Audits
Repealing Washington's millionaires tax is worth about $13 billion, not $300 billion
Version 3. 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
Title says about $13 billion, not $300 billion. Official estimates (fiscal note $12.894B over FY2029-32, OFM $11.4B, ERFC $12.938B) cluster near $13B, and the title's no-time-frame wording is consistent with the four-year figures. The finding of False matches.
-
Pass No obvious contradictions
Finding False, answer, conclusion and summary all agree. The ratios (23x four-year, 12.7x seven-year, 26x OFM) match the key points and dataset takeaway. The more-than-twenty-times wording refers to the three named estimates, which are all above twenty times smaller.
-
Pass Plausible justification
The conclusion ties the False rating to three official estimates and the No campaign's own figure, all about 13B, against 300B. It also explains that the static-estimate uncertainty cannot span a factor of twenty.
-
Pass Sources are relevant
The post, the No campaign ad, the OFM fiscal impact statement, the Pacifica memo, the ITEP Who Pays? report and the FactHub analyses each match the claim they support by name, title and description.
-
Pass Common questions answered
Four objections are present. Each response addresses its question: the decades claim, the typo claim, the 3x line (share versus dollars) and the tax-break framing.
Coverage: Read only the article payload and the sources block. Did not read source snapshots or the web, and did not verify quotes or source accuracy. Every takeaway in the sources block is marked 'not yet checked', so none is established. The key points marked established rely on those unchecked takeaways; they were treated as unverified and checks were limited to internal consistency. Source reliability notes and descriptions were used only for relevance. The ERFC September forecast is cited in the evidence and dataset text but has no source entry, so its figure was judged only for internal consistency. The ITEP average-income dollar figures in the 3x response (about $85,000 and $2,600) are not in any source entry, so the 33x arithmetic was checked only for internal consistency.