Transcript Highlights:

• Rent control tends to refer to stricter limits on rents.
• Rent control tends to refer to stricter limits on rents.
• The lower-income, lowest-income earners—the lower 50% of earners—are not seeing their rents drop; they
• How would you like it if someone comes to you and says, I'm going to limit your income, Senators?
• I'm going to limit your income, Representatives? It's wrong.

Bills: H5008

Committee: Joint Special Joint Committee on Initiative Petitions

Keywords: rent control, housing stability, tenants rights, affordability crisis, consumer protection, 1212, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Rent control tends to refer to stricter limits on rents.
• Rent control tends to refer to stricter limits on rents.
• The lower-income, lowest-income earners, the lower 50% of earners, are not seeing their rents drop; they
• How would you like it if someone comes to you and says, 'I'm going to limit your income, Senators.
• I'm going to limit your income, Representatives'? It's wrong. It just happened this morning.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Special Joint Committee on Initiative Petitions held a public hearing on Initiative Petition 25-21, House Bill 508, an act to protect tenants by limiting rent increases. Committee leaders explained the Article 48 initiative process and said the hearing was intended to gather testimony for a report to the legislature. The measure would replace current state law that prohibits rent control, cap annual rent increases at the lower of CPI or 5%, exempt certain properties including owner-occupied buildings of four or fewer units, subsidized, university, nonprofit, and short-term rental housing, and exempt new construction for 10 years. It would also eliminate vacancy decontrol, so limits would continue when units turn over, and enforcement would rely largely on tenants and the Attorney General through the courts. The hearing began with expert testimony from Whitney Airgood-Obrien of Harvard’s Joint Center for Housing Studies, who described Massachusetts’ severe rental affordability problems and reviewed research on rent regulation, noting mixed evidence on supply and quality effects but clearer evidence that rent regulation can slow rent growth and improve tenant stability. Supporters of the petition, led by Carolyn Chow of Homes for All Massachusetts, argued that rent stabilization is needed now to curb displacement and runaway rent increases, especially for low- and moderate-income renters. Laura Frost described her Arlington building being bought by a large firm that sought steep rent hikes, and said rent control would help prevent “tenant flipping” and community displacement. Dave Foley of SEIU Local 509 said the issue affects workers’ ability to live near their jobs, while Dr. Mark Paul and Tram Huang argued that the evidence supports well-designed rent stabilization, that vacancy decontrol encourages displacement, and that the policy should be seen as a complement to new housing production rather than a substitute. Committee members questioned supporters about the 10-year new construction exemption, the lack of vacancy decontrol, and whether rent stabilization could discourage development; supporters responded that the measure targets corporate rent gouging, that small landlords are protected by exemptions, and that production and rent stabilization can coexist. Opponents, including representatives of small property owners, chambers of commerce, and labor/building trades, argued the proposal would hurt small landlords, reduce investment, and slow housing production. They said operating costs such as taxes, insurance, and maintenance are rising faster than the proposed cap, and warned that the measure would reduce property values and tax revenue and could push investment to other states. Several opponents emphasized that many Massachusetts housing providers are mom-and-pop owners rather than large corporations, and said the policy would make it harder to maintain and improve housing. Committee members pressed both sides on the need for a middle ground between affordability and preserving development incentives, but no vote was taken at the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• Gross income, or AGI.
• income.
• Based interest income.
• to high-income earners?
• personal income calculated from federal income.

Summary: The Ways and Means Committee met on February 6, 2026, and first voted to suspend the five-day notice rule for all bills on the agenda. Senators Braun and Gildon objected, arguing the bill needed more public review and that the fiscal note had only just been released, but a roll call vote passed 15-9 and the committee proceeded to Senate Bill 6346. Staff briefed SB 6346 as a proposal to create a 9.9% income tax on Washington taxable income above a $1 million per-household standard deduction, with a $50,000 charitable deduction, apportionment rules for nonresidents and certain professions, quarterly estimated payments, and credits for capital gains tax and certain business taxes. Staff said the tax would begin in 2029 and eventually raise about $3.5 billion annually from roughly 30,000 taxpayers. The bill also would expand the Working Families Tax Credit, create a sales tax exemption for grooming and hygiene products, increase the small business B&O tax credit and filing threshold, and end the B&O surcharge on high-grossing businesses one year early. Members questioned the bill’s constitutionality, its exemption from referendum, treatment of student athletes, natural-resource industries, and whether real estate gains would be captured. Public testimony was sharply divided. Supporters, including labor groups, educators, health care advocates, counties, child care workers, and some business owners and high-income individuals, said the bill would make the tax code more progressive and provide stable funding for health care, education, child care, public defense, and other services, while expanding the Working Families Tax Credit. Opponents, including many small business, construction, housing, and taxpayer advocates, argued the measure would function as a tax on pass-through businesses and retained earnings, harm housing production and investment, encourage wealthy residents and businesses to leave the state, and violate the state constitution or the will of voters. No final action on SB 6346 was taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• in adjusted gross income.
• Both federal and California law currently taxes military retirement income and survivor benefits as income
• And that's in part because many states fully exempt. this income and many states have no state income
• We have identified key areas of improvement including future exemption increases, higher income limits
• So SSI is the main source of income or the only source of income for hundreds of thousands of people

