As of mid-2026, there is no Seattle vacancy tax. No ordinance has been introduced at the Seattle City Council, and property owners in the city owe no vacancy-specific charge beyond the standard property taxes that King County assesses and collects. Mayor Katie Wilson pledged during her campaign to consider “a well-designed vacancy tax or fine” aimed at pulling businesses back to the downtown core, but that pledge has not become a bill.
The idea is active, though. Downtown office vacancy hit 33% in the first quarter of 2025, housing costs keep climbing, and several West Coast cities already tax empty property. If Seattle moves, those existing programs are the clearest preview of what an ordinance here could look like.
Where the Proposal Stands
No council member has introduced a formal vacancy tax ordinance. The Building Owners and Managers Association of Greater Seattle said in early 2026 that vacancy taxes “will be introduced in other West Coast cities and states in the next couple of years,” framing the concept as an emerging regional trend rather than imminent Seattle policy. A California proposal set at $5 per square foot for office space vacant more than 182 days a year has drawn attention as a possible template, but Seattle has neither adopted nor adapted it.
State law is a second variable. Washington cities generally need state-level authorization to impose new tax types, and whether a vacancy tax could be enacted under existing city authority or would require enabling legislation is an open question. A related measure, the Vibrant Cities Act, was not ready for the 2026 legislative session and is being developed for possible introduction in 2027. Anyone tracking this issue should watch both the legislature and the council’s legislation portal, where any bill would appear with a council bill number before public hearings.
Why the City Is Looking at It
The pressure is coming from two directions. Downtown Seattle’s overall office vacancy reached 33% in the first quarter of 2025, up more than four percentage points from the prior year. Class A space fared slightly worse at 32.2%. Direct vacant space climbed to nearly 15 million square feet. That volume of empty commercial real estate means lost tax revenue, fewer workers spending money downtown, and visible blight that discourages new investment.
On the residential side, Seattle faces the affordability crunch affecting most of the coast. Supporters of a vacancy tax argue that charging owners for empty units pushes them to cut rent or sell, adding supply, and that the revenue can fund affordable housing. Critics say vacancy taxes add compliance costs, are hard to enforce, and can chill new construction. Whatever proposal eventually reaches the council will be shaped by that argument.
How Other West Coast Cities Do It
Because there is nothing to analyze in Seattle yet, the useful reference points are the cities that already tax empty property. Each takes a different approach, and a Seattle bill would likely borrow from several.
Vancouver, British Columbia
Vancouver’s Empty Homes Tax is the most cited model in West Coast housing debates. Residential properties declared or deemed empty during the reference year owe 3% of assessed value. For a home assessed at the equivalent of $800,000 USD, that is roughly $24,000 a year. The tax has been credited with reducing vacancy since its 2017 launch, though enforcement relies heavily on self-reporting.
San Francisco
San Francisco’s Commercial Vacancy Tax hits ground-floor commercial spaces in designated neighborhood commercial districts that sit empty more than 182 days in a tax year. The rate escalates: $250 per linear foot of street frontage in the first year, $500 in the second consecutive year, and $1,000 in the third consecutive year and beyond. The ordinance excludes time spent applying for building permits, up to one year of active construction after a permit is issued, and up to two years following fire or natural disaster damage.
Washington, D.C.
Washington, D.C. takes one of the more aggressive approaches. Vacant properties are taxed at $5 per $100 of assessed value, and blighted properties at $10 per $100. A vacant commercial building assessed at $1 million would owe $50,000 a year; a blighted one, $100,000. The rates are set to make holding empty property genuinely expensive.
Oakland
Oakland’s Measure W, approved by voters, uses a flat annual amount rather than a percentage. Vacant residential parcels owe $6,000 a year, and condos, duplexes, and townhomes under separate ownership owe $3,000 per vacant unit. A property counts as vacant if it is in use fewer than 50 days in the calendar year, one of the stricter definitions in the country.
Berkeley
Berkeley’s Empty Homes Tax applies to residential units vacant more than 182 days in a calendar year. First-year rates are $3,000 for condos, duplexes, and single-family homes and $6,000 for other residential units. Those amounts double in the second consecutive year and beyond, to $6,000 and $12,000, and Berkeley adjusts the numbers annually using the Consumer Price Index for the San Francisco-Oakland-San Jose area.
Exemptions You Would Expect to See
Every city with a vacancy tax carves out situations where an owner has a legitimate reason for leaving property empty. Seattle has not defined its own list, but the patterns across existing ordinances are consistent enough to sketch what would likely appear.
- Active renovation or construction, usually capped at one to two years so an owner cannot pull a permit and stall. San Francisco allows one year from the date the city issues the first building permit.
- Catastrophic damage from fire, earthquake, or similar events. San Francisco provides a two-year exclusion from the date of the event.
- Permit application periods, recognizing that an owner cannot occupy space while waiting on government approvals.
- Medical or care facility stays, typically requiring documentation from a healthcare provider.
- Probate and legal proceedings, where the person responsible for the property may not have authority to lease or sell it.
- Nonprofit use, when a charitable organization holds property for future affordable housing and can show a concrete plan.
Duration and documentation rules for each of these vary sharply between cities, so any Seattle ordinance would set its own terms.
What a Seattle Version Might Include
No one outside the council knows what a Seattle bill would contain, but the local circumstances point in some directions. With downtown office vacancy at 33%, commercial space would almost certainly be in scope; a purely residential vacancy tax would not touch the city’s most visible empty-building problem. The California $5-per-square-foot model for commercial space vacant more than 182 days has already drawn regional attention.
On the residential side, a flat per-unit amount along Oakland’s or Berkeley’s lines may be more politically workable than a percentage of assessed value, which lands harder on expensive property and could face legal challenges. Escalating rates for consecutive years of vacancy, as San Francisco and Berkeley both use, create rising pressure to lease or sell without hammering an owner who hits a temporary gap between tenants.
Enforcement is where these programs get complicated. Vancouver leans on self-declaration, which creates an honor-system problem. Oakland and Berkeley pair annual registration with utility data reviews. A Seattle version would probably require owners to file annual declarations, and the city would likely cross-reference utility usage to verify occupancy. The Seattle Department of Construction and Inspections already tracks permits and habitability, which makes it a natural fit for a role in enforcement.
How to Track and Engage
Any proposed ordinance would appear on the Seattle City Council’s online legislation portal with a bill number before public hearings, and council meeting agendas are the most direct way to see what is moving. Watching the state legislature matters too, given the open question about whether Washington cities need enabling authority for this kind of tax.
Joining an industry group such as the Building Owners and Managers Association of Greater Seattle or a local landlord association is a practical second step. These groups track proposed legislation and testify during public comment, and the earlier owners engage, the more room there is to shape exemptions, rates, and compliance requirements before they harden into law.