Skip to main content

HB 2743

In Committee

House

State property tax reduction

Reducing state property taxes.

This status may be delayed. See Action History below for the latest updates.

How does a bill become law?
  1. Introduced: The bill is filed and assigned a number.
  2. Committee: A subject-matter committee holds hearings, takes public testimony, and decides whether to advance the bill.
  3. Floor Vote: The full chamber (House or Senate) debates and votes on the bill.
  4. Opposite Chamber: The bill repeats the committee and floor vote process in the other chamber.
  5. Governor: The Governor reviews the bill and decides whether to sign or veto it.
  6. Signed: The bill has been signed into law.
Introduced: February 26, 2026
Last Action: February 27, 2026
Status: H Finance

AI Analysis

This analysis was generated by AI and may contain errors. It is not legal advice. Always refer to the official bill text for authoritative information.
People & CommunitiesCorporate-leaningCorporate & Wealthy Interests

This bill cuts state property taxes by $2.1 billion starting in 2027, primarily by lowering the amount the state can collect for K–12 schools. It also tightens the legal cap on state property taxes to $3.60 per $1,000 of assessed value and adds automatic triggers to reduce rates if that cap is exceeded.

  • Reduces the state property tax levy for common schools by $2.1 billion for taxes collected in 2027 and later.
  • Sets a new cap of $3.60 per $1,000 of assessed value for combined state property taxes (for 2022 and later), with automatic across-the-board rate reductions if the cap is exceeded.
  • Changes how the state calculates the maximum property tax it can collect for schools, shifting from a fixed rate formula to a formula based on the previous year’s highest lawful levy minus $2.1 billion.
  • Requires that any excess property tax revenue collected above the $3.60 cap be reduced proportionally across all tax rates to stay under the cap.
  • Clarifies that school capital construction (bond payments) is included in the definition of 'support of common schools' for tax purposes.

Who is affected

  • Property ownersHomeowners and property owners across Washington will pay less in state property taxes starting in 2027, with an estimated reduction of $2.1 billion statewide in that year alone.
  • Public schools and school districtsPublic K–12 schools will receive less state funding from property taxes starting in 2027, which may affect capital projects like building repairs or new construction, since the law ties part of the funding to property tax revenue.
  • State governmentThe state government will collect less revenue from property taxes, requiring adjustments to the state budget and potentially shifting more responsibility for school funding to other sources like the state general fund.
  • Local governmentsLocal governments may see changes in how much they receive from the state for school funding, depending on how the $2.1 billion reduction is allocated and whether additional state funding is provided to make up for the shortfall.
Effective: January 1, 2027Fiscal impact: Reduces state property tax revenue by $2.1 billion in 2027 and likely in future years, unless offset by other funding sources; this may require the state to find alternative revenue or cut other spending to maintain school funding levels.
Model: Intel/Qwen3-Coder-Next-int4-AutoRoundGenerated: Mar 20, 2026 at 2:55 AM

Pro/Con Analysis

Stronger case for concerns

Potential Benefits (3)
  • The $3.60 per $1,000 cap on state property taxes provides predictability and a hard limit on state-level property tax rates, which may offer short-term relief to homeowners facing rising assessed values—especially in high-appreciation areas like King and Snohomish counties.

    FinancialLean industryRef: Sec. 1(1), (4)(a)
  • The bill’s structural change—linking the 2027 levy to the “highest lawful levy” minus $2.1 billion—may reduce future property tax growth in high-appreciation jurisdictions, as the state will no longer automatically increase levies to match rising valuations, capping revenue growth at the statutory rate.

    HousingLean industryRef: Sec. 1(6)
  • The automatic across-the-board rate reduction if the $3.60 cap is exceeded creates a built-in safeguard against property tax overcollection, reducing the need for post-levy refunds and minimizing administrative disputes between counties and the state department of revenue.

