Washington's top-earner income swings sharply, and its new tax has no reserve.

1. Pass Title matches the evidence

   The title says top-earner income swings sharply and the new tax has no reserve. The IRS evidence shows 34% and 45% single-year drops, and the no-reserve evidence matches the statute summary. The title does not overstate the evidence.

2. Pass No obvious contradictions

   Finding True matches the answer and conclusion. The 44.6%, 34.0% and 45% figures agree with rounding, and the 33% standard deviation matches 32.9%. The 1% constitutional transfer is acknowledged as a caveat, not a contradiction.

3. Pass Plausible justification

   The conclusion explains that the income swings are much larger than the existing taxes, that the statute has no reserve or cap, and that the offsetting points are weighed. The reasoning follows from the evidence presented.

4. Pass Sources are relevant

   Each source's name, title and description match its use: the session law for the statute, the constitution for the rainy-day rule, the fiscal note and ERFC for revenue, Pew and Boyd for national volatility, and the Connecticut, California and Massachusetts fiscal offices for other-state evidence.

5. Pass Common questions answered

   There are five common questions, and each has a response that addresses its specific claim, including the forecast, capital gains, every-tax, reserve-later and budget-hole questions.

Coverage: I read only the article payload text: title, claim, finding, answer, conclusion, evidence summaries, objections, method, key points, sources metadata and takeaway statements. I did not read source snapshots or the web. Every takeaway in the sources section is marked not yet checked, so none is established. I did not rely on any takeaway as established, and I did not verify any quote against its source. I did not recompute the figures, inspect the charts or check the cross-state numbers against their reports. The checks above judge internal consistency and plausibility only.