Seattle Mayor Katie Wilson told a university audience that wealthy residents heading for the exits over Washington's new millionaire tax can go, and the Washington Post editorial board, hardly a right-wing outfit, called her out for it.
Speaking at a "Governing Through a Progressive Lens" forum at Seattle University's Pigott Auditorium on April 14, Wilson brushed aside warnings that high earners would relocate rather than pay the state's 9.9% tax on annual incomes exceeding $1 million. She dismissed the concern as overblown, then offered a wave goodbye to anyone who disagreed with her.
"I think the claims that millionaires are going to leave our state are, like, super overblown," Wilson said. "And if, the ones that leave, like, bye." The remark drew attention not for its policy substance but for its casual contempt toward the people whose tax dollars keep city services running. And the consequences of that attitude are already showing up in real-world job losses and corporate relocations.
On Friday, the Washington Post editorial board published a piece titled "Seattle's mayor waves goodbye to prosperity," as Fox News Digital reported. The editorial traced Wilson's progressive record from her first days in office, noting that nine days after winning Seattle's November mayoral election, she joined Starbucks baristas on a picket line and pledged to boycott the coffee company until their union "got its way."
The Post editorial board did not hold back about the mayor's posture toward the business community.
"Her arrogance is increasingly typical of the state's political elites."
That line landed with particular force because it came from a newspaper that endorsed Kamala Harris, not from a conservative outlet. When the Washington Post calls a progressive mayor arrogant on economic policy, the problem has moved well past partisan spin.
Wilson's flippant send-off to departing millionaires arrives against a backdrop of real economic damage. Starbucks, the company born in Seattle and long synonymous with the city, announced a major expansion in Nashville, Tennessee, that will shift 2,000 jobs away from the Pacific Northwest. A former Starbucks Reserve Roastery in Seattle had already closed earlier in the year.
Former Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz made the stakes personal. The editorial noted that Schultz announced he and his wife are leaving Seattle for Miami. Florida, of course, has no state income tax.
And Schultz is not alone in his concern. Microsoft President Brad Smith said he was "probably more worried right now about the business climate in Washington than at any point over the last 30 years." That is not a throwaway line from a minor player. Microsoft is one of the largest employers in the state.
The pattern is familiar to anyone who has watched business leaders sound alarms over progressive tax proposals in New York City and other deep-blue jurisdictions. Elected officials push aggressive new levies, corporate leaders warn of flight, and the politicians shrug, until the revenue projections collapse.
The shrugging may not last. Fox 13 Seattle reported that the city could lose up to $750 million in tax revenue in coming years as Starbucks expands in Tennessee instead of Washington, as the New York Post detailed. Wilson herself acknowledged that Seattle faces a "large structural budget deficit" and will need new revenue in the upcoming budget cycle.
Read that again. The mayor who just waved goodbye to the city's wealthiest taxpayers is simultaneously admitting the city is short on cash. She told the Seattle University audience that her office is exploring "progressive taxation" options, meaning she wants to find new ways to tax the people she just told to leave.
The contradiction is not subtle. You cannot dismiss the departure of high earners as irrelevant and then scramble to replace the revenue they took with them. That is not governance. That is posturing.
Seattle is hardly the only city where progressive leaders have discovered this the hard way. In New York, a progressive mayor recently retreated from a sweeping property tax hike after backlash forced a pivot to agency belt-tightening. The fiscal math catches up eventually.
Wilson's dismissiveness toward economic reality fits a broader pattern. She is a longtime progressive activist and co-founder of the Transit Riders Union. She appeared at the Seattle University forum alongside King County Executive Girmay Zahilay under the banner of "Governing Through a Progressive Lens."
Her record extends beyond tax policy. Wilson at one point supported slashing the Seattle Police Department budget by 50%. That position, combined with her eagerness to wave off the city's top earners and her boycott of one of Seattle's most iconic employers, paints a picture of a mayor more interested in ideological performance than in the practical work of keeping a city solvent and safe.
Local business owners are noticing. Seattle barber Matt Humphrey captured the mood on the ground, as Breitbart reported: "There's a lot of fear and trepidation with what's going on in our government when it comes to taxes." Humphrey is not a millionaire. He is the kind of small-business owner who depends on a healthy local economy, the kind of person who gets hurt when the tax base erodes and city services deteriorate.
Washington Gov. Bob Ferguson signed the millionaire's tax into law, imposing the 9.9% rate on households earning over $1 million. The tax was supposed to fund state priorities. But if the earners subject to it keep relocating to states like Florida and Tennessee, the projected revenue becomes a fantasy.
The dynamic is playing out in real time. Entrepreneurs are already making plans. One Seattle AI founder recently said he is heading for the exits as the millionaire tax drives business creators out of the state. Each departure shrinks the base that Wilson expects to fund her progressive agenda.
The Washington Post editorial board identified something deeper than a policy disagreement. It identified arrogance, the specific kind that takes hold when elected officials stop seeing taxpayers as constituents and start treating them as obstacles.
Wilson did not engage with the economic argument that capital is mobile and high earners have options. She did not offer data showing Seattle would be fine without its wealthiest residents. She waved. She said "bye." And she moved on to the next talking point about progressive taxation, apparently confident that the money would materialize from somewhere.
That confidence is not supported by what is actually happening. Starbucks is moving jobs to Tennessee. Schultz is moving to Florida. Microsoft's president is sounding alarms. The city faces a structural deficit. And Fox 13 Seattle puts the potential revenue loss at $750 million.
Cities across the country are learning the same lesson. In New York, proposals to slash estate tax exemptions and target wealth have drawn similar warnings about driving residents and investment to friendlier states. The geography changes. The math does not.
Wilson's "bye" was directed at millionaires. But when those millionaires take their businesses, their employees, their spending, and their tax payments with them, the people left holding the bag are the barbers, the baristas, the small landlords, and the city workers whose paychecks depend on a functioning tax base.
You can wave goodbye to the people who fund your city. But you cannot wave goodbye to the consequences.
