Five-second answer
Claim we investigated
I-645 would forgo about $13 billion in revenue over the tax's first four years, but it would not cut any current school, health-care or child-care budget.
True. Four years of projected collections total $12.9 billion, but none is collected before 2029 or appropriated now. The Legislature's fiscal note projects $12.894 billion of gross collections in FY2029-32, OFM's ballot statement and the Washington Research Council confirm nothing is collected or appropriated before 2029, and the law and a Thurston County judge say the money goes to the general fund rather than to schools.
Quote or cite this fact-check
FactHub rates the claim “I-645 would forgo about $13 billion in revenue over the tax's first four years, but it would not cut any current school, health-care or child-care budget” True (high confidence): Four years of projected collections total $12.9 billion, but none is collected before 2029 or appropriated now. Reviewed October 22, 2026. https://facthub.org/n/article/i645-13-billion-no-current-cuts/5
One-minute summary
What the evidence establishes
- Established. The Legislature's fiscal note projects $12.894 billion of gross collections in the tax's first four years (FY2029-32); that is where the No campaign's "$13 billion over four years" comes from.
- Established. OFM's $11.4 billion covers only three years of collections (FY2029-31). ERFC's September 2026 forecast puts those three years at $12.9 billion, so the figure is not inflated.
- Established. No tax is collected until April 2029, and no current appropriation relies on the revenue.
- Established. The law deposits 95% in the general fund and 5% in a child-care account; nothing is legally dedicated to K-12 schools.
- Established. The enacted budget outlook already counts on the tax: its 2027-29 balance of +$0.65 billion becomes about -$2.0 billion without it (our calculation).
- Not shown. That any specific school, health-care or child-care program would be cut is not shown: the 2027 Legislature could also use reserves, other taxes or trim the tax relief.
- Context. All estimates are static and the tax faces a pending constitutional challenge.
This measure cuts funding for K-12 public schools, healthcare, childcare, and other important public services by $13 billion over four years.
Context: Under the heading "Vote No: Stop Cuts to Schools, Healthcare, and Childcare." The next sentence says that means larger class sizes, higher costs for healthcare and childcare, "and the elimination of free school lunches for many children." The statement names no source or years for the $13 billion.
Source: 2026 General Election Voters' Pamphlet, Initiative Measure No. IP26-645, Washington Secretary of State · View in the dataset
The evidence
The conclusion rests on the combined record. Expand each item to see its role and limitations.
| Method | Institution / country | Year(s) | What it shows | Key limitation | Primary links |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Summed the ESSB 6346 fiscal note's gross Tax on Income line by state fiscal year and compared the result with OFM's I-645 fiscal impact statement and ERFC's June and September 2026 forecasts on the same fiscal-year basis. | Washington Office of Financial Management, Washington Department of Revenue, Economic and Revenue Forecast Council United States | 2026 | The fiscal note projects $2.698 billion (FY2029), $3.732 billion (FY2030), $3.167 billion (FY2031) and $3.297 billion (FY2032): $12.894 billion over four years of collections. The Pacifica Law Group memo for the No campaign used exactly this figure. OFM's $11.432 billion counts only FY2029-31 because its statement stops at FY2031. ERFC's September forecast raised those three years to $12.938 billion, so on the newest estimate four years would be larger than $13 billion. | These are projections, not collections, and all assume taxpayers do not change their behavior. ERFC publishes its forecast by biennium; its FY2030-31 split is our calculation from its Fair Start transfers. The No campaign never cited a source; the match with the fiscal note rests on its lawyers' memo using the same four rows. | FactHub Research Team FactHub Research Team Pacifica Law Group Office of Financial Management |
| Read OFM's fiscal impact statement for the collection schedule and the Washington Research Council's I-645 brief for the budget status; compared with news coverage that checked the claim. | Washington Office of Financial Management, Washington Research Council, KXLY United States | 2026 | OFM says the first payments are due in April 2029, in state fiscal year 2029. WRC states that because the tax is not yet collected, no current appropriations rely on it. KXLY's Oct. 14 fact check reached the same conclusion: the $13 billion is future revenue, not money cut from an existing budget. | "No current appropriation" describes the enacted 2025-27 budget; the budget outlook for 2027-29 does count the revenue (see the next evidence items). WRC is business-funded, though here it states a fact OFM's timing confirms. | Office of Financial Management Washington Research Council KXLY |
