The bill amends existing law (RCW 84.36.560) to change property tax exemption rules for real and personal property owned or used by nonprofit entities to provide rental housing or to place a mobile home lot for qualifying households. It sets eligibility requirements including that the benefit inures to the nonprofit, at least 75 percent of occupied units or lots are occupied by qualifying households, and the property was insured, financed, or assisted in whole or in part through specified sources (federal or state housing programs administered by the Department of Commerce or by cities/counties, affordable housing levies, certain surcharges, Washington State Housing Finance Commission financing for certain entities, or city/county affordable housing funds). If fewer than 75 percent of units are occupied by qualifying households, the amendment creates a partial real property exemption (with personal property fully exempt) calculated by multiplying the assessed value reasonably necessary to provide the housing by a fraction based on the number of qualifying-occupied units versus total occupied units as of specified dates. The amendment adds procedural and definitional provisions: it defines qualifying households by HUD median income thresholds (generally 50 percent of median income, changing to 60 percent beginning July 1, 2021, with HUD figures effective January 1 of the application year), defines group homes, mobile home lots, occupied dwelling units, rental housing, and eligible nonprofit entity types, and specifies occupancy measurement dates (December 31 for the first assessment year, January 1 for subsequent years, with a May 1 rule for facilities of three or fewer units). It allows continuity of exemption if a household’s income rises above the initial threshold but remains at or below 80 percent of median income provided certification requirements are met, permits an exemption claim for unoccupied property if conversion to the exempt purpose will occur within three assessment years and certain financing and intent conditions are met, and permits voluntary payments by qualifying nonprofits to local jurisdictions up to the last annual tax amount levied before exemption. The bill also adds a new section stating that RCW 82.32.805 and RCW 82.32.808 do not apply to this act. The text does not change criminal penalties; it primarily modifies tax exemption eligibility, calculation, and procedural requirements. The extracted material references other statutes (for example RCW 84.36.030, 84.36.040, 84.36.800 and several levy and surcharge provisions) whose full texts are not included here, and the source or further explanation for the 80 percent continuation threshold and the effect of excluding RCW 82.32.805 and .808 are not explained in the provided excerpts.

If enacted, nonprofit owners or managers of rental housing and certain mobile home parks that were built, financed, or assisted with specified public or housing finance sources will likely pay much less or no property tax on those buildings and the personal property in them, as long as most units are rented to lower-income households. Properties with at least 75% of units occupied by qualifying households get full exemptions; those with fewer qualifying households get a proportional exemption for real property and a full exemption for personal property. That will reduce operating costs for qualifying nonprofits and cooperatives, potentially making it easier for them to keep rents lower or preserve affordability, while city and county tax revenues for those properties will be reduced (though nonprofits can make voluntary payments capped at the last tax amount paid). The groups most affected are nonprofit housing providers, mobile home cooperatives, local governments that receive property tax revenue, and agencies that provide or administer the listed financing sources. Nonprofits will need to track occupancy and household incomes to qualify and re-certify when renters change; local governments may see revenue and budgeting impacts and gain only limited voluntary payments instead. The bill leaves unclear how it interacts with other cited statutes (including RCW 82.32.805 and 82.32.808, which are said not to apply) and some cross-referenced provisions, so full fiscal and administrative effects for jurisdictions and program administrators are uncertain without consulting those related laws.