Skip to main content

SB 6055

In Committee

Senate

Firearms background checks

Concerning firearms background check.

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: January 11, 2026
Last Action: January 12, 2026
Status: S Law & Justice
Companion Bill:

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 & CommunitiesPeople-leaningCorporate & Wealthy Interests

This bill creates a new, centralized automated firearms background check system run by the Washington State Patrol to replace current processes, requiring dealers to use it for all firearm sales or transfers (except pawn transactions) and charging a fee to fund the system. It expands data sources used in checks and adds transparency and appeal rights for applicants.

  • Establishes a centralized, automated firearms background check system operated by the Washington State Patrol as the single point of contact for dealers.
  • Requires dealers to use the system for all firearm sales or transfers (except pawn transactions), charging a fee to cover program costs (capped at $18 per check).
  • Expands background checks to include data from multiple state and federal databases—including Washington’s crime information center, health care authority records, FBI national data exchange, and court records—plus foreign conviction equivalency analysis.
  • Mandates real-time responses (approve, deny, or indeterminate), unique identifiers for each check, and a formal appeals process for denied applicants.
  • Requires the Washington State Patrol to report annually to the legislature on average processing time and to consult with the Washington Background Check Advisory Board.
  • Includes a sunset clause: Section 1 expires May 1, 2027; Section 2 (the permanent version) takes effect May 1, 2027.

Who is affected

  • Firearm dealersFirearm dealers must now use the Washington State Patrol’s new centralized background check system for all firearm sales or transfers (except pawn transactions), charge a fee to buyers to cover system costs, and comply with new procedural requirements.
  • Firearm purchasers and transfereesIndividuals seeking to buy or receive firearms must undergo a background check through the new system; if denied, they gain a formal right to appeal and request details about why they were denied.
  • Washington State PatrolThe Washington State Patrol must develop, operate, and maintain the new automated background check system, including integrating multiple state and federal databases, and reporting performance metrics to the legislature.
  • Washington Background Check Advisory BoardThe Washington Background Check Advisory Board must be consulted during system development and operation, providing expert input on implementation and improvements.
Effective: May 1, 2027Fiscal impact: The bill authorizes a background check fee (up to $18) collected from firearm buyers to fund the Washington State Patrol’s background check program, with fees deposited into the state firearms background check system account. The bill does not specify a net fiscal impact on the state general fund.Sunset: May 1, 2027
Model: Intel/Qwen3-Coder-Next-int4-AutoRoundGenerated: Mar 20, 2026 at 2:38 AM

Pro/Con Analysis

Stronger case for benefits

Potential Benefits (5)
  • The bill establishes a formal appeals process for denied applicants, including the right to obtain the reasons for denial and to challenge erroneous records—enhancing due process and reducing wrongful denials.

    Rights & LibertiesPeopleRef: Sec. 1(5), Sec. 2(5)
  • Mandated annual reporting on average processing times increases accountability and allows for performance evaluation, supporting timely and efficient background checks—critical for preventing delays in lawful transfers and identifying systemic failures.

    Public SafetyPeopleRef: Sec. 1(9), Sec. 2(9)
  • Integration with the FBI National Data Exchange and statewide local law enforcement record systems improves comprehensiveness of background checks, increasing the likelihood of identifying prohibited persons with out-of-state or multi-jurisdictional records.

    Public SafetyPeopleRef: Sec. 1(2)(iii), Sec. 2(2)(iii)
  • Mandating foreign conviction equivalency analysis ensures that individuals with international criminal records cannot exploit jurisdictional gaps to bypass prohibitions—enhancing consistency and fairness in eligibility determinations.

    Public SafetyPeopleRef: Sec. 1(2)(v), Sec. 2(2)(v)
  • Linking the background check system to the Administrative Office of the Courts case management system improves accuracy in identifying individuals with court-ordered prohibitions (e.g., no-contact orders, mental health commitments), reducing reliance on incomplete or outdated records.

    Public SafetyLean peopleRef: Sec. 1(6), Sec. 2(6)
Potential Concerns (5)
  • A $18-per-check fee is imposed on every firearm purchaser (except pawn transactions), effectively creating a new user fee that adds a direct out-of-pocket cost for lawful gun buyers—potentially deterring lawful transfers or purchases, especially among low- and middle-income individuals.

    FinancialRef: Sec. 1(4)(a), Sec. 2(4)(a)
  • Background check records are exempt from public disclosure under the Public Records Act (chapter 42.56 RCW), limiting transparency and public oversight of how eligibility determinations are made and how errors occur.

    Rights & LibertiesRef: Sec. 1(10), Sec. 2(10)
  • Access to the Washington Health Care Authority’s electronic database for background checks raises privacy concerns—particularly if mental health or substance use treatment records are included—potentially deterring individuals from seeking care due to fear of future firearm eligibility consequences.

    HealthcareRef: Sec. 1(2)(ii), Sec. 2(2)(ii)
  • While the bill expands data sources, it does not mandate inclusion of all relevant federal or state databases (e.g., domestic violence restraining orders not resulting in conviction, or emergency protective orders), limiting the system’s ability to prevent high-risk transfers.

    Public SafetyRef: Sec. 1(2)(v), Sec. 2(2)(v)
  • Pawn transactions are explicitly exempted from the fee and centralized check requirement, creating a regulatory loophole that could allow firearm transfers without the same level of vetting as other sales—potentially undermining public safety goals.

    Business & EmploymentRef: Sec. 1(4)(b), Sec. 2(4)(b)

Who Is Most Affected

Firearm dealersMixed Impact

Firearm dealers face a new administrative requirement and fee collection obligation, but benefit from a standardized, centralized system that reduces reliance on the federal NICS system and may reduce liability exposure. The $18 fee is capped and self-funding, limiting net cost impact.

Firearm purchasers and transfereesMixed Impact

Lawful firearm purchasers gain due process rights and potentially faster, more accurate checks—but pay a new $18 fee. Those with complex or erroneous records may benefit from the appeals process, while those with minor or outdated records may face unwarranted delays or denials.

Washington State PatrolPositive Impact

The Washington State Patrol gains new responsibilities but also a dedicated funding stream (user fees) and performance metrics. The centralized system may improve operational efficiency and reduce reliance on federal resources, but requires significant upfront IT investment.

Washington Background Check Advisory BoardPositive Impact

The Advisory Board gains formal consultation authority, enhancing its influence over system design and fairness. However, its impact depends on whether its recommendations are binding—text does not require adoption of its advice.

General public / taxpayersMixed Impact

Taxpayers benefit from a self-funded program (fees cover costs), avoiding general fund expenditures. However, the $18 fee is regressive relative to income, and the public loses transparency due to record exemptions.

Sponsors

Senator Nobles(Democrat)District 28Primary
Senator Conway(Democrat)District 29Secondary
Senator Dhingra(Democrat)District 45Secondary
Senator Liias(Democrat)District 21Secondary
Senator Pedersen(Democrat)District 43Secondary
Senator Trudeau(Democrat)District 27Secondary
Senator Wilson(Democrat)District 30Secondary