1
2
3
4
5
6
7

SUPERIOR COURT OF WASHINGTON
IN AND FOR KING COUNTY

8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15

PHILIP WATSON, an individual, RAY
CARTER, an individual, FARWEST SPORTS, No.
INC., dba OUTDOOR EMPORIUM, a
Washington corporation, PRECISE
COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY
SHOOTER, LLC, a Washington limited
AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
liability company, THE SECOND
AMENDMENT FOUNDATION, INC., a
Washington nonprofit corporation; NATIONAL
RIFLE ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA, INC., a
New York non-profit association; AND
NATIONAL SHOOTING SPORTS
FOUNDATION, a Connecticut non-profit
association,

16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23

Plaintiffs,
v.
CITY OF SEATTLE, a municipality;
ED MURRAY, Mayor of the City of Seattle, in
his official capacity; SEATTLE
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE AND
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES, a department
of the City of Seattle; and GLEN LEE, Director
of Finance and Administrative Services, in his
official capacity,
Defendants.

24
25
COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE
RELIEF – 1

CORR CRONIN MICHELSON
BAUMGARDNER FOGG & MOORE
LLP

1001 Fourth Avenue, Suite 3900
Seattle, Washington 98154-1051
Tel (206) 625-8600
Fax (206) 625-0900

 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
1.
24

Plaintiffs, by and through their attorneys, allege the following Complaint for declaratory
and injunctive relief against Defendants City of Seattle, Mayor Ed Murray, and City of Seattle
Finance Director Glen Lee:
I.

NATURE OF THE CASE

The City of Seattle has passed an ordinance regulating the sale of firearms and
ammunition which imposes a tax on every firearm and ammunition sale in the city, with the
purpose of making it more difficult to access firearms and ammunition. However, the ordinance
serves only as a piece of propaganda, because the ordinance’s mandates are legally
unenforceable. The State of Washington has the exclusive right to regulate the sale of firearms
in Washington, and cities may not enact local laws or regulations related to the sale of firearms.
RCW 9.41.290. The City of Seattle has simply ignored this clear rule of preemption—a rule
which it has been found to have violated in the past, see Chan v. City of Seattle, 164 Wn. App.
549, 265 P.3d 169 (2011)—by purporting to regulate the sale of firearms and ammunition
through a tax that is punishable as a gross misdemeanor. The rule of preemption could not be
clearer: the City of Seattle (like any municipality in the state of Washington) is not permitted to
pass laws that target the sale of firearms and ammunition through any means, be it through the
suppressive effect of a $25 tax, the operative prohibition of sales through a $1000 tax, or an
outright ban. By ignoring this clear principle, the City of Seattle has wasted public resources in
a futile effort to skirt the State’s exclusive powers to regulate firearms and ammunition.
Accordingly, Plaintiffs bring this action for injunctive and declaratory relief, and ask this Court
for an order that would require the Defendants to follow the law.
II.

PARTIES

Plaintiff Philip Watson is an individual residing in Lakewood, Washington. Philip Watson has
purchased ammunition in Seattle at least once a year for the past six years, including from

25
COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE
RELIEF – 2

CORR CRONIN MICHELSON
BAUMGARDNER FOGG & MOORE
LLP

1001 Fourth Avenue, Suite 3900
Seattle, Washington 98154-1051
Tel (206) 625-8600
Fax (206) 625-0900

 1
2
3
4
2.
5
6
7
8
9
3.
10
11
12
13
14
4.
15
16
17
18
5.
19
20
21
22
23

Plaintiff Farwest Sports, Inc., dba Outdoor Emporium.

Philip Watson intends to continue

purchasing ammunition in Seattle, but will not be able to do so if the firearm and ammunition
tax is imposed and the cost is passed on to the consumer.
Plaintiff Ray Carter is an individual residing in West Seattle. Ray Carter has purchased firearms
and ammunition in Seattle at least once a year for the past six years, including from Plaintiffs
Farwest Sports, Inc., dba Outdoor Emporium and Precise Shooter, LLC. Ray Carter intends to
continue purchasing ammunition in Seattle, but will not be able to do so if the firearm and
ammunition tax is imposed and the cost is pass on to the consumer.
Farwest Sports, Inc., dba Outdoor Emporium (“Outdoor Emporium”), is incorporated in
Washington, with is principle place of business in Seattle, Washington. Outdoor Emporium is
the largest firearm and ammunition dealer in Seattle. Outdoor Emporium retails firearms and
ammunition to consumers, approximately 70% of whom are non-Seattle residents. Outdoor
Emporium also wholesales ammunition to other retails in the Seattle area.
Plaintiff Precise Shooter, LLC (“Precise Shooter”) is incorporated in Washington, with its
principle place of business in Seattle, Washington.