| Read ESSB 6346 section 202 and the Attorney General's explanatory statement, and the court ruling on how the ballot statement may describe the revenue. | Washington State Legislature, Washington Attorney General's Office, Thurston County Superior Court United States | 2026 | Section 202 says the taxes "must be deposited in the state general fund" to fund the bill's tax relief and to make public investments in K-12, health care, human services and higher education. Only 5% goes to a dedicated account, for child care and early learning. When the No campaign asked a judge to say the tax directs money to those uses, Judge Anne Egeler refused: only the Legislature appropriates from the general fund. "It doesn't direct. It has hopes." The No campaign's own lawyers put the non-dedicated general-fund share at about 55% once the tax relief is counted. | Section 202 does name K-12, health care, human services and higher education as purposes, and the general fund pays for most K-12 spending, so repeal reduces money available for those services. What the law lacks is a legal dedication or appropriation. | Washington State Legislature Washington Attorney General's Office Washington State Standard Pacifica Law Group Office of Financial Management |
| Read ERFC's April 2026 outlook for the enacted supplemental budget and computed the 2027-29 balance without the tax. | Economic and Revenue Forecast Council, Washington Research Council United States | 2026 | The enacted outlook counts ESSB 6346 at +$2.309 billion net in 2027-29 and projects a +$0.653 billion balance. WRC notes the outlook assumes $2.698 billion of gross income-tax revenue. Removing the gross tax while keeping its relief, as I-645 would, leaves about -$2.0 billion (our calculation). WRC: repeal would make the state's structural gap harder to close, though keeping the tax would not close it alone. | An outlook is a projection made before the 2027-29 budget is written; it shows pressure, not which programs would change. The balance without the tax is our calculation and ignores small offsets such as lower Department of Revenue costs. | Washington Research Council FactHub Research Team |
| Read the Attorney General's explanatory statement on what I-645 repeals and compared the fiscal note's gross and net revenue by year. | Washington Attorney General's Office, Washington Department of Revenue, Pacifica Law Group United States | 2026 | The AG says the tax credits, exemptions and deductions passed with the tax "would not be repealed and would remain in place." In the fiscal note, that relief costs $0.35-0.83 billion a year in FY2029-32, so net revenue is 77-87% of the gross tax. Under I-645 the state therefore loses the full gross amount, not the net. The No campaign's lawyers add the continuing relief to reach nearly $16.6 billion through 2032, and say future legislatures would choose among spending cuts, changes to the relief, other revenue or a mix. | A future Legislature could repeal or delay the relief by simple majority, which would shrink the gap. The relief stays if voters repeal the tax through I-645, but the 2026 law voids it if a court strikes the tax down (Sec. 1202). Pacifica's $16.6 billion is an advocacy memo's total that counts the relief as a cost of repeal. | Washington Attorney General's Office FactHub Research Team Pacifica Law Group Washington State Legislature |
1. Four years of the Legislature's own estimate total $12.9 billion Summed the ESSB 6346 fiscal note's gross Tax on Income line by state fiscal year and compared the result with OFM's I-645 fiscal impact statement and ERFC's June and September 2026 forecasts on the same fiscal-year basis.
The fiscal note projects $2.698 billion (FY2029), $3.732 billion (FY2030), $3.167 billion (FY2031) and $3.297 billion (FY2032): $12.894 billion over four years of collections. The Pacifica Law Group memo for the No campaign used exactly this figure. OFM's $11.432 billion counts only FY2029-31 because its statement stops at FY2031. ERFC's September forecast raised those three years to $12.938 billion, so on the newest estimate four years would be larger than $13 billion.
Limit: These are projections, not collections, and all assume taxpayers do not change their behavior. ERFC publishes its forecast by biennium; its FY2030-31 split is our calculation from its Fair Start transfers. The No campaign never cited a source; the match with the fiscal note rests on its lawyers' memo using the same four rows.
Verify: Totals by estimate and window of years Gross income-tax revenue by fiscal year, four official estimates Memorandum to Millionaires Tax for WA on Initiative 645 (July 2026) Fiscal Impact Statement for Initiative 645 (July 2026)
- Fiscal note FY2029-32: $12.894 billion; OFM FY2027-31: $11.432 billion; ERFC September FY2029-31: $12.938 billion. FactHub Research Team
- Official estimates have risen since March: FY2029 from $2.698 billion to $3.503 billion and FY2030 from $3.732 billion to $5.032 billion (ERFC split ours). FactHub Research Team
- The No campaign's lawyers put repeal at $12.9 billion over 2029-2032, the fiscal note's four years. Pacifica Law Group
- OFM estimates repeal would cost $11.4 billion over fiscal years 2027-31, a window with collections in only FY2029-31. Office of Financial Management
2. Nothing is collected before April 2029, and no current budget spends it Read OFM's fiscal impact statement for the collection schedule and the Washington Research Council's I-645 brief for the budget status; compared with news coverage that checked the claim.
OFM says the first payments are due in April 2029, in state fiscal year 2029. WRC states that because the tax is not yet collected, no current appropriations rely on it. KXLY's Oct. 14 fact check reached the same conclusion: the $13 billion is future revenue, not money cut from an existing budget.