    Local GovernmentRef: Sec. 1(4)(a), (4)(b)
Potential Concerns (5)
  • Reducing state property tax revenue by $2.1 billion in 2027 will likely force the state to shift school funding responsibilities away from property taxes and toward the general fund, increasing pressure on other budget priorities—including public safety—and potentially reducing resources for school resource officers, mental health staff, and emergency preparedness programs in districts.

    Public SafetyIndustryRef: Sec. 1(1), (4)(a), (6)
  • The $2.1 billion reduction in school property tax levies starting in 2027 will significantly reduce state funding for K–12 schools, disproportionately affecting districts in high-need areas that rely heavily on state support to supplement local property tax revenues; this may lead to larger class sizes, reduced support staff, and deferred capital maintenance—especially in districts with lower property values per student.

    EducationIndustryRef: Sec. 1(6), (4)(b)
  • Local governments may face increased pressure to fund school capital projects through local bond measures or supplemental levies, as the state shifts responsibility for school construction funding away from property taxes—potentially leading to more frequent local ballot initiatives and increased administrative burden on county auditors and election offices.

    Local GovernmentIndustryRef: Sec. 1(6), (4)(b)
  • The automatic rate-reduction trigger (pro rata reduction if cap exceeded) may create volatility in property tax bills for homeowners, especially in areas where assessed values rise rapidly—potentially causing unpredictable tax bills and undermining long-term budget planning for both households and local governments.

    HousingIndustryRef: Sec. 1(4)(b)
  • While the bill reduces property taxes for all property owners, the $2.1 billion cut is structured to benefit higher-assessed-value properties disproportionately—commercial and industrial properties (e.g., warehouses, office parks, apartment complexes) will see larger dollar savings than most residential owners, especially given Washington’s regressive property tax system where commercial properties are assessed at 100% of real value while residential at 99% of market value.

    Business & EmploymentIndustryRef: Sec. 1(6)

Who Is Most Affected

Higher-income homeowners in high-appreciation countiesMixed Impact

Homeowners in high-appreciation areas (e.g., Seattle, Bellevue, Tacoma) will see meaningful property tax savings in 2027, especially those with higher-valued homes—though the benefit is concentrated in wealthier neighborhoods and does not offset broader underfunding of schools that serve their children.

Public school districts in low-wealth areasNegative Impact

School districts in lower-wealth areas (e.g., Eastern WA, rural SW WA) will face significant funding shortfalls, as they rely more heavily on state property tax revenue to equalize funding across districts; this may worsen resource disparities and limit capital improvements.

Local government administrators and finance officesNegative Impact

Local governments (counties, cities, school districts) will face increased administrative and fiscal pressure to fund school capital projects through local levies or bonds, potentially triggering more frequent ballot measures and straining limited staff resources.

Commercial and industrial property ownersPositive Impact

Commercial property owners (e.g., warehouse operators, apartment complexes, office landlords) will receive the largest dollar savings due to higher assessed values and 100% assessment ratio, while residential owners benefit less in absolute terms despite similar rate reductions.

State budget planners and agenciesMixed Impact

State government will need to reallocate general fund dollars to offset school funding shortfalls, potentially crowding out other priorities like health care, transportation, or social services—especially if no new revenue is added.

Sponsors

Representative Couture(Republican)District 35Primary
Representative Orcutt(Republican)District 20Secondary
Representative Abell(Republican)District 7Secondary
Representative Barnard(Republican)District 8Secondary
Representative Dufault(Republican)District 15Secondary
Representative Keaton(Republican)District 25Secondary
Representative Dye(Republican)District 9Secondary
Representative Marshall(Republican)District 2Secondary
Representative Abbarno(Republican)District 20Secondary
Representative Ley(Republican)District 18Secondary
Representative Ybarra(Republican)District 13Secondary
Representative Barkis(Republican)District 2Secondary
Representative Corry(Republican)District 15Secondary
Representative Schmidt(Republican)District 4Secondary
Representative Jacobsen(Republican)District 25Secondary