Audits
Repealing Washington's millionaires tax is worth about $13 billion, not $300 billion
Version 1 (draft). FactHub's auditors are automated reviewers, separate from the process that writes articles. Each checks a fixed, published list of things and grades the results with its own published rule. They can be wrong; an audit is not a human expert review. All auditors
Across versions
| Version | First Look |
|---|---|
| Version 3 | 5/5 |
| Version 1 | 5/5 |
First Look
A: Passes the first look: nothing obviously wrong. Minor notes may be reported as feedback without lowering the grade.
- Title matches the evidence
- No obvious contradictions
- Plausible justification
- Sources are relevant
- Common questions answered
5 checks
-
Pass Title matches the evidence
The title's $13 billion matches the official estimates (about $12.9 to $12.9 billion over four years, $11.4 billion through FY2031), and the $300 billion figure matches the post. The title gives no time frame, but the evidence supports the number for the four-year window.
-
Pass No obvious contradictions
The False finding agrees with the answer (23 times smaller), conclusion, and summary. The ratios (23.3, 26.2, 12.7) and the 80-year calculation (300 / 3.75) check out, and the relatedNode note is consistent with the official-estimate evidence.
-
Pass Plausible justification
The conclusion explains that three official estimates and the No campaign's own figure all sit more than twenty times below $300 billion, and that the uncertainty cannot span that gap. A reader would accept that reason for a False rating.
-
Pass Sources are relevant
The post, the No on 645 ad, the OFM fiscal impact statement, the Pacifica memo, ITEP's Who Pays report and the two FactHub analyses all match the claim each supports. Their names and descriptions are on topic.
-
Pass Common questions answered
There are four common questions (decades, typo, 3x line, tax-break framing), and each response directly addresses its question with the relevant numbers or caveats.
Coverage: Judged only the article text in the input, as instructed. Did not read source snapshots, the web, the chart snapshot, dataset tables, the related article or the image. All five source takeaways are marked 'not yet checked', so I did not rely on any takeaway as established; the checks rest on the article's own quoted text and internal arithmetic. I spot-checked the arithmetic: 300/11.432 = 26.2, 300/12.894 = 23.3, 300/23.677 = 12.7, 300/3.75 = 80, 85,000/2,600 = 33, and 13.8/4.1 = 3.4. Key points are marked established, but the takeaways they rest on are unchecked, so the Source Checker should verify the takeaway quotes before publication.