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• They just had to be within the income cap.
• The new parent loan limits are also a concern.
• It's also worth noting that higher-income families are far more likely to exceed the new annual limit
• That would set a $20,500 annual limit, which is the current limit for graduate loans, and a $100,000
• So as you move from left to right on the graph, you go from the lowest-income students to middle-income

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• income, or AGI, and incorporates several modifications to arrive at their Washington base income.
• This bill specifies that income excluded from the federal AGI, including tribal treaty income, is also
• From the Washington-based income, there are three deductions and one income increase that are applied
• From the Washington-based income, there are three deductions and one income increase that are applied
• lowest income.

Summary: House Finance held a public hearing on Gross Substitute Senate Bill 6346, a proposal to impose a 9.9% tax beginning in 2028 on Washington taxable income over $1 million for individuals, with related rules for residents, nonresidents, pass-through entities, estimated payments, penalties, credits, and revenue distribution. Staff explained that the bill would also fund several tax changes, including an expanded Working Families Tax Credit, sales tax exemptions for grooming and hygiene products, higher small business B&O credits, an early end to the B&O surcharge on very large businesses, and repeal of most retail services sales tax changes from last session. The fiscal note projected about $2.53 billion in additional state revenue in FY 2029 and $3.21 billion in FY 2030, with local revenue losses and significant Department of Revenue implementation costs. The chair also announced concerns about apparent fraud and duplicate records in the public sign-in system and set testimony rules limiting questions and shortening testimony time as the hearing progressed. The prime sponsor, Senator Jamie Peterson, said the bill was intended to make Washington’s tax system less regressive and to raise revenue for schools, health care, higher education, and other public needs while reducing the burden on lower- and middle-income residents. Supporters from labor, education, health care, child care, housing, poverty-reduction, and social service organizations argued that the bill would help fund essential services, expand the Working Families Tax Credit, and improve fairness by asking the wealthiest households to contribute more. Several individual supporters, including business owners and workers, said they were willing to pay more and described the need for better-funded schools, health care, child care, and public defense. Opponents, including former Attorney General Rob McKenna, business groups, construction and real estate representatives, and taxpayer advocates, argued the measure would function as an unconstitutional income tax, would be unstable and likely expanded over time, and would harm small businesses organized as pass-through entities. They said the bill would reduce investment, discourage entrepreneurship, and could drive businesses and high earners out of Washington. Some local government representatives supported the public defense funding but asked for more dedicated revenue and protection against local revenue losses from the bill’s sales tax exemptions. No committee vote or final action was taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• Presently, under the Missouri income tax...
• If they make under, it has a joint—if their income level... ...make under, as a joint, if their income
• Are the income requirements the same? No, no. There is no income threshold for a public pension.
• In terms of where the means testing, the income limits are, those are determined based on the Missouri
• adjusted gross income.

Committee: House Pensions

Keywords: 959, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Well, first I should ask this question: Are the income on this sheet that we're looking at the income
• income exactly are we looking at?
• </c> their income? Yes, Miss Fergus. Mr. their income? Yes, Miss Fergus.
• </c> to 10% of their annual income. to 10% of their annual income.
• This is brand new. based on income thresholds and levels. based on income thresholds and levels.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• There's no three-month limit for the refugees and asylees.
• I will next discuss changes to the CalFresh time limit.
• Well, there was no time limit at that time. Right.
• And in addition to those, we saw a very significant income...
• who are immigrants, and that is the implementation of work and time limits, a work time limit.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Our forecast for personal income, just a reminder, personal income is all Our forecast for personal income
• Personal income is a big input to our revenue forecast, so it's something we watch pretty Personal income
• So, for example, if high-income incomes are growing very rapidly, it would show us personal income growing
• Mid-level income.
• We know people's incomes. ESD knows people's income.

