Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

JLARC: Aerospace tax preferences still reduce costs, but employment targets unclear

January 14, 2025 | Finance, House of Representatives, Legislative Sessions, Washington


This article was created by AI summarizing key points discussed. AI makes mistakes, so for full details and context, please refer to the video of the full meeting. Please report any errors so we can fix them. Report an error »

JLARC: Aerospace tax preferences still reduce costs, but employment targets unclear
The Joint Legislative Audit and Review Committee presented a 2024 review of nine tax preferences benefitting the aerospace industry to the House Finance Committee on Jan. 14.

JLARC reported the preferences lower effective tax costs for aerospace firms and concluded they continue to meet stated legislative goals to lower costs, maintain industry presence and encourage strong wages. The package includes preferential B&O rates, credits, sales-and-use exemptions, a property-tax exemption and a leasehold-excise-tax exemption; JLARC estimated biennial savings near $205 million for 2028–2029 under the current framework.

The review noted Washington remains a national leader in aerospace manufacturing (about $27.4 billion contribution to U.S. GDP and more than 73,000 employees across 234 establishments in 2022) and that reported average annual wages in the aerospace industry were high relative to other states ($127,000 average wage in 2022). However, JLARC said employment has fluctuated and that the Legislature has not set a clear metric for the “maintain aerospace industry employment” objective, making it impossible to state whether employment expectations are being met.

JLARC also described that a preferential rate for manufacturing/wholesaling commercial airplanes was repealed following a World Trade Organization ruling; that repeal reduced the amount saved by the package in recent years. The legislative auditor recommended clarifying legislative expectations for industry employment and suggested removing the five-year review requirement for this package and returning the preferences to the customary 10‑year review cycle unless the Legislature requests otherwise.

View full meeting

This article is based on a recent meeting—watch the full video and explore the complete transcript for deeper insights into the discussion.

View full meeting

Sponsors

Proudly supported by sponsors who keep Washington articles free in 2025

Scribe from Workplace AI
Scribe from Workplace AI