Limit: "No current appropriation" describes the enacted 2025-27 budget; the budget outlook for 2027-29 does count the revenue (see the next evidence items). WRC is business-funded, though here it states a fact OFM's timing confirms.
Verify: Fiscal Impact Statement for Initiative 645 (July 2026) New brief: I-645: Repealing the State Individual Income Tax (Sept. 22, 2026) Fact check: What you need to know about Initiative 645, the millionaires tax repeal (Oct. 14, 2026)
- No tax is paid until April 2029. Office of Financial Management
- No current appropriation relies on the income tax. Washington Research Council
- KXLY independently found the $13 billion is future revenue that would not be raised, not a cut to an existing budget. KXLY
3. The law sends the money to the general fund, not to schools Read ESSB 6346 section 202 and the Attorney General's explanatory statement, and the court ruling on how the ballot statement may describe the revenue.
Section 202 says the taxes "must be deposited in the state general fund" to fund the bill's tax relief and to make public investments in K-12, health care, human services and higher education. Only 5% goes to a dedicated account, for child care and early learning. When the No campaign asked a judge to say the tax directs money to those uses, Judge Anne Egeler refused: only the Legislature appropriates from the general fund. "It doesn't direct. It has hopes." The No campaign's own lawyers put the non-dedicated general-fund share at about 55% once the tax relief is counted.
Limit: Section 202 does name K-12, health care, human services and higher education as purposes, and the general fund pays for most K-12 spending, so repeal reduces money available for those services. What the law lacks is a legal dedication or appropriation.
Verify: ESSB 6346, Chapter 238, Laws of 2026 (session law) Ballot Title and Explanatory Statement for Initiative IL26-645 (July 23, 2026) WA judge rejects bid to ditch description of income tax initiative's budget effects (Aug. 7, 2026) Memorandum to Millionaires Tax for WA on Initiative 645 (July 2026) Fiscal Impact Statement for Initiative 645 (July 2026)
- The law deposits the tax in the general fund and names K-12, health care, human services and higher education as purposes, without appropriating it. Washington State Legislature · Qualifies
- Only 5% of the revenue is dedicated, to child care and early learning; 95% goes to the general fund. Washington Attorney General's Office
- The judge refused to let the explanatory statement say the tax directs money to specific services. Washington State Standard
- Only the Legislature can appropriate general-fund money. Washington State Standard
- About 55% of projected revenue is non-dedicated general-fund money. Pacifica Law Group
- OFM says the lost revenue would reduce general-fund money for core services, particularly K-12, higher education and health care. Office of Financial Management · Qualifies
4. The budget outlook already counts on the revenue Read ERFC's April 2026 outlook for the enacted supplemental budget and computed the 2027-29 balance without the tax.
The enacted outlook counts ESSB 6346 at +$2.309 billion net in 2027-29 and projects a +$0.653 billion balance. WRC notes the outlook assumes $2.698 billion of gross income-tax revenue. Removing the gross tax while keeping its relief, as I-645 would, leaves about -$2.0 billion (our calculation). WRC: repeal would make the state's structural gap harder to close, though keeping the tax would not close it alone.
Limit: An outlook is a projection made before the 2027-29 budget is written; it shows pressure, not which programs would change. The balance without the tax is our calculation and ignores small offsets such as lower Department of Revenue costs.
Verify: New brief: I-645: Repealing the State Individual Income Tax (Sept. 22, 2026) 2027-29 outlook ending balance with and without the income tax
- The current budget outlook already assumes $2.698 billion of income-tax revenue in 2027-29. Washington Research Council · Qualifies
- The outlook's +$0.653 billion 2027-29 balance becomes about -$2.0 billion without the gross tax if its relief stays (our calculation). FactHub Research Team · Qualifies
- Repeal would make the structural budget gap harder to close, though keeping the tax would not close it alone. Washington Research Council · Qualifies
5. Repeal removes the gross tax while its tax relief stays Read the Attorney General's explanatory statement on what I-645 repeals and compared the fiscal note's gross and net revenue by year.
The AG says the tax credits, exemptions and deductions passed with the tax "would not be repealed and would remain in place." In the fiscal note, that relief costs $0.35-0.83 billion a year in FY2029-32, so net revenue is 77-87% of the gross tax. Under I-645 the state therefore loses the full gross amount, not the net. The No campaign's lawyers add the continuing relief to reach nearly $16.6 billion through 2032, and say future legislatures would choose among spending cuts, changes to the relief, other revenue or a mix.
Limit: A future Legislature could repeal or delay the relief by simple majority, which would shrink the gap. The relief stays if voters repeal the tax through I-645, but the 2026 law voids it if a court strikes the tax down (Sec. 1202). Pacifica's $16.6 billion is an advocacy memo's total that counts the relief as a cost of repeal.
