The State's Tax Grab
A landmark Supreme Court ruling forces Washington cities to share their liquor license revenue with the state, hitting Seattle for thousands.
The story, cleaned up
A cleaned-up reading of the newspaper page: spelling and layout repaired, one story lifted off a crowded page. It follows the original closely but it is not a transcription. The original page is below; read it if a detail matters.
The supreme court today decided in favor of the state in the case wherein action was brought by Attorney-General Jones to recover from the city of Spokane Falls the sum of $10,200 and interest due the state under the act of 1888, compelling all incorporated cities to pay over to the state fund 10 per cent of the receipts from all liquor licenses. This was considered a test case, and under the ruling, Seattle will be compelled to pay over to the state about $17,500 and interest, and Tacoma about $5,000, making a total of about $37,200 due from these cities alone. The court ruled that the act of 1888 was a general revision designed to supersede all prior special city charters regarding the disposition of license funds.
“It is obvious that section 2 of said act must have been intended to apply to and modify various special charters of municipal corporations then existing.”
This decision mirrors the perpetual tug-of-war between municipal autonomy and state-level financial control in Washington. Just as cities fought to keep their own liquor tax revenue in 1891, modern Washington municipalities often grapple with the state over how tax revenues are collected and redistributed.
From readers
No comments yet. If you know something about this story — a correction, a family memory, a source — it belongs here.