The Seattle City Council was fully authorized by the state Legislature to enact a personal income tax on high-income residents and should not be bound by cases from the 1930s that held income is property for tax purposes, attorneys for the City Attorney’s Office argue.
Those nearly century-old Washington Supreme Court decisions “relied on case law that is no longer valid, incorrect statements of the law, and unfounded conclusions,” says the City’s motion for summary judgment filed Friday in the consolidated cases by four opponents of the tax.
Seattle’s personal income tax is best characterized as an excise tax rather than a property tax, the motion asserted. The case is assigned to King County Superior Court Judge John Ruhl, who will hear arguments at 10 a.m. on Nov. 17.
Editor’s note: The City is represented by Pacifica Law Group, whose senior litigation partner, Paul Lawrence, is available for comment at Paul.Lawrence@pacificalawgroup.com