Verify: Ballot Title and Explanatory Statement for Initiative IL26-645 (July 23, 2026) Fiscal note: tax relief bundled with the income tax, FY2029-32 Memorandum to Millionaires Tax for WA on Initiative 645 (July 2026) ESSB 6346, Chapter 238, Laws of 2026 (session law)
- I-645 keeps the tax relief that passed with the income tax. Washington Attorney General's Office · Qualifies
- The bill's revenue-side relief costs $0.35-0.83 billion a year in FY2029-32; with the relief kept, repeal loses the gross amount. FactHub Research Team · Qualifies
- Counting the relief that continues, the memo puts the fiscal impact at nearly $16.6 billion through 2032. Pacifica Law Group · Qualifies
- Future legislatures could close the gap with cuts, changes to the relief, other revenue, or a mix. Pacifica Law Group
- If a court strikes the tax down, the whole package, including its tax relief, is void; I-645 does not repeal this clause. Washington State Legislature · Qualifies
Common questions
“This measure cuts funding for K-12 public schools, healthcare, childcare, and other important public services by $13 billion over four years.”
The size is right; the verb is not. $13 billion over four years matches the fiscal note's FY2029-32 gross estimate ($12.894 billion). But I-645 cuts no current funding: nothing is collected before 2029, no appropriation relies on the money, and only 5% is dedicated, to child care rather than K-12. Whether schools, health care or child care get less is a decision the 2027 Legislature has not made; the sentence presents it as a fact.
- Fiscal note FY2029-32: $12.894 billion; OFM FY2027-31: $11.432 billion; ERFC September FY2029-31: $12.938 billion. FactHub Research Team
- No current appropriation relies on the income tax. Washington Research Council
- The law deposits the tax in the general fund and names K-12, health care, human services and higher education as purposes, without appropriating it. Washington State Legislature · Qualifies
“That means larger class sizes, higher costs for healthcare and childcare, and the elimination of free school lunches for many children.”
Each consequence is stated as certain, but none is in the law or in OFM's estimate. Free school meals for all students appear only as the Legislature's stated intent in ESSB 6346, and OFM excludes effects that rest on intent; the budget outlook pencils in $140 million for free meals in FY2029 but labels it not mandatory. No current lunch, class-size or child-care program depends on the tax. Losing the revenue could lead a future Legislature to drop planned expansions, which is a possibility, not the elimination of anything that exists today.
- Free school meals appear only as a statement of intent. Washington State Legislature
- OFM leaves out effects that exist only as legislative intent, such as free school meals. Office of Financial Management
- The outlook includes $140 million for free school meals in FY2029, labeled not mandatory. Economic and Revenue Forecast Council · Qualifies
“I-645 blows a $13 billion hole in the budget - don’t believe lies that we can keep tax cuts for working families and small businesses but eliminate the tax on the wealthy few that pays for them.”
The core is real: the state's budget outlook already counts on this revenue, so repeal opens a gap going forward, and $13 billion matches four years of projected collections (FY2029-32). But no current budget has a hole, because nothing is collected until April 2029. In the outlook that does exist, for 2027-29, the gap is about $2.0 billion with the relief kept (our calculation), not $13 billion; most of the $13 billion falls in years beyond the outlook. The second half of the sentence is wrong: calling it a lie that the tax cuts can be kept contradicts the Attorney General's statement that the relief "would not be repealed and would remain in place" under I-645. Paying for that relief is a real budget question, but keeping it is what I-645 does. (The relief would fall only if a court struck the tax down, under Sec. 1202.)
- The bill's revenue-side relief costs $0.35-0.83 billion a year in FY2029-32; with the relief kept, repeal loses the gross amount. FactHub Research Team · Qualifies
- The outlook's +$0.653 billion 2027-29 balance becomes about -$2.0 billion without the gross tax if its relief stays (our calculation). FactHub Research Team · Qualifies
- Counting the relief that continues, the memo puts the fiscal impact at nearly $16.6 billion through 2032. Pacifica Law Group · Qualifies
- I-645 keeps the tax relief that passed with the income tax. Washington Attorney General's Office · Qualifies
- If a court strikes the tax down, the whole package, including its tax relief, is void; I-645 does not repeal this clause. Washington State Legislature · Qualifies
- No current appropriation relies on the income tax. Washington Research Council
“Yes side (Brian Heywood, I-645 sponsor): "our initiative doesn't do anything with K through 12 funding."”
Short answer: Goes too far
This goes too far the other way. The general fund pays for most K-12 education, OFM says repeal would reduce general-fund money for core services "particularly public K-12 education," and the outlook counts the revenue. What is true is narrower: I-645 cuts no current K-12 appropriation, and the tax was never dedicated to K-12.
- OFM says the lost revenue would reduce general-fund money for core services, particularly K-12, higher education and health care. Office of Financial Management · Qualifies
- The current budget outlook already assumes $2.698 billion of income-tax revenue in 2027-29. Washington Research Council · Qualifies
“OFM says $11.4 billion, so the No campaign's $13 billion is inflated.”