Summary: House Finance met in work session on January 13, 2026, beginning with the introduction of new member Rep. Janice Zahn and a reminder about short-session amendment deadlines. The committee then heard JLARC’s 2025 tax preference performance reviews, covering nine preferences. JLARC recommended continuing several preferences, including natural gas transportation fuel exemptions, reduced B&O rates for travel agents and tour operators, a property tax exemption for nonprofit low-income housing developers, a property tax exemption for multipurpose senior centers, a sales and use tax remittance for disabled veteran adapted housing, a trade convention attendance nexus exemption, a B&O exemption for agricultural fertilizer and seed sales, and a hazardous substance tax exemption for certain pesticides. JLARC also recommended allowing unused silicon smelter-related preferences to expire. Members asked about legislative intent, data limitations, and how performance metrics should be tied more clearly to policy objectives; committee leaders and JLARC staff discussed a new standardized rubric for future tax preference performance statements and fiscal note review. The committee also noted that bills related to some of the reviewed preferences were already introduced. For the low-income housing exemption, JLARC said nonprofit developers were building homes as intended but that the current spending-based metric did not fully reflect the policy goal, and it recommended the legislature decide whether to continue or modify the preference. For multipurpose senior centers, JLARC said the exemption met its inferred objective and recommended continuation, with possible consideration of making it permanent. For the disabled veteran adapted housing remittance, JLARC said few eligible veterans were claiming the benefit and recommended continuation with changes to improve access and consultation with the Department of Veterans Affairs. On the trade convention attendance exemption, JLARC said use was unknown but the preference likely helped keep Washington competitive with other states and recommended continuation, though members questioned the lack of direct evidence and the administrative-burden rationale. The committee then received an update from the Economic and Revenue Forecast Council. The forecast showed the U.S. economy slowing but still growing, with Washington expected to have modest growth, weak employment gains, continued personal income growth, and slow construction. ERFC said tariffs and trade policy remained the biggest risks, inflation was expected to stay elevated in the near term, and the Federal Reserve had cut rates three times in 2025 with two more cuts projected in 2026. State revenues were up $105 million in the current biennium compared with the November forecast, but down $185 million in the next biennium, with growth driven in part by recent legislative changes and improved estate tax collections. Members asked about sector-specific employment trends, the impact of high-income households on retail sales, and how state revenues compare with personal income over time. The meeting adjourned after the forecast presentation.

Transcript Highlights:

• And then there are the income limits kind of specified below.
• </c><00:26:29.279><c> limits</c> And then um there are the income limits And then um there are the income
• Um, thank you, Scott. >> [Clears throat] Uh, question: the income limits that are specified under the
• Um, thank you, Scott. >> [Clears throat] Uh, question: the income limits that are specified under the
• Um, thank you, Scott. >> [Clears throat] Uh, question: the income limits that are specified under the

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The committee on Human Services and Homelessness received a briefing from Scott Morish of the Hawaii Department of Human Services on upcoming SNAP changes tied to the federal One Big Beautiful Bill Act (HR1/OBBA) and on the federal government shutdown’s impact on November SNAP benefits. DHS described its SNAP workload and statewide participation, noting about 86,229 households and 168,947 individuals receiving benefits in September, with roughly $58–$60 million distributed monthly. Morish said DHS has already made system and policy updates in preparation for the November 1 implementation date. Most of the briefing focused on expanded able-bodied adult work requirements. DHS explained that the work rule now applies to additional groups, including adults ages 55 to 64, households with dependent children age 14 and older, people experiencing homelessness, veterans, and youth ages 18 to 24 who transitioned from foster care. The department said affected individuals must generally work or participate in qualifying activities for 80 hours per month, with noncompliance leading to a three-month benefit limit and a 36-month ineligibility period. DHS also reviewed exemptions, including for disability, pregnancy, caregiving, school or training, unemployment, and substance use treatment, and clarified that the new Indian Health Care Improvement Act exemption does not include Native Hawaiians. DHS said it received approval for Hawaii’s request for a non-contiguous-state exemption from payment error penalties through September 30, 2026, but must still make good-faith efforts to implement the work rules. Morish also outlined OBBA changes to non-citizen eligibility, saying that beginning November 1 only lawful permanent residents, COFA residents, and Cuban or Haitian entrants will remain eligible, while other previously eligible categories such as refugees, asylees, and some parolees will no longer qualify. He noted that ineligible non-citizens must still be included in household reporting and their income counted. The committee then discussed the federal shutdown’s effect on SNAP, with DHS saying USDA directed states to suspend November SNAP issuance because of insufficient funding; existing October benefits remain usable, and TANF and general assistance are not affected. DHS said it has posted FAQs and call-center messages, and is working with the Hawaii Food Bank on an additional $2 million in support and with nonprofit partners on a new Hawaii Relief program funded by TANF for families with dependent children. Members asked about eligibility for kūpuna and documentation for the relief program, and DHS said the TANF-funded program is limited to households with a child under 18, while FAQs are now available online.

