Analysis Complete for House Bill 1965

You are receiving this email as a subscriber to the Initiative 960 email list. RCW 43.135.031 (I-960) requires that notices be sent each time a bill that raises taxes or fees is: introduced in either house; scheduled for a public hearing; approved by any legislative committee; or passed by either house of the Legislature.

Please note: This email message was sent from a notification-only address. Please do not reply to this message.

HB 1965, titled AN ACT Relating to allowing whistleblowers to bring actions on behalf of the state for violations of workplace protections, 10 year analysis complete.

The Office of Financial Management has identified this bill as requiring a ten-year projection of increased cost to the taxpayers or affected fee payers.

Ten-year projection:

The Department of Health assumes that this Bill does not expand the authority under 43.70.075 therefore no additional revenue is anticipated.

The Commission is not able to determine the cash receipts impact associated with HB 1965. 

Section 4 (2) establishes a civil penalty of $500 for violations of this law. This amount is authorized in cases where no civil penalty is provided under previously established law. Courts are also authorized to modify the amount of the penalty for reasons stated in the bill.  The Commission is unable to estimate the number or amount of penalties that could be received.  

Section 5 (1) allows the Commission to accept a $75 filing fee for each Qui Tam case. The number of cases that could be filed is unknown therefore the amount received cannot be determined. The bill also permits the agency to adopt rules to waive the filing fee.  

Section 7 (1) designates the percentage of any penalties received pursuant to Qui Tam cases that the agency may retain. The percentage is dependent on the agency's level of intervention in the Qui Tam cases filed. The agency cannot know how many cases it will decide to intervene in therefore the amount to be retained is unknown.

This bill could possibly increase the number of civil filings in Superior Court.  The number of filings is indeterminate, therefore, determining the increase in filings fees is also indeterminate.