic comeback from the wilderness. I found out that the 50th District has voted Democratic forever, and the previous holder of that seat ran unopposed on occasion. The last time he had a Republican opponent, he won by 20 percentage points. Furthermore, in the Democratic primary for this seat this year, the winning candidate won his place on the ballot by a mere seven votes in an election that required a recount to confirm his win. Winning candidate Keishan Scott, is a 24-year-old town council member and will be the youngest member of the South Carolina Legislature. He is Black, and his Republican opponent is white. The district population is about 90% Black and 10% white and Hispanic, so Scott's victory is not quite a watershed event. A whopping 14% of eligible voters took part in this special election, and Scott received 2,572 votes. The Democrats are desperate for good news, but hyping this 'victory' is more pathetic than uplifting. Robert Brems Wyomissing
Yahoo
25 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Coinbase adds former top Obama and Harris adviser Plouffe as it broadens its political reach
WASHINGTON (AP) — A senior adviser to Kamala Harris' 2024 presidential campaign is joining Coinbase's global advisory council, which already includes several former U.S. senators and Donald Trump's ex-campaign manager, as the cryptocurrency exchange broadens its political reach. David Plouffe, a top Democratic strategist best known as an architect of Barack Obama's successful 2008 presidential campaign, is the latest addition to the council, joining as the cryptocurrency industry plays an increasingly prominent role in shaping fast-moving legislation in Congress. The legislation aims to create a comprehensive framework for the regulation of digital assets and comes amid a shift in Washington. President Trump, a Republican, has pledged to make the U.S. the global capital of cryptocurrency, contrasting with what industry leaders viewed as a stifling regulatory approach under the previous Democratic administration. Trump and his family have also been aggressively expanding their personal business into almost every part of the cryptocurrency ecosystem, including raising billions of dollars to buy bitcoin, creating a new stablecoin and launching and promoting a Trump-themed meme coin. Chris LaCivita, the former co-campaign manager of Trump's successful 2024 presidential bid, joined Coinbase's advisory council in January. Former U.S. Sen. Kyrsten Sinema, a Democrat-turned-independent from Arizona, also joined the council, which consists of a number of other high-profile figures from both major political parties. Plouffe previously served on the global advisory board for Binance, the world's largest cryptocurrency exchange, before joining Harris' presidential campaign as a senior adviser in August. Faryar Shirzad, Coinbase's chief policy officer, described the role of the advisers as being a 'sound board' to discuss policy efforts and business strategy. In Congress, legislation is advancing far more quickly than usual for a new industry — a pace that some involved in shaping the bills say comes amid an all-out pressure campaign from the cryptocurrency sector. On Wednesday, a group of Democrats joined the Republican majority to advance legislation regulating stablecoins, a type of cryptocurrency typically pegged to the U.S. dollar. Final passage through the Senate could come next week. Meanwhile, a more sweeping bill to implement cryptocurrency market structure has begun moving through House committees.