Transcript Highlights:

• There are limitations to how data can be used.
• Health care services to low-income families who meet eligibility requirements.
• We The income levels are slightly different.
• And guaranteed income.
• This funding typically limits services to approximately 6% of the income-eligible population in a given

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee on Human Services heard an overview of efforts to streamline access to safety net programs and move toward more automatic, person-centered enrollment. CDSS, DHCS, and CalHHS described current cross-enrollment between Medi-Cal, CalFresh, and CalWORKs, including data showing high overlap among programs and a text-message outreach pilot that increased CalWORKs applications and enrollments but reached only a small share of potentially eligible people. Witnesses emphasized barriers such as differing federal eligibility rules, data-sharing limits, privacy concerns, and the need for better technology, consent management, and stakeholder engagement. Members pressed the administration on how to institutionalize these efforts across administrations and asked for concrete budgetary and regulatory steps to support “no wrong door” enrollment and automatic referrals. The committee also reviewed several chair priorities. On the proposed foster care multi-agency office, CDSS said existing coordination structures already address much of the intended work and asked to verify prior fiscal scoring. On the Employment First Office, CalHHS explained that the office’s $1 million budget was eliminated in the 2024-25 budget as part of deficit reductions, while noting that employment for people with intellectual and developmental disabilities remains an administration priority through existing departmental coordination. For the food insecurity proposal, CDSS said it could provide technical assistance but would need new data-sharing agreements, could not separately calculate a CFAP participation rate with current data, and would likely need until July 1, 2027, plus ongoing staffing, to complete the requested report. The mandated reporter proposal drew support for reform, with CDSS estimating low-millions in one-time training costs and ongoing costs in the hundreds of thousands. The subcommittee also discussed a guaranteed income proposal. CalHHS suggested drafting new statutory language and considering a county-administered model rather than a state-run competitive grant process to reduce administrative burden, while members and public commenters urged support for AB 661 and a study of a permanent statewide guaranteed income program. Public testimony also supported automatic enrollment, community-supporting mandated reporting reforms, and cash assistance for fire recovery. In the final items, CSD described how local nonprofit partners helped during the Los Angeles fires with food, housing vouchers, transportation, and emergency energy assistance, and explained that LIHEAP and CSBG remain important but limited tools for disaster response. CSD also said recent federal staffing cuts and possible future federal budget threats could affect LIHEAP and CSBG administration, though no immediate service disruptions had occurred and additional LIHEAP funds were expected to be released soon.

Transcript Highlights:

• Those data points don't only apply to high-income earners in California, or medium-income earners.
• Those data points don't only apply to high-income earners in California or medium-income earners.
• One was low-income customers, low-income households where they were only 33% online.
• Where their income is so limited that anything more than zero would be unaffordable to them.
• upper-middle-income population: low-income population can't participate in the market in the same way

