Proposition 30

Should California raise the personal income tax of its wealthiest residents to pay for programs meant to fight climate change and air pollution? 

Proposition 30 would levy an additional 1.75% personal income tax on individual Californians or married couples who make more than $2 million a year. The money would go toward creating the Clean Cars and Clean Air Trust Fund and pay for some electric vehicle rebates, charging infrastructure, wildfire mitigation and firefighter training.

Yes Argument

Proposition 30 is necessary to clean up the state’s dirty air and to fight climate change. It asks the wealthiest Californians to make an equitable and sustained public investment in a cleaner transportation system and in the prevention of catastrophic wildfires. Most Californians experience climate change through wildfire smoke. This would create well-paid green jobs and help build a network of EV chargers across California, especially in less affluent neighborhoods where air pollution tends to be more acute. It's an air-quality measure seeded by environmental justice and transit groups.

No Argument

California already has the highest income tax of any state in the nation. With inflation and gas prices soaring, this is exactly the wrong time to raise taxes. The measure could disrupt the state’s tax revenue and make its finances more unstable. California already invested billions this year in fighting climate change. And it’s a handout for Lyft, a ride-hailing company required by state law to increase its electric vehicle trips.

Key Supporters
This list represents notable organizations and officials who have taken a position on the ballot measure, or who are funding the campaigns in support or in opposition. This list is not exhaustive, and may be updated.
This list represents notable organizations and officials who have taken a position on the ballot measure, or who are funding the campaigns in support or in opposition. This list is not exhaustive, and may be updated.

Key Opponents
This list represents notable organizations and officials who have taken a position on the ballot measure, or who are funding the campaigns in support or in opposition. This list is not exhaustive, and may be updated.
This list represents notable organizations and officials who have taken a position on the ballot measure, or who are funding the campaigns in support or in opposition. This list is not exhaustive, and may be updated.

Fundraising
Campaign finance data comes from the California Secretary of State’s office and our partners at Voter’s Edge.
Campaign finance data comes from the California Secretary of State’s office and our partners at Voter’s Edge.

Updated at 5:30 PM PT on Oct 27, 2022
Source: California Secretary of State
In Support
$48.1mTotal
Lyft, Inc.
$45.4m
International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Political Action Committee
$1.0m
Zinc Collective LLC
$200.0k
Rocky Mountain Institute
$132.6k
Nicholas Josefowitz
$600.9k
In Opposition
$26.1mTotal
California Teachers Association
$5.0m
Mark Heising
$1.0m
Michael Moritz
$1.0m
Reed Hastings
$1.0m
Catherine Dean
$1.0m

 

More California Propositions

Proposition 1


Should California amend its constitution to include the right to reproductive freedom, including access to abortion and contraceptives?

Proposition 26


Should California legalize sports betting at tribal casinos and horse racetracks, and allow roulette and dice games at tribal casinos?

Proposition 27


Should California legalize online sports betting?

Proposition 28


Should California guarantee that 1% of the amount funded for public education be set aside for music and the arts in every K-12 public school?

Proposition 29


Should California add new regulations for kidney dialysis clinics?

Proposition 31


Should California ban flavored tobacco products?