Precise Shooter specializes in serving

precision shooters seeking products for highly accurate target shooting, as used in shooting
sports, competitive events, ranges, and hunting.
Plaintiff Second Amendment Foundation, Inc. ("SAF") is a non-profit membership organization
incorporated under the laws of Washington with its principal place of business in Bellevue,
Washington. SAF has over 600,000 members and supporters nationwide, including thousands in
the State of Washington. The purposes of SAF include education, research, publishing, and
legal action focusing on the constitutional right to own and possess firearms. SAF brings this
action on behalf of itself and its members.

24
25
COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE
RELIEF – 3

CORR CRONIN MICHELSON
BAUMGARDNER FOGG & MOORE
LLP

1001 Fourth Avenue, Suite 3900
Seattle, Washington 98154-1051
Tel (206) 625-8600
Fax (206) 625-0900

 1
6.
2
3
4
5
6
7
7.
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18

Plaintiff National Rifle Association of America, Inc. ("NRA") is a non-profit association
incorporated under the laws of New York, with its principal place of business in Fairfax,
Virginia. NRA has almost four million members, including thousands of members in the State
of Washington. NRA's purposes include protection of the right of citizens to have firearms for
lawful defense, hunting, and sporting use, and to promote public safety. NRA brings this action
on behalf of itself and its members.
Plaintiff National Shooting Sports Foundation (“NSSF”) is a non-profit trade association for
America’s firearms, hunting, and recreational shooting sports industry, incorporated and with its
principle place of business in Connecticut.

NSSF has a membership of more than 9,000

federally-licensed firearms and ammunition manufacturers, distributors, retailers; companies
manufacturing, distributing, and selling shooting and hunting-related goods and services; public
and private shooting ranges; and sportsmen’s organizations, including members in the State of
Washington. NSSF’s members supply the firearms and ammunition used by the U.S. Military
and Federal, State, and Local law enforcement to protect America’s national security and keep
our communities safe, and also supply sportsmen and gun owners throughout the State with the
firearms and ammunition they use for lawful purposes. NSSF’s purpose is to promote, protect,
and preserve hunting and the shooting sports. NSSF brings this action on behalf of itself and its
members.

19
8.
20

Defendant City of Seattle ("Seattle" or "the City") is a municipal corporation and first-class city

21
9.
22

Defendant Ed Murray ("Mayor Murray") is the Mayor of the City of Seattle. Mayor Murray is

23
24

organized under the laws of the State of Washington.

the head of the Executive Department, and in that capacity directs and controls all City offices
and departments except where that authority is granted to another office by the Seattle City
Charter.

25
COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE
RELIEF – 4

CORR CRONIN MICHELSON
BAUMGARDNER FOGG & MOORE
LLP

1001 Fourth Avenue, Suite 3900
Seattle, Washington 98154-1051
Tel (206) 625-8600
Fax (206) 625-0900

 1
10.
2

Defendant Seattle Department of Finance and Administrative Services ("Finance Department")

3
11.
4

Defendant Glen Lee (“Director Lee”) is the Director of Finance and Administrative Services.

is an agency of the City of Seattle which oversees the business taxes in Seattle, Washington.

Director Lee oversees the collection and enforcement of business taxes in the City of Seattle.

5
6
12.
7
8
13.
9
10
14.
11

III.

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

This Court has jurisdiction under RCW 2.08.010, RCW 7.24.010, and RCW
7.40.010.
Venue is properly in this Court under RCW 4.12.020(2) and RCW 4.12.025(1).
IV.

FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS

Washington law states in no uncertain terms that the authority to regulate firearms
rests exclusively with the State. Washington law expressly states:

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
15.
19
20
21
22
23
24
25

The state of Washington hereby fully occupies and preempts the entire field of
firearms regulation within the boundaries of the state, including the registration,
licensing, possession, purchase, sale, acquisition, transfer, discharge, and
transportation of firearms, or any other element relating to firearms or parts
thereof, including ammunition and reloader components. Cities, towns, and
counties or other municipalities may enact only those laws and ordinances relating
to firearms that are specifically authorized by state law, as in RCW 9.41.300, and
are consistent with this chapter.
RCW 9.41.290 ("Preemption Clause").1
On August 10, 2015, the Seattle City Council passed Council Bill 118437, entitled
“An Ordinance related to imposing a tax on engaging in the business of making retail sales of
firearms and ammunition.”

On [X], 2015, Mayor Murray approved and signed the Ordinance,

1 RCW 9.41.300, which is referenced in the Preemption Clause, permits cities, towns, counties,
and other municipalities to enact laws and ordinances restricting the discharge of firearms in
certain locations and restricting the possession of firearms in a municipality-owned stadium or
convention cuter. RCW 9.41.300(2). This statutory provision is inapplicable to the present case,
which concerns city restrictions that have nothing to do with the discharge of firearms or the
possession of firearms in stadiums or convention centers.
COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE
RELIEF – 5

CORR CRONIN MICHELSON
BAUMGARDNER FOGG & MOORE
LLP

1001 Fourth Avenue, Suite 3900
Seattle, Washington 98154-1051
Tel (206) 625-8600
Fax (206) 625-0900

 1
2
3
4
5
16.
6

making the Ordinance effective on [X], 2015. The Ordinance states that the tax itself will be
imposed beginning on January 1, 2016 on every person engaging within the City in the business
of making sales of firearms or ammunition, as administrated by the Finance Department and
Director Lee.
The Ordinance added Chapter 5.50 to the Seattle Municipal Code, which states, in
part:

7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
17.

5.50.030 Tax imposed; rates
A. There is imposed a tax on every person engaging within the City in the
business of making retail sales of firearms or ammunition. The amount of the tax
due shall be equal to the quantity of firearms sold at retail and the quantity of
ammunition sold at retail multiplied by the applicable tax rates that are stated in
Section 5.50.030.B.
B. The tax rate shall be $25 per firearm sold at retail, $.02 per round of
ammunition that contains a single projectile that measures .22 caliber or less sold
at retail, and $.05 per round of ammunition for all other ammunition sold at retail.
The Ordinance also amended 5.55.220 of the Seattle Municipal Code to make failure

15

to pay the firearm and ammunition tax a gross misdemeanor, punishable by a fine of up to

16

$5,000, imprisonment for a term not to exceed 364 days, or both.

17
18.

Defendants have enacted and are required to enforce this tax despite the fact that the

18

authority to regulate firearms rests exclusively with the State of Washington. The City Council’s

19

materials attempt to avoid preemption by stating, without support, that RCW 9.41.290 is not

20

implicated because taxation and regulation are legally distinct functions. Beyond having no

21

legal basis, the fanciful notion that a tax can exist without implicating or requiring regulation

22

quickly collapses when one considers the context surrounding passage of the ordinance. For

23

example, the statements in support of the Ordinance by council members demonstrate a desire to

24

suppress the sale of firearms and ammunition: council member John Okamoto showed his

25

support by reading a citizen statement that “[p]rohibiting guns completely will not stop every
COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE
RELIEF – 6

CORR CRONIN MICHELSON
BAUMGARDNER FOGG & MOORE
LLP

1001 Fourth Avenue, Suite 3900
Seattle, Washington 98154-1051
Tel (206) 625-8600
Fax (206) 625-0900

 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19.
14
15
16
20.
17
18
19
20
21
21.
22

