The bill eliminates the document recording tax and reenacts and amends RCW 36.18.010, creates new sections, repeals several specified RCW sections, and takes effect June 30, 2026. It directs county auditors or other recording officers to charge no more than their actual cost to record a document or $30, whichever is less, and states that county auditor offices incur about $21 per document recorded (source for that figure is not provided in the extracted facts). The reenacted and amended RCW specifies fees for recording and related official services: $30 per recorded instrument; $3 for the first page of a certified copy and $1 for each additional page; $1 per page for noncertified copies; $2 for administering an oath or taking an affidavit; $8 for issuing a marriage license with additional $5 and $10 fees that must be transmitted monthly to the state treasurer and deposited in the state general fund; and $8 per hour for searching records. The bill also requires that any residual balance in the centennial document preservation and modernization account be transferred to the state general fund on the act’s effective date. This is a procedural and fiscal change to recording law: it repeals certain statutes, reenacts and amends an existing statute (RCW 36.18.010), establishes specific fee amounts and collection/transmittal rules, and requires an account balance transfer. The extracted text does not show any changes to criminal penalties or create a new crime. Some details are unclear from the provided material: portions of amended language appear to have deletions shown in double parentheses, the interaction between the repealed RCWs and the reenacted RCW is not fully explained here, and the phrase “this fee” referring to legislative intent to appropriate revenues (mentioned in connection with the displaced homemaker program) is ambiguous in the extracted facts.

If enacted, the bill limits what county auditors can charge the public to record documents to no more than the auditor’s actual cost or $30 per document (whichever is less), sets specific small fees for certified and noncertified copies, oaths, record searches, and sets marriage license fee components that must be sent monthly to the state treasurer and deposited in the state general fund. Practically, people and businesses who record documents will likely pay lower, predictable fees capped at $30; county auditor offices will lose broader recording-tax revenue streams that previously funded other programs and will need to collect and remit the new specified fees, which could reduce local discretionary funding and shift some revenue to the state general fund. The state treasurer and state general fund will receive any remaining balance in the centennial document preservation account on the act’s effective date (June 30, 2026) and the new monthly marriage-license remittances; the legislature signals intent to appropriate at least as much as the marriage-related fee revenue to the displaced homemaker program, but the bill text here is ambiguous about which exact fee that refers to. It is also unclear from the provided text how the listed repeals and the reenacted RCW interact in practice and the source for the cited $21 per-document cost is not included.