Seattle Councilmember Rob Saka said he was “gravely concerned” after Starbucks announced it will shift 2,000 corporate jobs to a new regional headquarters in Nashville, a move he called “real” at a moment when Democrats in Washington are already bracing for pushback over the state’s new millionaire tax.

The move from the coffee giant lands less than five months after Washington Gov. Bob Ferguson signed the tax into law on March 30. It imposes a 9.9% income tax on households earning more than $1 million each year, a policy backed by progressives and socialists and opposed by conservatives. Starbucks’ relocation affects jobs mostly in IT and supply chain management, while KOMO News reported last week that the company had already laid off another 61 employees in a reorganization of its technology department at its corporate headquarters.

Saka, who once welcomed Katie Wilson after she defeated incumbent Bruce Harrell, had said after her victory that he looked forward to partnering with her to build “a thriving, inclusive Seattle” and to push for universal preschool, safer neighborhoods and other priorities. Now, with Wilson in office, he is sounding the alarm as a major Seattle company trims its local footprint and sends a large slice of corporate work to Tennessee.

Wilson has taken the opposite view. Last year, speaking at a barista picket line, she said, “I am not buying Starbucks, and you should not either.” And when asked about fears that wealthy residents would leave Washington because of the millionaire tax, she said, “I think the claims that millionaires are going to leave our state are super overblown,” adding, “the ones that leave? Like, bye.”

The clash captures a larger fight that goes well beyond one company. The debate in Seattle and across Washington has become part of a broader argument over whether blue states are pushing businesses and high earners toward more market-friendly red states. Starbucks remains one of Seattle’s best-known corporate names, which makes any job shift there politically loaded in a city that still sees the company as part of its economic identity.

For Wilson, the question is not whether the tax or the company’s restructuring will draw headlines. It is whether Seattle can keep its political identity intact while one of its signature employers cuts jobs, moves work out of state and tests how much economic pain voters are willing to accept for a policy meant to raise revenue from the very richest households.