Short answer: No: different window
OFM's statement covers fiscal years 2027-31, which contain only three years of collections (FY2029-31). The No figure covers four (FY2029-32). On the same three years, ERFC's newer September 2026 forecast is $12.9 billion, higher than OFM's.
- OFM estimates repeal would cost $11.4 billion over fiscal years 2027-31, a window with collections in only FY2029-31. Office of Financial Management
- Fiscal note FY2029-32: $12.894 billion; OFM FY2027-31: $11.432 billion; ERFC September FY2029-31: $12.938 billion. FactHub Research Team
- Official estimates have risen since March: FY2029 from $2.698 billion to $3.503 billion and FY2030 from $3.732 billion to $5.032 billion (ERFC split ours). FactHub Research Team
“The $13 billion may never arrive, so nothing is really lost.”
Short answer: Possible, not shown
The estimate is uncertain. It assumes high earners do not change their behavior, and a pending lawsuit (Petter v. State) argues the tax is unconstitutional; if courts strike it, revenue is zero either way. But the official forecasts have risen, not fallen, since March, and the budget outlook relies on them. Uncertainty about the amount does not make it zero.
- The revenue estimate assumes high earners do not change their behavior. Washington Department of Revenue / OFM · Qualifies
- Official estimates have risen since March: FY2029 from $2.698 billion to $3.503 billion and FY2030 from $3.732 billion to $5.032 billion (ERFC split ours). FactHub Research Team
Conclusion
Both campaigns have half of this right. The No campaign's $13 billion is a fair size for what repeal gives up: it is exactly four years of the Legislature's own gross estimate (FY2029-32, $12.894 billion), the figure the No campaign's lawyers used, and the newer September 2026 forecast puts three years alone at $12.938 billion. Yes-side writers who answer with OFM's $11.4 billion are comparing a three-collection-year window with a four-year one. Because the tax cuts passed with the income tax survive I-645, gross rather than net revenue is the right measure of what the budget loses. The relief stays if voters repeal the tax through I-645, but the 2026 law voids it if a court strikes the tax down (Sec. 1202). But "cut" describes something I-645 does not do. No tax is collected until April 2029; no current appropriation relies on it; and the law deposits 95% of it in the general fund, from which only the Legislature appropriates. The 5% for Fair Start for Kids (about $377 million through FY2031 per OFM) is the only dollar the law dedicates, and it is dedicated to child care and early learning, not K-12. Free school lunches appear only as legislative intent, and OFM excludes intent from its estimate. The No side's strongest fact is real and belongs beside the verdict: the state's enacted budget outlook already counts on the tax. It books $2.309 billion net in 2027-29 and ends that biennium with $0.653 billion; take out the gross tax while keeping its relief, as I-645 would, and the balance is about -$2.0 billion (our calculation). Whether that gap is closed by spending cuts, reserves, other taxes or trimming the relief is a choice the 2027 Legislature would make; the No campaign's own legal memo lists all four. Calling the result "cuts to schools" states one of those choices as a certainty and labels general-fund money as school money. We rate the claim True with high confidence because every number comes from a state document and the legal facts (timing, the 95/5 split) are not disputed by either side. What remains uncertain is the size of the revenue itself: the estimate is static, the tax base is volatile, and a pending constitutional challenge (Petter v. State) could make the revenue zero with or without I-645; if that challenge succeeds, Sec. 1202 also voids the relief.
Voting yes on Initiative 645 will not cut K-12 education funding, and it will not cut health care funding. This tax isn't even set to be collected until 2029.
Context: Response to Rian Watt in the same segment. She added that lawmakers declined to earmark the money for health care and education.
Source: The millionaires tax is on the WA ballot this fall. Both sides make their case, KUOW (Oct. 8, 2026) · View in the dataset
They like to throw in K through 12, but our initiative doesn't do anything with K through 12 funding. So if they write K through 12, it is a lie, and we'll challenge it.
Context: Heywood was discussing the ballot's public investment impact disclosure before the Attorney General had written it, predicting it would mention K-12. The Attorney General's July 23 disclosure did name K-12; a judge upheld it and Let's Go Washington's own challenge was never heard.
Source: Heywood says I-645 fiscal impact statement is premature, vows court challenge, Seattle Red (July 19, 2026) · View in the dataset
How we checked
- Defined the claim as two parts: how much revenue I-645 gives up, and whether it cuts any current budget.
- Traced the No campaign's $13 billion: the pamphlet, website and press releases cite no source; matched it to the fiscal note's FY2029-32 gross line through the No campaign's own legal memo.
- Put every official estimate (fiscal note, OFM fiscal impact statement, ERFC June and September 2026) on the same fiscal-year basis in a FactHub dataset; ERFC's FY2030-31 split is our calculation from its published 5% Fair Start transfers.
