Espresso tax has businesses, some latte lovers steaming

Barista Stephanie Curwick's customers soon may pay 10 cents more for each espresso they buy if a Seattle espresso-tax initiative makes it on the ballot.

And there's a good chance it will, because a group sponsoring Initiative 77 says it has enough signatures and plans to submit them to the city clerk today.


	Mary Huether sips on her vanilla latte from the Planetary Espresso on Capitol Hill yesterday. The group sponsoring an initiative to tax espresso drinks says it will submit signatures to the city clerk today. Paul Kitagaki Jr. / Seattle Post-Intelligencer Click for larger photo

In a city where espresso is religion and ordering a cup of Joe can be an art form, the proposal -- designed to pay for early childhood education -- is getting mixed reaction from java-lovers and non-drinkers alike.

"It's an absolutely horrible idea to target one group of people," said Curwick, shaking her head as she palmed a cup of java inside the wood frame of the espresso stand on Broadway. "I don't see the connection."

Across the street, Bobby Hawbaker sipped an iced caffe Americano with the sound of hissing steamed milk in the background and said, "No problem."

He's willing to pay 10 cents more, and it wouldn't stop him from consuming 10 cups of java each week. "Nothing would," he joked.

The tax would be levied on any drink containing a half-ounce of espresso or more. If drip coffee is your style, don't worry -- it's not included.

The sponsors missed the deadline to force the issue onto the November ballot, so whether the initiative goes before voters Nov. 5 depends on timing. Under the city charter, the City Council can take up to 45 days to decide whether to enact the initiative into law, draw up an alternative to offer alongside I-77 on the ballot or simply put the initiative before voters. And first the county must validate the signatures, which could take 20 days.

Meanwhile, the Greater Seattle Chamber of Commerce and a coalition called JOLT, Joined to Oppose the Latte Tax, are lining up against the proposal.

Sponsors say the initiative would raise between $7 million and $10 million a year to expand the city's childcare subsidy program for low-income families, improve teacher training and education and expand programs to help 3- to 5-year-olds prepare for school.

"There's not enough child care, good or otherwise, to meet the demand, and there's a shortage of high-quality child care," said Michael Kasprzak, director of the Interlake Childcare Center and campaign treasurer.

There are 350 low-income families currently on the city's waiting list for child-care subsidies, said Janet Staub, program supervisor with Child Development Services within the city's Human Services Department.

"The need for funding in early childhood is great," she said. "We see what could be done if we have sufficient money."

Seattle pediatrician Jill Sells, an initiative sponsor and an espresso drinker, said children's early years are critical to their future success and it's difficult for families to find or afford high-quality child care. She said the group settled on an espresso tax because the city needs a new stable revenue source and it would not greatly affect any one person.

Small businesses with less than $50,000 in annual gross receipts would be exempt. But the tax applies to everyone who sells espresso drinks -- even restaurants, department stores and hospitals whose main line of business isn't espresso.

The chamber of commerce opposes the tax, saying it would create an onerous system for businesses.

A vast majority of small espresso shops don't inventory individual products, said Stephanie Bowman, with the Greater Seattle Chamber of Commerce. "Now they're going to have to figure out a system of recording each latte they sell," she said.

"It's a joke," said business owner Tom Whitfield, who added espresso sales when he bought the magazine shop In The News in downtown Seattle. Espresso drinks account for 15 percent of his business, he said. "Why do that?"

"Holy cow," said Jeremy Van Bronckhorst, as Whitfield filled his order for an iced grande mocha latte yesterday afternoon. "We pay enough taxes."

The initiative had its share of supporters around the city's coffee scene.

Mike Callahan, 33, drove up to the Smoke Espresso stand in Interbay yesterday. He'd support it.

"It's a good idea," said Callahan, noting that the tax would be only 4 percent on the $2.50 double grande latte that he just ordered. "I don't have a problem taxing a luxury item. If people are worried about 10 cents, they can get a machine and make it at home."

Outside Torrefazione Italia in Fremont, Kay Ishii said, "Go for it, if it goes toward a good cause."

Others said it was great that the tax could raise millions for children, but they were puzzled by the connection between lattes and preschool programs.

Sitting outside Starbucks in Upper Queen Anne, Stefan Pfeifer, 22, said, "Coffee has nothing to do with children.

"People are going to be able to afford it, but it only benefits people with children."

"Why lattes?" asked Councilwoman Jan Drago, who once started a preschool center before entering politics. "I certainly recognize the need, but I don't think it's good policy to start looking at a targeted tax. What's next?"

But campaign treasurer Kasprzak said it makes as much sense as taxing property owners or timber sales to pay for public schools. He said the group was looking for a tax that was a luxury item that was "discretionary, wouldn't be a big one-time hit to anybody, and would be spread over a large population."

The initiative says that money raised through espresso taxes would not supplant existing city funds.

Staub said the city currently spends $3.68 million on child development services, with $1.6 million going toward child-care subsidies for low-income families. It also provides money for child care for homeless children, support services for child care providers and training.

Each month the city subsidized about 450 children, paying anywhere from $43 to $660 a child depending on the family's poverty level. The city picks up where the state leaves off, paying for people who are at 200 to 300 percent of federal poverty level. But the waiting list is still so long that the city doesn't do outreach for the program, Staub said.

"I'm pleased to see that there is a political effort that will raise these issues more broadly and bring them to the public," said Council President Peter Steinbrueck, who added he wants to study the issue further before taking a position.

P-I reporter Phuong Cat Le can be reached at 206-903-0370 or phuongle@seattlepi.com

Add P-I Local headlines to