Washington’s proposed Road Usage Charge under House Bill 1921 is being marketed as a forward-thinking solution to declining gas tax revenues.
Don’t be fooled: this legislation represents yet another regressive policy that will disproportionately impact working-class communities, small businesses and Hispanic entrepreneurs. As someone who has spent years advocating for energy equity and economic opportunity, I see policies like these as deeply flawed, harmful and fundamentally deceitful.
They make a grand promise of goodness with one hand, when the reality is that claim is made to take our attention off the fact that the other hand is taking money from our pockets.
At 2.6 cents per mile driven, this charge will hit hardest those who rely on their vehicles for work — contractors, delivery drivers, rural workers and small business owners. While electric vehicle owners will have the voluntary option to pay this tax until 2029, gas-powered vehicle owners — who are more likely to be working-class families — will be forced into this system, with no choice. This is unfair and grossly inequitable.
Hispanic families, who already pay 20 percent higher energy bills than the national average and are major contributors to Washington’s economy, will bear the brunt of this policy. Many work in industries such as construction, landscaping and food service — sectors that rely on affordable transportation and equipment that the state seems intent on regulating out of existence.
This policy isn’t the only example of Washington pushing regulations that cripple entrepreneurs. A couple years ago, there was an attempt to impose burdensome regulations on small businesses, particularly in landscaping, by targeting gas-powered mowers and outdoor equipment. While that effort ultimately failed, it serves as a clear example of how these policies keep surfacing, making it harder for entrepreneurs to sustain and grow their operations.
Small businesses already navigate a difficult regulatory landscape every legislative session, and adding even more unnecessary burdens only makes it harder for them to survive. Washington’s people were asked to suffer and have fewer options to run their businesses in the name of reducing emissions.
Wealthier Washingtonians who can afford an EV, live in urban areas with public transit and own battery-powered lawn equipment won’t feel the sting of these policies. But the plumber commuting across counties, the single mother driving to two jobs and the landscaper trying to grow his business will see their costs skyrocket.
Meanwhile, the wealthiest residents get to choose when they start paying this tax, while working-class Washingtonians are forced into compliance immediately. This is nothing short of an onslaught against working families — and it’s coming from the same lawmakers who claim to fight for economic justice.
If Washington truly wants to fund transportation infrastructure fairly, it should not do so on the backs of those who can least afford it. Instead of pushing an aggressive mileage tax that punishes lower-income drivers, the state should consider policies that ensure families below a certain income threshold aren’t disproportionately burdened.
House Bill 1921 and the state’s push to impose more financial burdens on working families are not solutions for a better future; they are policies that will deepen economic inequality and further marginalize small business owners, Hispanic entrepreneurs and working-class families.
Washington’s lawmakers must reconsider this legislation before they push even more families to the financial breaking point. The people of this state deserve equitable, practical policies — not another regressive tax disguised as shiny, happy progress.
Matthew Gonzales is vice chairman for the National Hispanic Energy Council.
