Wash. Rev. Code § 35A.82.020
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov
JustiaTitle on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
A code city may exercise the authority authorized by general law for any class of city to license and revoke the same for cause, to regulate, make inspections and to impose excises for regulation or revenue in regard to all places and kinds of business, production, commerce, entertainment, exhibition, and upon all occupations, trades and professions and any other lawful activity: PROVIDED, That no license or permit to engage in any such activity or place shall be granted to any who shall not first comply with the general laws of the state.
No such license shall be granted to continue for longer than a period of one year from the date thereof and no license or excise shall be required where the same shall have been preempted by the state, nor where exempted by the state, including, but not limited to, the provisions of RCW 36.71.090 and chapter 73.04 RCW relating to veterans.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 11
cases, 1976–2020 · leading case: Arborwood Idaho v. City of Kennewick
Arborwood Idaho v. City of Kennewick (2004)
“The owner and the occupant of industries, businesses and households are jointly responsible for this charge.”
Arborwood Idaho, L.L.C. v. City of Kennewick (2004)
“) Kennewick cites RCW 35A.82.020 to justify the ambulance charge.”
City of Wenatchee v. Chelan County Public Utility District No. 1 (2014)
“¶5 The city’s position is that RCW 35A.82.020, which grants code cities like Wenatchee broad general authority to impose excise taxes for regulation or revenue, includes the authority to tax domestic water sales by another municipality that take place within the city limits.”
Harbour Village Apartments v. City of Mukilteo (1999)
“RCW 35A.82.020 states in pertinent part: A code city may exercise the authority authorized by general law for any class of city[ 9 ] to license and revoke the same for cause, to regulate, make inspections and to impose excises *619 for regulation or revenue in regard to all…”
Harbour Village Apts. v. City of Mukilteo (1999)
“RCW 35A.82.020 states in pertinent part: A code city may exercise the authority authorized by general law for any class of city[ [6] ] to license and revoke the same for *551 cause, to regulate, make inspections and to impose excises for regulation or revenue in regard to all…”
King County v. City of Algona (1984)
“) RCW 35A.82.020 grants code cities specific authority to levy B & 0 taxes.”
WCHS, Inc. v. City of Lynnwood (2004)
“Nevertheless, the city attorney determined that the business license should be denied under the requirements of RCW 35A.82.020 4 and RCW 35A.96A.410 [sic].”
Lakehaven Water & Sewer Dist. v. City of Federal Way (2020)
“In passing the ordinance, the council relied on RCW 35A.82.020, which it concluded gave the City broad authority to impose excises for regulation or revenue regarding all places and kinds of businesses.”
WCHS, INC. v. City of Lynnwood (2004)
“Nevertheless, the city attorney determined that the business license should be denied under the requirements of RCW 35A.82.020 [4] and RCW 35A.96A.410 [ sic ].”
City of Bellevue v. Patterson (1976)
“Specific authority for the City of Bellevue’s right, as a noncharter optional code city, to fix and collect a license tax for revenue purposes is found in RCW 35A.82.020, which grants inter alia the power to license for revenue purposes to the extent and in the manner…”
Watson v. City of Seattle (2017)
“With respect to municipal business taxes, Seattle has the authority to "collect a license tax for the purposes of revenue and regulation," a power granted to second class cities.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.