WR is closely monitoring the bills that have advanced through the legislative process. Each week, we’ll spotlight our weekly “hot list” key legislation that could have the most significant impact on WR members.
Commercial Electronic Mail Act (CEMA) (SB 5976/HB 2274)
HB 2274 has advanced out of the Washington State Senate Business, Trade & Economic Development Committee, clearing the opposite chamber policy cutoff and moving to Senate Rules. The bill must now be pulled to the Senate floor for a vote before the March 6 opposite chamber deadline.
The amended bill makes two significant changes to existing law:
- Proportional statutory damages: Reduces damages from $500 per message to $100 per message, or actual damages, whichever is greater. This maintains enforcement authority while better aligning penalties with actual harm.
- Knowledge requirement: Requires plaintiffs to prove the sender either actually knew the message was false or misleading, or reasonably should have known based on objective facts. This eliminates automatic liability based solely on wording and focuses enforcement on intentional or clearly deceptive conduct.
While not comprehensive reform, the bill provides much-needed stability in the current litigation environment and preserves core consumer protections. It also reflects legislative recognition that a law written in 1998 must be updated to reflect today’s marketing practices and technology. Because this is a short 60-day session, broader structural reform will require interim stakeholder engagement. WR is committed to ensuring retailers’ operational realities are part of those discussions as lawmakers consider long-term updates in 2027.
Position: WR supports this bill.
Status: Passed out of Senate policy committee; now in Senate Rules awaiting consideration by the full Senate before the March 6 deadline.
Employer Medicaid Reimbursement (SB 6173)
SB 6173 would require employers to reimburse the state for healthcare costs if their employees utilize Apple Health (Medicaid). Stakeholders are concerned this would create a significant new employer cost, effectively operating as a hidden tax on businesses, with estimated impacts approaching $1 billion across the employer community. A large coalition of employer and industry groups is actively coordinating opposition, with AWB leading engagement.
WR and a broad coalition strongly oppose the bill, calling it a tax on part-time work that would significantly impact retail and hospitality. Although pulled from executive action temporarily, the bill is expected to return, as it is critical to the Senate’s budget plan, which relies on nearly $1 billion in projected savings.
Position: WR is opposed to this bill.
Status: Executive session was scheduled on February 19 in Senate Committee on Ways & Means, no action taken – NTIB
Immigration enforcement employer requirements & penalties (HB 2105)
This bill is modeled after California’s 2017 Immigrant Worker Protection Act, but the initial version would significantly expand compliance requirements and penalties well beyond California’s framework, including establishing a private right of action and imposing high fines multiplied by the number of Washington-based employees. Primary concern is the Private Right of Action (PRA).
The Immigrant Worker Protection Act has passed the House and is now advancing in the Senate, with the House bill serving as the vehicle. While improved, business groups still oppose it due to PRA-related litigation risk and compliance burdens. The bill sets penalties of $1,000 per worker per violation (higher if willful), allows courts to waive penalties in some cases, and limits PRA claims to injured parties. Although the prohibition on voluntary employer cooperation with federal inspections was removed, concerns remain about costly notice requirements and expanded Attorney General investigative authority, which could allow investigations without formal complaints.
Position: WR is opposed to this bill.
Status: The bill is scheduled for public hearing in the opposite house (Senate Committee on Ways & Means) on February 26 – NTIB
Plastic Bag Ban (SB 5965)
Multiple proposals this session would revise carryout bag policies, ranging from expanded plastic bag bans and fee increases to proposals that would repeal fees and thickness requirements. WR supports data-driven flexibility and opposes measures that disproportionately impact low-income shoppers.
WR successfully supported a Senate amendment removing the ban on plastic consumer bags and lowering the paper bag fee. The amendment maintains the current 12-cent plastic bag fee, with gradual increases to 15 cents and then 18 cents over time. With this amendment adopted in the Senate, WR is neutral on the bill and is closely monitoring to ensure the changes remain intact as it moves through the House.
Position: WR is opposed to this bill.
Status:The bill passed to Rules committee on February 23 for second reading – NTIB
DOR “technical” tax-administration cleanup bills (HB 2257 / SB 6113)
This bill raises significant concern because it could expand taxation on advertising, particularly if constitutional challenges to the digital advertising tax succeed. Earlier language included a provision that would have eliminated the entire section — including existing deductions and exemptions — if any portion of the law was struck down, potentially broadening an advertising sales tax to cover physical signage, in-store displays, point-of-sale materials, print inserts, and circulars in addition to digital advertising. Due to the potential broad retail impact and ongoing legal scrutiny around differential treatment of digital versus traditional advertising, this remains a high-priority issue. As of 2/6/2026, the tax administration cleanup bill was amended to remove the Section 26 “blow-up” provision that could have eliminated key deductions and exemptions (including retail signage), with support from House leadership.
A harmful amendment that would have repealed exemptions and deductions for digital advertising, signage, and shelf pricing was successfully removed from the Senate bill. This positive outcome followed joint advocacy by WR and approximately 30 other organizations.
Position: WR has concerns with this bill.
Status: SB 6113 is scheduled for public hearing in the opposite house (House Committee on Finance) on February 27 – NTIB