shooting, but I do believe that making it more difficult to access guns and ammunition will save
more lives”, council member Bruce Harrell issued his support for the ordinance by stating “[t]he
fact is, in simple terms, access to guns is too high”, and council member Sally Bagshaw’s
statement that “we cannot rely upon our federal government to do what’s right here.” 2 The
strawman of taxation is also undermined by the City’s wildly erroneous estimates of what funds
would be raised by this tax, which were based on inaccurate assumptions on the price of
firearms and ammunition, the number of sales taking place in Seattle, and the firearms
businesses that would be able to continue operating in Seattle after imposition of the tax. The
anticipated funds that would be earmarked for gun violence education and research will not be
realized, but Seattle’s tax will have exactly the regulatory effect the City Council intended by
passing this tax: a dramatic suppression in the number of firearm and ammunition sales that will
take place within the Seattle city limits.
Defendants’ refusal to recognize the State’s basic preemption principle will cause
irreparable harm to citizens who are hindered in their ability to exercise a basic constitutional
right of purchasing firearms and ammunition in the City of Seattle.
Plaintiffs Phillip Watson, Ray Carter, and SAF all purchase ammunition in Seattle
and plan to do so in the future. If the tax becomes effective, these Plaintiffs will be forced to
seek firearms and ammunition outside Seattle, either because it is economically infeasible to
purchase in Seattle or because those selling firearms and ammunition will be required to
relocate.
Irreparable harm is faced by those individual Plaintiffs who engage in the business of
selling firearms, by requiring them to impose a tax on each sale or face penalty or prosecution.

23
24
25

2 August 10, 2015 Seattle City Council Meeting at 1:24:39, 1:25:44 & 1:27:39 (available at
http://www.seattlechannel.org/mayor-and-council/city-council/full-council?
videoid=x57446&Mode2=Video)
COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE
RELIEF – 7

CORR CRONIN MICHELSON
BAUMGARDNER FOGG & MOORE
LLP

1001 Fourth Avenue, Suite 3900
Seattle, Washington 98154-1051
Tel (206) 625-8600
Fax (206) 625-0900

 1
22.
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
23.
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24

Precise Shooter faces irreparable harm from a tax that will either force it to pass on
the tax to their customers or force it to move outside Seattle. Applying the tax to Precise
Shooter’s sales to date in 2015, it would owe more for this increased tax than it has earned in
profit.

However, passing the tax on to the customer would result in a catastrophic loss of

business for Precise Shooter. For example, one of the most popular rounds of ammunition at
Precise Shooter, the .22 caliber, costs $.05 to $.10 a round. The next most popular ammunition
at Precise Shooter, the 9mm, costs approximately $.20 to $.30 a round. A $.02 and $.05
respective tax increase per round would result in a tax rate from 20% to 40% on ammunition, an
increase that would send customers to online retailers or to those just outside Seattle. Given that
the tax will make the firearm business in Seattle unprofitable, Precise Shooter must relocate
north outside the city limits if the tax is not struck down. Although the tax will not go into effect
until January 1, 2016, Precise Shooter must make decisions now about moving outside the city
limits in order to continue its business after that date.
Outdoor Emporium faces similar irreparable harm. To ensure customer satisfaction
and maintain its position as the largest firearm retailer in Seattle, Outdoor Emporium has
historically matched any advertised price on firearms and ammunition. As a result, Outdoor
Emporium’s margin on firearms and ammunition is significantly lower than required, even
before the imposition of a good-specific tax. A firearm and ammunition specific tax on Seattle
retailers will erase that thin margin if it is not passed on to customers or drive customers outside
the city limits if it is passed on to customers (especially considering approximately 70% of
Outdoor Emporium’s firearms customers are non-Seattle residents).

Outdoor Emporium’s

wholesale business would also be affected, because it will no longer be able to provide the
cheapest price on ammunition to local retailers. Should the tax go into effect on January 1,
2016, Outdoor Emporium will be required to either relocate outside Seattle to maintain its

25
COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE
RELIEF – 8

CORR CRONIN MICHELSON
BAUMGARDNER FOGG & MOORE
LLP

1001 Fourth Avenue, Suite 3900
Seattle, Washington 98154-1051
Tel (206) 625-8600
Fax (206) 625-0900

 1
2
3
4
5
6
24.
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
25.
17
26.
18
19
20
21
22
23

firearm and ammunition sales, cut its firearm and ammunition department entirely, or refrain
from selling all but the most expensive and highly-specialized firearm and ammunition. Any of
these choices will damage Outdoor Emporium’s brand as a location for a wide array of sporting
goods and irreparably damage its customer base. Outdoor Emporium must make this choice
now so that it may take the appropriate action prior to the end of the year.
Outdoor Emporium and Precise Shooter sell the vast majority of firearms and
ammunition in Seattle. However, neither Outdoor Emporium nor Precise Shooter will be able to
continue selling firearms or ammunition in Seattle after the imposition of the newly-passed tax,
with the possible exception of a select few high-end firearms and ammunition. The exit of these
retailers from the Seattle firearm market will make purchasing a generic firearm (such as a
handgun or range rifle) or common ammunition (such as .22 caliber or 9mm) in Seattle a
practical, if not total, impossibility.
V.