Summary: The Assembly Communications and Conveyance Committee held an informational hearing on the state of broadband affordability in California. Chair Tasha Berner said the committee was examining how broadband prices, access, and affordability are affecting households, especially after the end of the federal Affordable Connectivity Program and amid concerns about federal resistance to state broadband regulation. She noted the committee’s continued interest in policy options for 2026 and referenced prior legislation, including AB 353, that would have required affordable home internet as a condition of doing business in California. Industry witnesses from U.S. Telecom and CTIA argued that broadband and wireless prices have generally fallen in real terms even as inflation and other household costs have risen, citing competition, infrastructure investment, and faster speeds as the main drivers. They said California’s higher costs are tied to permitting delays, taxes, copper theft, and legacy obligations such as COLR requirements, and they urged the Legislature to preserve market incentives, reduce fees and regulatory burdens, and support infrastructure deployment. They also discussed fixed wireless access, federal BEAD funding, and Universal Service Fund reform, arguing that more entities benefiting from networks, including tech platforms, should contribute to support programs. Consumer and public-interest witnesses presented a different view, saying California still has a serious affordability and adoption problem, especially for low-income households. Sunny McPhee of the California Emerging Technology Fund said broadband adoption has improved dramatically over time, but about 500,000 households remain offline or underconnected and many low-income households still pay above the FCC affordability benchmark. Ernesto Falcon of the CPUC Public Advocates Office said California’s market is losing its competitive edge, with prices higher than in other states and meaningful price pressure coming mainly from fiber competition at the gigabit tier. He said roughly 4.8 million Californians are limited to one gigabit option and estimated that more competition could save consumers more than $1 billion annually. Both witnesses emphasized the need for stronger transparency, targeted subsidies, and a permanent affordability solution, including extending and refining the CPUC broadband Lifeline pilot and advancing SB 716. Public commenters, including representatives from cable providers, nonprofits, and digital equity organizations, largely supported SB 716 and a permanent broadband affordability program. Several urged the committee to remove a cap on the Lifeline program, expand the CPUC pilot, and invest in digital navigators, outreach, and enrollment assistance. The hearing ended without a vote or formal action, after the chair thanked the witnesses and public commenters for their testimony.

Transcript Highlights:

• buyer income limit at 100% of statewide median income.
• buyer income limit at 100% of statewide median income.
• buyer income limit at 100% of statewide median income.
• buyer income limit at 100% of statewide median income.
• buyer income limit at 100% of statewide median income.

Committee: House Housing Finance and Policy

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• -based entities, although there are some limited categories in which foreign income can enter even on
• the water's edge, but I will leave the... ...limited categories in which foreign income can enter even
• the inclusion of foreign income that was proven to be... ...taxation but limits the inclusion of foreign
• can be transformed into NICTI income, and NICTI income can be transformed to subpart F income, and we
• if there is any income.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• income, or AGI, and incorporates several modifications to arrive at their Washington base income.
• This bill specifies that income excluded from the federal AGI, including tribal treaty income, is also
• From the Washington-based income, there are three deductions and one income increase that are applied
• From the Washington-based income, there are three deductions and one income increase that are applied
• lowest income.

Committee: House Finance

Keywords: 904, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Your testimony will be limited, however, to state only your name, organization, or what jurisdiction
• Your testimony will be limited, however, to state only your name, organization, or what jurisdiction
• Californians with disabilities, older adults on fixed incomes, people without stable income, or with
• low income cannot afford housing.
• , plans for the housing needs of all residents across income levels and life circumstances.

Committee: Senate Housing

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• This would include things like increasing the income limit for individuals eligible for indigent care
• Both of those things are exemptions to the HR1 work limit or time limit requirements.
• Both of those things are exemptions to the HR1 work limit or time limit requirements.
• Our 35 smallest counties have very limited resources to raise revenue, with high poverty rates and low-income
• Our 35 smallest counties have very limited resources to raise revenue, with high poverty rates and low-income

Summary: The subcommittee heard an extended briefing on the impacts of H.R. 1 on Medi-Cal and CalFresh, followed by testimony from the Legislative Analyst’s Office and county officials. DHCS described major Medi-Cal changes in H.R. 1, including work/community engagement requirements, six-month redeterminations, reduced federal matching for some emergency services, narrower immigrant eligibility, reduced retroactive coverage, and limits on provider taxes and directed payments. CDSS outlined CalFresh changes, especially the expanded able-bodied adults without dependents time limit, reduced exemptions and waivers, and the new federal-state-county administrative cost split. Both departments emphasized implementation plans, automation, outreach, and county coordination, while acknowledging significant expected coverage losses and administrative burden. The LAO and an independent policy expert discussed how H.R. 1 could increase demand on county indigent care systems and public hospitals as people lose Medi-Cal. They reviewed the history of county indigent care, 1991 realignment, and AB 85, explaining that counties already rely on a patchwork of funding and that current realignment revenues are often used for public health rather than indigent care. They warned that counties may face large increases in uninsured residents, with wide variation in how counties respond, and raised concerns about equity, financing, and whether a more standardized state-county program should be created. Committee members pressed witnesses on county funding, exemptions, homelessness, older adults, undocumented residents, and the effect of administrative burden versus true ineligibility. County representatives from Los Angeles, Santa Clara, Tulare, and San Bernardino described the expected local impacts and asked for additional state support. They said H.R. 1 would drive major losses in Medi-Cal and CalFresh enrollment, increase uncompensated care, strain eligibility staff, and worsen homelessness and food insecurity. Several counties urged the Legislature to fund eligibility workers, preserve enrollment, and consider a CalFresh match waiver; Santa Clara and San Bernardino also cited local tax measures and staffing reductions already underway. No formal vote or committee action was taken in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• income.
• income.
• Costs specifically to low-income schools.
• I would ask that you limit it to one minute.
• It just limits what state funding is provided, and it limits it to a specific group.

