← Back to the draft

Audits

Ten payments supplied half of Washington's first-year capital gains tax.

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

First Look

5 of 5 checks passed · version 1 · claude-haiku-5-5 · 22 October 2026

A: Passes the first look: nothing obviously wrong. Minor notes may be reported as feedback without lowering the grade.

5 checks
  1. Pass Title matches the evidence

    The title says 10 payments supplied half of the first year's tax. The DOR decile evidence shows the top 10 payments at 51% of tax year 2022 net payments, and the collections evidence matches the swing figures in the claim.

  2. Pass No obvious contradictions

    The finding True agrees with the answer and conclusion. The 85.6% top-tenth figure, the 73% share of the drop, the 1.77/0.84/1.16 estimate ratios and the year-over-year percentages all recompute from the figures shown.

  3. Pass Plausible justification

    The conclusion ties the True rating to DOR payment records, corroborating sources and the 2023 drop, and it names what the data cannot show. A reader would accept that reasoning.

  4. Pass Sources are relevant

    Each source is on topic for what it supports: DOR tables and statistics for the concentration and collections, fiscal notes for the estimates, the state forecaster and statute for the trust account, and Bloomberg Law for the officials' statement.

  5. Pass Common questions answered

    There are five objections, and each has a response that addresses its question, including the windfall, surcharge, one-year, people and income-tax questions.

Coverage: I examined the article payload only: title, claim, finding, answer, conclusion, context, editorial note, the five evidence items with their summaries and limitations, the key points, method, the five objections with responses, and the source metadata and takeaway quotes as supplied. I did not open any source or the web. No takeaway is marked established; every takeaway is marked not yet checked, so the figures are unverified by source checkers, and I relied on text and arithmetic consistency only. Recomputed without contradiction: 782.0/442=1.77, 394.7/469=0.84, 583.8/505=1.16; 265.2/363.7=73%; 668.0/780.4=85.6%; 394.3/780.4=51%; 1.5B/583.8 is about +157%. Items I could not verify and that are for the Source Checker: the IRS claim in the income-tax objection (its cited takeaway fh-coll does not cover IRS data); the I-645 section references 302 and 205; the 1.28 billion ELTA figure in evidence:independent-reporting (the cited quote does not state it); the 3,380 payers in the decile table versus 3,625 net payments on the DOR statistics page (disclosed as a snapshot difference); and the surcharge objection's 151 million a year versus the FY2026-only estimate in the evidence. The Bloomberg objection paraphrases more than half of the payments as all of the money, which the Skeptic may want to check.