House Bill 1665 (H-0708.3) would repeal Washington’s capital gains income tax and a set of statutory provisions that established, defined, administered, and enforced that tax. The bill includes legislative findings criticizing the capital gains income tax and states the legislature’s intent to repeal it to improve competitiveness and fairness. The repeal explicitly lists RCW 82.87.010 through RCW 82.87.150 (various findings, definitions, tax imposition for long‑term capital assets, exemptions, deductions, administration, filing and documentation requirements, and tax criminal penalties), RCW 82.04.4497 (a related credit), and two uncodified 2021 c 196 sections (s.18 and s.20). Legally, this is a repeal of existing statutory law governing the capital gains income tax, which also removes the tax’s associated procedures, deductions, credits, and the provision identified as imposing tax criminal penalties. The act, if enacted, would take effect October 1, 2025. The bill was read for the first time in the House on January 28, 2025, and referred to the House Committee on Finance; it is designated HOUSE BILL 1665, H-0708.3, introduced by Representative Dufault. The provided extracts do not include the original statutory text being repealed or the contents of the uncodified 2021 c 196 sections 18 and 20, and no additional implementing or transition provisions beyond the October 1, 2025 effective date are shown.

If enacted, the bill would abolish Washington’s capital gains income tax and all the named statutory provisions on October 1, 2025. That would most directly reduce or eliminate tax liabilities and compliance paperwork for individuals, families, businesses, and investors who had been subject to the tax, and it would remove the collection, filing, and enforcement duties tied to those specific statutes from the agencies that administered the tax. The extracted text does not include the original statutory language or transition details, so exactly which administrative processes and taxpayer obligations end on that date is unclear. Removing the tax also eliminates the state revenue stream tied to it, so programs or budget items that had depended on that revenue would face reduced funding unless the legislature provides offsets; the bill excerpt does not describe any replacement funding or budget actions. The legislative findings state an intent to boost competitiveness and attract investment, so the likely practical effects include lower costs for affected payers and a reduced administrative burden for tax authorities, but the magnitude of budgetary and economic impacts is not specified in the provided text.