- Read the law (ESSB 6346 sections 1 and 202), the Attorney General's explanatory statement, and the court ruling on how the revenue may be described.
- Read the enacted budget outlook and computed its 2027-29 balance without the tax, keeping the relief as I-645 would.
- Checked both campaigns' exact words and rated them separately in Common questions; limitations are stated for each evidence item.
Editorial note: Scope: the revenue at stake if I-645 passes and whether it cuts any current budget. We do not rate whether the state needs the money; that is a value judgment. The tax's volatility, behavioral response and constitutionality are covered only as caveats. All figures are nominal dollars. Our own arithmetic (window totals, the outlook balance without the tax, ERFC's year-by-year split) is labeled as ours and reproducible from the linked dataset.
Expert-review status
No external specialist review has been recorded.
Funding and conflicts
Funding: No external funding for this piece.
Ownership: Published by the FactHub Research Team.
Conflicts: None declared.
Sources
Sources are labeled by kind, with what this fact check takes from each, so readers can check the evidence independently.
-
Government
Office of Financial Management.
Fiscal Impact Statement for Initiative 645 (July 2026)
OFM's legally required estimate of I-645's fiscal effect, printed in the voters' pamphlet.
Reliability: Required by RCW 29A.72.025. Covers fiscal years 2027-2031 and excludes effects that depend on future legislative action or intent.
-
OFM estimates repeal would cost $11.4 billion over fiscal years 2027-31, a window with collections in only FY2029-31.
What the source says
If approved by voters, Initiative 645 will result in an estimated loss to state revenue of $11.4 billion over state fiscal years 2027-2031.
Summary, p. 1 -
No tax is paid until April 2029.
What the source says
There are no estimated tax payments required in tax year 2028 (calendar year 2028), therefore the first payments are due from taxpayers in April 2029.
State Revenue Assumptions, p. 2 -
OFM leaves out effects that exist only as legislative intent, such as free school meals.
What the source says
impacts that might occur due to actions of a future Legislature or those only expressed through legislative intent, are not included.
General assumptions, p. 1 -
Qualifies: OFM says the lost revenue would reduce general-fund money for core services, particularly K-12, higher education and health care.
What the source says
This would reduce funding to the state general fund to support core government services, particularly public K-12 education, higher education (including universities and community colleges), and human services (primarily healthcare).
Summary, p. 1
-
-
Government
Washington Department of Revenue / OFM.
Multiple Agency Fiscal Note Summary, ESSB 6346 (2026), Tax on millionaires
The Legislature's fiscal note for the enacted bill, with the Department of Revenue's revenue estimate and assumptions.
Reliability: Prepared by the Department of Revenue for the Legislature in March 2026; the source of the $12.894 billion four-year gross figure.
-
Qualifies: The revenue estimate assumes high earners do not change their behavior.
What the source says
In response to the new tax, affected taxpayers do not reduce taxable income.
Department of Revenue fiscal note, II.B Cash receipts impact, Assumptions
-
-
Government
Washington State Legislature.
ESSB 6346, Chapter 238, Laws of 2026 (session law)
The enacted text of the millionaires tax.
Reliability: Official session law. Section 1 states legislative intent; section 202 is the operative distribution rule that I-645 would repeal.
-
Qualifies: The law deposits the tax in the general fund and names K-12, health care, human services and higher education as purposes, without appropriating it.
What the source says
Taxes collected under this chapter must be deposited in the state general fund
Sec. 202(1), p. 9 -
Free school meals appear only as a statement of intent.
What the source says
The legislature intends to further support academic success and well-being of our children in K-12 education by providing access to breakfast and lunch for all children served without charge each school day.
Sec. 1(2), p. 1-2 -
Qualifies: If a court strikes the tax down, the whole package, including its tax relief, is void; I-645 does not repeal this clause.
What the source says
If a court of final jurisdiction invalidates section 201 of this act, sections 1 through 1003 and 1201 through 1209 of this act are null and void in its entirety.
Sec. 1202, p. 107
-
-
Government
Washington Attorney General's Office.
Ballot Title and Explanatory Statement for Initiative IL26-645 (July 23, 2026)
The AG's official explanation of current law and of I-645's effect, printed in the voters' pamphlet.
Reliability: Written by the AG's office as required by law; edited and approved by Thurston County Superior Court after the No campaign sought changes.
-
Only 5% of the revenue is dedicated, to child care and early learning; 95% goes to the general fund.
What the source says
Five percent of the money collected from this tax is deposited into an account that can only be used for childcare and early learning purposes.
The Law As It Presently Exists, p. 2 -
Qualifies: I-645 keeps the tax relief that passed with the income tax.
What the source says
The non-income tax credits, exemptions, and deductions that accompanied this tax would not be repealed and would remain in place.
