Billionaire tax makes it to ballot in California

[SamuelTheThird]

California officials announced that a proposed ballot initiative imposing a one-time tax on residents worth more than $1 billion has qualified for the November 2026 ballot. The measure, backed by a healthcare workers' union, faces strong opposition from Gov. Gavin Newsom and several tech billionaires, who argue it could drive wealthy residents and investment out of the state. Supporters say the revenue is needed to fund healthcare, education, and food assistance programs.

[Lovie777]

1. Well I guess the billionaires will be leaving California.................

it's ok for us to paid higher taxes, but rich don't want to pay their fair share.

Greed.

[hookaleft]

2. I absolutely love Newsome

He ideas about the future of AI and his confrontation of the impacts that AI will have on our communites and country and preparing for the future are uplifting. But Billionaires must pay their fair share. They cannot continue to take advantage of the opportunities that have been afforded to them. They must pay their fair share.

Governor Newsom signs first-of-its-kind executive order to prepare workers and businesses for potential AI disruption

What you need to know: Governor Newsom is signing a first-in-the-nation executive order to confront the economic impacts of artificial intelligence on workers and small businesses, support workers in sectors impacted by AI transition, and pursue new policies that ensure Californians — not just big tech companies — benefit from the wealth-generating opportunities of the future economy.

SACRAMENTO – Governor Gavin Newsom today issued an executive order directing California to prepare workers, small businesses, and communities for the economic disruption that artificial intelligence will bring to the workforce. The order mobilizes state agencies, labor experts, economists, universities, and industry leaders to develop new policies, gather data, and identify early warning signs of workforce disruption — while ensuring workers share in the gains created by AI-driven productivity.

The order directs the state to explore policies including severance standards, employment insurance and transition support for displaced workers, worker ownership models, universal basic capital concepts, expanded workforce training, and stronger tracking of hiring and payroll trends to help California respond faster to potential layoffs and economic disruption. Read the executive order here.
“California has never sat back and watched as the future happened to us – and we won’t start now. We have taken the lead on advancing innovation, safety, and transparency. But we must think bigger. This moment demands that we reimagine the entire system — how we work, how we govern, how we prepare people for the future — and that work is starting right here in the Golden State.

Today is just the first step as we rewrite policy and direction, creating a future of work that works for all.”

Governor Gavin Newsom
https://www.gov.ca.gov/2026/05/21/governor-newsom-signs-first-of-its-kind-executive-order-to-prepare-workers-and-businesses-for-potential-ai-disruption/
Much More:

[SamuelTheThird]

3. Newsom veteod data center transparency legislation

They dont have to reveal their water usage to the public now.

[hookaleft]

4. and he is against the billionaire tax

I am disappointed

[Sympthsical]

8. This reads like me padding an assignment

One that I don't particularly care about and am just trying to get through. Buzz words and interesting sounding things!

We have ordered a study! And, since I'm Californian and have met this state, this study will take years. Then they will "formulate legislation" that will take another few years.

And then, ten years later, they will have figured out the impacts!

Mainly because the impacts will have already occurred while they were doing all this studying.

This is resume padding for 2028. Tech will continue its control of the state. Where it mattered - data centers, taxation, and regulation - nothing.

But glorious studies of policy!

The fact this works on people is really something.

[tirebiter]

5. I don't support the one time aspect.

One time is too short sited. California will need the money forever. So will the US. just create a new bracket . Keep making money, just be willing to share it

[MichMan]

6. It is based on total accumulated wealth, not income

You can't just create a new bracket.

[MichMan]

9. Note that it is a "one time 5% tax"

Later on, they can implement a 5.5% or 6% billionaire tax, or any other amount as long as it isn't 5%.

[MichMan]

7. I can't find out how they plan on determining everyone's total wealth

Total accumulated wealth consists of real estate, investments, businesses, art, jewelry, cars, collectibles, furniture and anything else that is property.

Just how does California plan on assessing the values of all those things, without a team of assessors physically looking at all of them?

First off they have to determine the values to know who is even eligible for the tax and after that determine how much people would owe. It seems like they would have to assess all kinds of people to know who had $100 million, $500 million, or over a billion.

[Abolishinist]

10. I've thought this all along.

So many issues with the whole thing. Art collections, for example. I read that only 35% to 40% of art lots offered by Sotheby's sell strictly within their pre-auction low-to-high estimates. Are they allowed to object to the valuations? And why should anyone be forced to allow strangers to randomly walk through their private residence.

And as you say, businesses. Not only is a private business difficult to value, there are also public start-ups that have a high value on paper but not in the 'cash' world. Some of these stocks cannot even be sold due to holding restrictions.

And why the $1 billion starting point. Someone worth $980 million isn't well off?

And as you say, what's to keep the state from coming back in several years with a new tax. I can understand why some might decide to leave the state. Especially considering the retroactive clawback, which targets anyone who held primary residency in California as of January 1, 2026. What's to keep them from doing this again as well. Pick a date.

Changes need to be made at the federal IRS level to tax these people more, eliminating loopholes would be a start. This would dramatically increase the California state incomes taxes collected as well.