WA Democrat asks: Should cops have to pay taxes?

Baby, you the whole package, plus you pay your taxes - B.o.B, "Nothin on You," 2009

This lyric was in a No. 1 song that my kids liked. My wife and I would laugh at how the rapper had settled on the notion that paying taxes could be a shorthand for respectability. Even desirability.

You pay your taxes, so you are the whole package plus.

Now, not so much.

We're 16 years removed from that song (which, side note, made Bruno Mars a star.) But we're light-years removed in political and cultural attitude about who should contribute to the commonwealth, or what it even means.

Politicians now are moving to shield selected professions from the tax system. And they're doing it on the grounds that not having to pay is a way to show respect.

U.S. Rep. Marie Gluesenkamp Perez, a Democrat in Southwest Washington's 3rd District, has a proposal to exempt police officers from federal income taxes, on the first $100,000 of their pay. She promoted it this week after doing a ride along with the Clark County sheriff's office.

"It's a necessary step to building back respect for law enforcement," she said at a D.C. news conference when the bill, called the Fuel the Force Act, was introduced. "You can reflect values of respect in the budget."

Her tweet about this idea got "ratioed," however - meaning it got no respect from commenters.

"You think police officers shouldn't pay taxes but that our troops should?" asked one.

"Why should sanitation workers pay taxes? Why should nurses? … Teachers? Farm workers?" wondered another.

You can see where this is going.

"No tax on Polish people," said another.

OK, I didn't see where that was going.

I also didn't see anybody pushing "no tax on newspaper columnists," but maybe that's coming soon.

This feeding frenzy for carveouts in the tax code ramped up last year, when President Trump pushed through his "no tax on tips" idea. That was a popular one that helped him get reelected. It also makes little sense, any more than the ones above.

To make it work, the IRS had to craft a list of the occupations eligible to have tip income excused. The roster includes what you'd expect, like waiters, delivery drivers and hotel maids. But also: comedians. Slot machine attendants. Hot air balloon aeronauts. Social media influencers. Clergy.

Wait, people tip their priests?

Wait, we just gave a tax cut to social media influencers?

Anyway, there are now 70 such occupations specified for special treatment in the tax code, as adopted by the IRS.

Gluesenkamp Perez said she was inspired to co-sponsor the no tax on police bill after attending a kegger for cops during Police Week. (Really, that's what she said.) Some of the officers there "told me they had colleagues living on food stamps. That's enraging to me."

I'm uncertain about this anecdote. A jail guard might make so little, unfortunately, that his or her family could need food stamps. But police are not exactly one of our lower-paid public professions.

The starting pay for a rookie Clark County deputy in Gluesenkamp Perez's district is $94,000. In Seattle, rookie cops start at $118,000, rising to $126,000 after six months. At 4 ½ years their base salary is $154,000.

It's a tough job that I wouldn't, or couldn't, do. So I don't begrudge them the pay. But do they need one of the larger personal tax exemptions ever proposed? No one else gets to deduct a full $100K from their ordinary income.

Gluesenkamp Perez's bill would apply to all federal, state and local police, corrections, parole, judicial officers, and sheriff's deputies, who have five or more years of experience. The premise is to try to make it worth their whiles not to quit.

"We need to think creatively about how to support law enforcement and first responder health and wellness," she said this week.

People love firefighters the most, so I'm surprised they aren't already on this tax-free carousel.

The concept of narrow tax favors for supposedly special sectors of the American experience seemed to really get started during the President Bill Clinton years.

But Clinton had a balanced federal budget. In fact in his later years there was a surplus, which is unimaginable today. The complete disconnect from any responsibility to pay our bills really took off under President George W. Bush, who sent out stimulus checks while launching two wars, unleashing a predictable gusher of red ink.

Today just the annual interest on the national debt has crossed $1 trillion. Yet ruling Republicans passed huge tax cuts and now want massive hikes in military spending. Plus some suddenly want to finance President Trump's narcissistic ballroom out of the Treasury. (Even though he already said it was paid for by private donations?)

Oh, and we're at war again. The costs for that are going straight on the creaking national credit card.

It's ancient history, but there were times we'd go to war and impose a temporary tax surcharge to pay for it. Shared sacrifice all around.

Now the federal government is more like a spoils system. Get what you can while the getting's good.

Tax-exempt cops, if it happens, would be yet another hit to the dying idea that we're all in this together. There'd be a rush on the national till from other professions. And bitterness from those who don't get their own.

Baby, you'd be the whole package, but you're a fool to pay your taxes. 2026 is playing a sadder song.

Copyright 2026 Tribune Content Agency. All Rights Reserved.

This story was originally published April 29, 2026 at 6:42 AM.