The Effect of the Proposed Measure if Approved, p. 2
-
-
News report
Washington State Standard.
WA judge rejects bid to ditch description of income tax initiative's budget effects (Aug. 7, 2026)
Report on the Thurston County rulings on I-645's ballot disclosure and explanatory statement.
Reliability: Nonprofit state-government news outlet (States Newsroom); reporter Jerry Cornfield attended the hearings.
-
The judge refused to let the explanatory statement say the tax directs money to specific services.
What the source says
It doesn’t direct. It has hopes.
Ruling on the explanatory statement, final paragraphs · Judge Anne Egeler, Thurston County Superior Court -
Only the Legislature can appropriate general-fund money.
What the source says
Egeler countered that only the Legislature can make appropriations from the general fund.
Ruling on the explanatory statement
-
-
Advocacy group
Washington Research Council.
New brief: I-645: Repealing the State Individual Income Tax (Sept. 22, 2026)
Summary of WRC's budget analysis of I-645.
Reliability: Business-funded nonpartisan research group that has criticized the income tax; this brief takes no position on I-645 and concedes repeal makes budgeting harder.
-
No current appropriation relies on the income tax.
What the source says
Because the income tax is not yet being collected, no current appropriations rely on the revenues.
Paragraph 2 -
Qualifies: The current budget outlook already assumes $2.698 billion of income-tax revenue in 2027-29.
What the source says
The outlook for the current operating budget assumes $2.698 billion in income tax revenues in 2027–29.
Paragraph 2 -
Qualifies: Repeal would make the structural budget gap harder to close, though keeping the tax would not close it alone.
What the source says
Repealing the income tax would make it more difficult for the state to close the persistent gap between spending and ongoing revenues, but maintaining the tax would not solve the problem on its own.
Paragraph 3
-
-
Government
Economic and Revenue Forecast Council.
Enacted 2026 Supplemental Budget Outlook Methodology (April 22, 2026)
Methodology for the official four-year outlook of the enacted 2026 supplemental budget.
Reliability: ERFC adopts the outlook required by RCW 43.88.055; it lists which projected expenditures are mandatory.
-
Qualifies: The outlook includes $140 million for free school meals in FY2029, labeled not mandatory.
What the source says
These expenditures are not mandatory but are included in expenditure projections at the direction of the ERFC on April 14, 2026.
K-12 Education, policy level adjustments
-
-
Party to the dispute
Pacifica Law Group.
Memorandum to Millionaires Tax for WA on Initiative 645 (July 2026)
Legal and fiscal memo prepared for the coalition opposing I-645, citing the ESSB 6346 fiscal note.
Reliability: Speaks against its own interest. Written for the No campaign. It is the only document we found that shows where the $13 billion comes from, and it concedes points against the campaign's "cuts" framing: cuts are one option among several, and about 55% of the revenue is non-dedicated.
-
The No campaign's lawyers put repeal at $12.9 billion over 2029-2032, the fiscal note's four years.
What the source says
Repeal of the tax is projected to reduce state revenues by approximately $12.9 billion between 2029 and 2032.
Section I -
About 55% of projected revenue is non-dedicated general-fund money.
What the source says
Approximately 55 percent of projected revenue is directed to the non-dedicated State General Fund.
Section II -
Qualifies: Counting the relief that continues, the memo puts the fiscal impact at nearly $16.6 billion through 2032.
What the source says
the net fiscal impact is estimated at nearly $16.6 billion through 2032
Section II -
Future legislatures could close the gap with cuts, changes to the relief, other revenue, or a mix.
What the source says
future legislatures would need to determine whether to reduce spending, modify existing tax reductions and credits, identify alternative revenue sources, or pursue some combination of those approaches.
Section II
-
-
News report
KXLY.
Fact check: What you need to know about Initiative 645, the millionaires tax repeal (Oct. 14, 2026)
Spokane TV station's fact check of both campaigns' ads, republished by its sister radio station.
Reliability: Local broadcast news; one of the few outlets we found that checked the $13 billion claim.
-
KXLY independently found the $13 billion is future revenue that would not be raised, not a cut to an existing budget.
What the source says
an estimated $13 billion in future tax funds that will not be raised
Section on No campaign ads
-
-
FactHub record
FactHub Research Team.
Totals by estimate and window of years
Saved analysis summing each official estimate over the fiscal years each figure covers.
-
Fiscal note FY2029-32: $12.894 billion; OFM FY2027-31: $11.432 billion; ERFC September FY2029-31: $12.938 billion.
-
-
FactHub record
FactHub Research Team.
Gross income-tax revenue by fiscal year, four official estimates
Saved analysis listing each estimate by fiscal year.
-
Official estimates have risen since March: FY2029 from $2.698 billion to $3.503 billion and FY2030 from $3.732 billion to $5.032 billion (ERFC split ours).