Summary: The committee opened with a public hearing on Senate Bill 5808, a proposal to require nonprofit health carriers with “excess surplus” to pay 10% of that surplus into the state health care affordability account for Cascade Care Savings. Committee staff said the bill could generate about $330 million one time in 2027, while the Office of Insurance Commissioner would have implementation costs. Supporters argued the bill would redirect consumer premium dollars to help people afford coverage, while opponents from health plans said reserves are needed for solvency, claims, and capital needs and warned the bill would destabilize nonprofit insurers. The committee also heard testimony on House Bill 2254, which would let the Partnership Access Line assessment cover administrative costs; HCA and Seattle Children’s supported it as a technical fix that saves general fund dollars, and a child psychiatrist asked that savings be reinvested in behavioral health services. House Bill 2385, which extends deadlines for the Medicaid Access Program because of federal restrictions on new provider taxes, also drew support from provider groups seeking future Medicaid rate increases. The committee then heard Substitute Senate Bill 6286, which would increase fines on private detention facilities that deny Department of Health inspections and dedicate the fines to an account for community repair and assistance to harmed individuals and families. Supporters, including Tacoma’s mayor and family members affected by detention, framed the bill as an accountability measure; fiscal staff estimated Department of Health costs of about $395,000 in the 2025-27 biennium. Senate Bill 6006 would exempt food banks from sales tax on certain services enacted last session, with food bank and tribal representatives saying the savings would go directly to food and operations. Senate Bill 6351 would create exemptions from the new sales tax on live presentations for before- and after-school care, arts and cultural nonprofit classes, and K-12 school purchases; school districts, arts groups, and PTA representatives supported it, while asking for clarifying language and broader nonprofit exemptions. Engrossed Substitute House Bill 1717 would let cities and counties create local sales tax remittance programs for affordable housing projects, and housing builders, Habitat affiliates, counties, and city officials supported it as a local tool to lower development costs. In executive session, the committee received briefings on several tax and spending bills and then voted to advance multiple measures. It adopted a substitute and passed Senate Bill 5949, which narrows a B&O tax exemption related to insurance premiums; a proposed retroactivity-removing amendment failed. It adopted a substitute and passed Senate Bill 6129 on cigarette, tobacco, and nicotine taxes after rejecting several amendments, including proposals to study the tax policy or replace the bill with illicit-market enforcement language. The committee also passed Senate Bill 6228 repealing a preferential B&O rate for prescription drug resellers, Senate Bill 6231 repealing data center sales tax exemptions, and Second Substitute Senate Bill 5965, which retained a bag-fee approach rather than a full ban after adopting an amendment. The committee then returned to public hearing and began testimony on Senate Bill 6353, a major Working Connections Child Care bill that would keep income eligibility at 60% of state median income, lower the provider rate target from the 85th to the 75th percentile, and make other program changes; the briefing was underway when the transcript ended.

Transcript Highlights:

• income.
• Our concern is lower-income older adults.
• It is a limited time they’re using to fill those rooms.
• It is a limited time they're using to fill those rooms.
• Nothing in CMA limits claims to end soon sales.

Bills: SB5976 , SB6111 , SB6250 , SB6257 , SB6289 , SGA9060 , SGA9169 , SGA9265 , SGA9266

Committee: Senate Business, Trade & Economic Development

Keywords: commercial email, spam regulations, online marketing, privacy, consumer protection, SB 6111, Washington Protecting Children Online Act, online child safety, minor privacy, age verification, parental consent, social media regulation, digital platforms, user-generated content, content moderation, online harms, youth protection, data privacy, geolocation, targeted advertising