Incoming: The "Property" Question Challenging Washington's New Tax

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

Do you own your own income? Is income even property? Or does income exist in some unattributed, unowned amorphous state before it transforms into money in your bank account? To the federal Internal Revenue Service, “income” is used exclusively as a noun: it’s the thing you receive. (Section 61 and throughout the IRS guidance.) But in Washington State, is it different?

A question from 1933 is back.

While the Washington State Supreme Court has already ruled on and affirmed in subsequent cases over nearly a century that income is property, the court is very likely to take up this question again and rule on it anew. And what it decides will have ramifications for our state, and in time, and for an income tax which may eventually impact far more Washingtonians than just millionaires.

Voters have a new tool to see how candidates might rule on this consequential question. And it may be the first of its kind for an election, using AI to try to read the tea-leaves on how judges might rule.

https://www.postalley.org/2026/05/21/incoming-the-property-question-challenging-washingtons-new-tax/

[Ilikepurple]

1. I'm not sure how I feel about an article designed to push voters towards conservative justices on this one issue.

I understand the “millionaire tax” has a lot of Washingtonians worried that it will be extended to their tax bracket or fear they will lose income if they ever make it to the very high one it’s currently set at, but I think it’s a mistake to base our votes on this one issue because a conservative Supreme Court could change the very fabric of this state’s heart. Contrary to Vietnam Q Nguyen’s opinion, I don’t believe lack of a state income tax is as much a part of our DNA as our rain and mountains. The issue of income tax in Washington State is a sticky one and our Democratic leadership is obviously trying to make some inroads to progressive taxation, but I’m uncomfortable with this interview with an ex Republican staffer promoting their one issue website to try to swing votes away from liberal Justices.

The author, Steve Murch, is a self-described “tech entrepreneur” who seems to keep trying to be relevant in the internet space. He seems most proud of launching Alignvote.com, a website seemingly designed to aid or create one issue voters. Below are some sample questions to attract users. It’s easy to see his policy focus.
There is a city budget shortfall projected this year, and some have called for reducing the police
budget by 30%. Do you agree?
We have a homelessness crisis. Would you allow people to set up camp in public parks overnight?
Some legislators are calling for school funding to follow students. Do you support this plan?
Should the city prosecute individuals for drug use?

This is what Washington GOP’s official X account has to say about Viet Nguyen, who is also a former staffer for Reagan Dunn, a former republican attorney general candidate.

@WAGOP
Another excellent analysis by
@VietQNguyen
. Read. Memorize. Vote for JUDICIAL candidates who will respect 93 years of precedent and keep—NOT scrap—the Culliton decision.

I’m hoping that the readers of this article vote for the candidates that most align with their sentiments about a wide range of issues. Even if I was a one issue voter, I am not ready to turn over my vote to a website informed by AI prompts written by a person with an agenda. I’m also leery of the recent change in political allegiance amongst techies, both successful and those who aspire to be.

[slightlv]

2. man, this is a loaded question!

I honestly don't have an opinion on this issue, itself... I'd have to sit and think long and hard on it and its ramifications. The one thing I DO have an opinion on, which I'll state since they brought up the IRS, is "Earned Income" vs "Unearned Income." I honestly think income HAS to be broken down along these lines or the word is useless. This faux capitalist society we have taxes earned income at the highest level they can get away with, and unearned income at the lowest they can get away with.

I believe if you've actually "earned" an income... did labor or service for someone... that income should be counted as "earned income" and taxed at the lowest level possible. Not only are you recognizing a societal good, but you also passively help set society ideals.

Unearned income (sometimes called 'passive' income, I think), should be taxed at the highest levels. The individual did nothing more than move digits in a database... if he even did that! This is how we got into the mess we're in. It's so much easier to become rich if your "income" isn't taxed because it's "passed through" or whatever they do with it to evade the taxes. The common person can't do that. Their income goes for living expenses. The rich live off us and stash away their returns on investment trades, and other types of hedge fund activity in far off countries that don't tax it at all.

So, one issue or not... the issue, as I see it, is NOT defined for anyone, let alone common people who only have a paycheck at the end of a month to somehow meet expenses through the next month.

I'm all for a millionaires tax... bend the tax brackets for the rich like we used to do when we were a prosperous, growing economy... back before the yuppies took over in the 70's and 80's. And tax Earned Income at the lowest level... if at all... If you want people who can work to work, reward them for working. Giving all kinds of tax breaks to unearned income is like throwing pearls before swine, IMO.

But that's just my opinion. I've always had a hardline when it comes to the word "income." It's especially true now after working a lifetime and seeing what a pittance of a living all that money taken from each paycheck brought me in SS today.