-
-
FactHub record
FactHub Research Team.
2027-29 outlook ending balance with and without the income tax
Saved analysis removing the income tax from the enacted budget outlook.
-
Qualifies: The outlook's +$0.653 billion 2027-29 balance becomes about -$2.0 billion without the gross tax if its relief stays (our calculation).
-
-
FactHub record
FactHub Research Team.
Fiscal note: tax relief bundled with the income tax, FY2029-32
Saved analysis comparing the fiscal note's gross tax with the bill's net revenue.
-
Qualifies: The bill's revenue-side relief costs $0.35-0.83 billion a year in FY2029-32; with the relief kept, repeal loses the gross amount.
-
-
FactHub dataset
Washington millionaires tax (ESSB 6346): official revenue estimates by fiscal year
-
Tables: estimates-by-fy
Saved analysis window-totals
-
Tables: outlook-2027-29
Saved analysis outlook-without-tax
-
This measure cuts funding for K-12 public schools, healthcare, childcare, and other important public services by $13 billion over four years.
Committee against I-645 (Janie White, WEA; April Sims, WSLC; et al.), Authors of the official voters' pamphlet argument against I-645, · In the dataset -
They like to throw in K through 12, but our initiative doesn't do anything with K through 12 funding. So if they write K through 12, it is a lie, and we'll challenge it.
Brian Heywood, Founder of Let's Go Washington, sponsor of I-645, · In the dataset -
Voting yes on Initiative 645 will not cut K-12 education funding, and it will not cut health care funding. This tax isn't even set to be collected until 2029.
Jaime Herrera Beutler, Spokesperson for the Yes on I-645 campaign, · In the dataset
-
-
FactHub dataset
Initiative 645: the campaigns' claims in their own words
-
This measure cuts funding for K-12 public schools, healthcare, childcare, and other important public services by $13 billion over four years.
Committee for the argument against Initiative 645 (WEA President Janie White and five co-authors), Authors of the official voters' pamphlet argument against I-645, · In the dataset -
That means larger class sizes, higher costs for healthcare and childcare, and the elimination of free school lunches for many children.
Committee for the argument against Initiative 645 (WEA President Janie White and five co-authors), Authors of the official voters' pamphlet argument against I-645, · In the dataset -
I-645 blows a $13 billion hole in the budget - don’t believe lies that we can keep tax cuts for working families and small businesses but eliminate the tax on the wealthy few that pays for them.
Committee for the argument against Initiative 645 (WEA President Janie White and five co-authors), Authors of the official voters' pamphlet argument against I-645, · In the dataset
-
- FactHub chart wa-millionaires-tax-revenue-estimates-by-fy
Update history
- Disclosure updated to the standard wording. First Look review (grade A, no findings) required no content changes.
- Added the court-invalidation caveat: the relief survives repeal by I-645 but is void if a court strikes the tax down (ESSB 6346 Sec. 1202).
- Three Common questions now rate the No campaign's exact voters' pamphlet sentences, citing FactHub's campaign-statements dataset: the $13 billion sentence (Mixed), the school-lunches sentence (Misleading, now addressing the whole sentence) and the "$13 billion hole" rebuttal (Mostly true, with a note on the rest of that sentence).
- Rating of the No rebuttal "I-645 blows a $13 billion hole in the budget..." changed from Mostly true to Mixed, now rating the full sentence: the forward gap is real, but no current budget has a hole, the 2027-29 outlook gap is about $2.0 billion, and the claim that keeping the tax cuts is a "lie" contradicts the Attorney General's statement.
- First draft.
Cited by
For search, research, and AI systems
Machine-readable fact-check
This page includes standardized ClaimReview metadata describing the exact claim, FactHub's finding, publisher, and review dates. You can inspect the record below and confirm that it matches the article you just read.
View ClaimReview JSON
{"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"ClaimReview","url":"https://facthub.org/n/article/i645-13-billion-no-current-cuts/5","datePublished":"2026-10-21","dateModified":"2026-10-22","author":{"@type":"Organization","name":"FactHub","url":"https://facthub.org/"},"claimReviewed":"I-645 would forgo about $13 billion in revenue over the tax\u0027s first four years, but it would not cut any current school, health-care or child-care budget.","reviewRating":{"@type":"Rating","alternateName":"True"},"image":"https://facthub.org/node-assets-v2/article/i645-13-billion-no-current-cuts/5/capitol-dome/social-1200x630.jpg"}This metadata helps machines discover the fact-check. It does not prove the conclusion or guarantee special treatment by a search engine.
Challenge this fact-check
Every source above is linked so you can check it yourself. Identify the specific conclusion you dispute and provide verifiable evidence that could change it. Credible challenges deserve review and a visible response.
Submit evidence Send general feedback insteadTechnical details: node handle article:i645-13-billion-no-current-cuts