CAUSES OF ACTION

FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION: DECLARATORY RELIEF
-Against All DefendantsPlaintiffs repeat and reallege paragraphs 1 through __ as if fully set forth herein.
A present controversy exists concerning whether Defendants have legal authority to
regulate the sale of firearms and ammunition by imposing a tax, the non-payment of which is
punishable as a gross misdemeanor. The retailer Plaintiffs’ statutory right to be free from local
interference with the sale of firearms is affected by this controversy. In addition, the individual
Plaintiffs’ and the organizational Plaintiffs’ Washington members’ constitutional rights to
purchase firearms and ammunition in Seattle is affected by this controversy, and the protection
of those rights is germane to the organizational Plaintiffs’ purposes.

24
25
COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE
RELIEF – 9

CORR CRONIN MICHELSON
BAUMGARDNER FOGG & MOORE
LLP

1001 Fourth Avenue, Suite 3900
Seattle, Washington 98154-1051
Tel (206) 625-8600
Fax (206) 625-0900

 1
27.
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
28.
9

Plaintiffs are entitled, under RCW 7.24 and CR 57, to an accelerated judicial
declaration that:
a. The Ordinance violates Washington statutory law and is therefore null and void;
b. Defendants lack legal authority to enact any ordinance, law, or rule that imposes a tax on the
sale of firearms or ammunition; and
c. Defendants may not collect the firearm or ammunition tax or enforce the Ordinance by any other
means.
Such declaration will conclusively terminate the controversy giving rise to this
proceeding.

10

SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION: INJUNCTIVE RELIEF

11
12
29.
13
30.
14
15
16
17
18
19
31.
20
21

- Against All Defendants Plaintiffs repeat and reallege paragraphs __ through __ as if fully set forth herein.
The retailer Plaintiffs’ statutory rights to be free from local interference with the sale
of firearms is in jeopardy of immediate invasion, causing actual and substantial injuries without
any adequate remedy at law.

Plaintiffs’ Washington members’ constitutional rights to purchase firearms and ammunition in
Seattle is in jeopardy of immediate invasion, causing actual and substantial injuries without any
adequate remedy at law.
Plaintiffs are entitled, under RCW 7.40 and CR 65, to an injunction as enjoining
Defendants from collecting the firearm or ammunition tax or enforcing the Ordinance by any
other means.

22
23
24

In addition, the individual Plaintiffs’ and the organizational

VI.

REQUEST FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs request that judgment be entered against Defendants as
follows:

25
COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE
RELIEF – 10

CORR CRONIN MICHELSON
BAUMGARDNER FOGG & MOORE
LLP

1001 Fourth Avenue, Suite 3900
Seattle, Washington 98154-1051
Tel (206) 625-8600
Fax (206) 625-0900

 1

a.

2
3

contrary to law and the Ordinance is null and void.
b.

4
5
6

Declaring that Defendants’ actions in enacting and enforcing the Ordinance were

Awarding Plaintiffs fees, costs, and disbursements incurred in this action as the
court deems just and equitable.

c.

Awarding any additional or further relief which the court finds appropriate,
equitable, or just.

7
8
9
10

DATED this _______ day of

, 2015.
CORR CRONIN MICHELSON
BAUMGARDNER FOGG & MOORE LLP

11
12
13
14

Steven W. Fogg, WSBA No. 23528
David B. Edwards, WSBA No. 44680
Attorneys for Plaintiffs

15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE
RELIEF – 11

CORR CRONIN MICHELSON
BAUMGARDNER FOGG & MOORE
LLP

1001 Fourth Avenue, Suite 3900
Seattle, Washington 98154-1051
Tel (206) 625-8600
Fax (206) 625-0900