5 Things to Know About California's New Billionaire Tax Measure

Wealthy allies in Silicon Valley joined the fray armed with deep pockets and threats to leave the state, which depends disproportionately on high earners for revenue.

The union funding the measure, Service Employees International Union-United Healthcare Workers West, says California needs the revenue that would be generated by the measure to rescue the healthcare system from deep cuts that the Trump administration made last year in the president’s tax reform package, known as the “One Big Beautiful Bill Act.”

Newsom is reportedly trying to negotiate a last-minute deal that would pull the initiative before the ballot is finalized on June 25.

What would it do?

The proposed initiative would levy a one-time 5% tax on California residents whose net worth exceeded $1 billion at the start of this year. The tax would hit roughly 200 people, and billionaires could pay in installments over five years. Proponents of the measure estimate it would generate $100 billion for the state.

The revenue would go into a special fund with 90% reserved for healthcare spending and 10% for education and food assistance programs.

The Legislature would control the funds and could allocate up to $25 billion annually to designated programs including Medi-Cal and CalFresh.

It needs a simple majority to pass.

Who is supporting it?

The state’s largest healthcare workers union is bankrolling the measure, pouring more than $31 million into the campaign. “We are facing literally a collapse of our healthcare system here in California and elsewhere,” Dave Regan, president of SEIU-UHW, said in October when the campaign launched.

The union, which is known for wielding ballot measures aggressively, argues that federal healthcare cuts will result in hospital and clinic closures, worsened patient access and thousands of lost jobs if the state doesn’t step in to backfill tens of billions of federal dollars. The group also points out that the Trump tax breaks for income, businesses and investments disproportionately benefit the wealthy people who would then be subject to the proposed billionaire tax.

“Whether or not folks support this, they can’t deny that these massive cuts to healthcare are coming,” said union spokesperson Renée Saldaña. “Nobody else has a solution to fill this massive $100 billion funding gap that is facing California.”

Saldaña noted that people signing the initiative petition were supportive and sometimes wanted the tax to be continuous rather than one-time.

“This is popular. The public is feeling the strain of their own healthcare costs,” she said.

The measure has won high-profile support from Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders and former Secretary of Labor Robert Reich. A handful of local unions as well as the Teamsters and AFSCME California have also backed the measure.

Who is opposed to it?

Newsom is an unsurprising and vocal critic of the proposal. He has long argued that increased taxes would drive wealthy people and businesses out of the state. In a recent appearance on Real Time with Bill Maher, Newsom claimed that “we’ve already seen dozens and dozens of people leave the state.”

Google co-founder Sergey Brin, with a net worth of $300 billion, according to Forbes, reportedly moved to Nevada because of the tax threat. Brin, a one-time supporter of liberal causes turned Trump supporter, is also the biggest spender among opponents.

As of June 15, he has contributed $82 million to Building a Better California, which is funding multiple countermeasures designed to invalidate or weaken the initiative should it pass. The committee has not, however, taken a position on the wealth tax.

The top two measures — the Retirement and Personal Savings Protection Act and the Improving Transparency, Effectiveness and Efficiency in California Government Act — will also likely appear on the November ballot.

The retirement act would prohibit new state taxes on personal property, effectively canceling the billionaire tax if both measures pass. The transparency act would require audits of state programs funded by special taxes.

Other tech and industry titans, including Google CEO Eric Schmidt, worth $43.3 billion, Kleiner Perkins chairman John Doerr, worth $25 billion, and The Wonderful Company president Stewart Resnick, worth $5.4 billion, have donated millions of dollars to Brin’s committee.

Ripple Labs co-founder Chris Larsen, worth an estimated $12.4 billion, also started Golden State Promise, a political action committee dedicated to opposing the tax initiative directly. Venture capitalist Ron Conway, who does not appear on Forbes’ billionaires list, is funding a third group, Stop The Squeeze.

Collectively, the opposition campaigns have raised $107.9 million as of June 15, according to state campaign finance data.

Robert Lapsley, president of the California Business Roundtable, said one of the most concerning parts of the proposal is a provision allowing the Legislature to amend the tax after passage. “They can change the level of taxation; they can change how often they get taxed; they can keep ratcheting down the income level of who pays it.” The union disputes this claim.

Progressive groups like Planned Parenthood and the California Teachers Association have opposed the measure in recent weeks. Healthcare industry groups like the California Medical Association, California Primary Care Association and California Hospital Association also oppose it.

What’s really going on with healthcare?

The “One Big Beautiful Bill Act,” which Congress passed last year, enacts a number of sweeping changes to Medicaid, the health insurance program for low-income people and those with disabilities.

Over time, experts say the changes will dramatically reduce the number of people with publicly funded insurance through mandates such as work requirements and shorter eligibility periods. The law also limits federal Medicaid spending. Because Medicaid programs draw on state and federal dollars, reductions in enrollment or federal spending mean less money for states like California.

The state Department of Health Care Services projected early on that federal cuts could cost California $30 billion annually. Roughly 14 million people rely on Medicaid, also known as Medi-Cal, in California.

State lawmakers have also grappled with successive budget deficits and ballooning program costs. Last year, Newsom and the Legislature limited Medi-Cal enrollment for low-income people without legal status. State leaders are eyeing additional cuts this year to align with new federal requirements.

Miranda Dietz, director of the Health Care Program at the UC Berkeley Labor Center, said close to 3 million Californians will lose healthcare over the next two years as a result of state and federal changes.

“The need for health insurance and healthcare is not going anywhere,” Dietz said.

What are the challenges?

Should the measure pass, it will surely face legal challenges that could tie the potential revenue up for years, experts say.

The seemingly retroactive nature of the tax invites a constitutional challenge, many say, though supporters reject those concerns. The initiative proposes taxing those who are California residents as of Jan. 1, 2026, meaning those who have since left the state would still owe it.

Mark Peterson, a public policy professor at UCLA School of Law, said revenue from the initiative would “make a huge difference” in helping the state offset federal funding losses, but that’s only if the initiative survives legal challenges and efforts by billionaires to move or hide assets.

Economists and state budget watchers are also wary of the number of billionaires who have already left the state, taking their assets and businesses with them.

Only six people moved out of state last year before the proposed tax would apply to them, but their collective worth would have generated the state $27 billion, Fortune reported. Others, including Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg, worth $231 billion, have also reportedly moved out but not before Jan. 1.

On the other hand, there’s no evidence yet that a majority of the state’s 200 billionaires are leaving. Some, including former gubernatorial candidate and billionaire Tom Steyer, have stated they support the proposal.

Early polling shows 50% of voters favor the initiative, with most strongly behind it, according to the UC Berkeley Citrin Center for Public Opinion Research-POLITICO poll.

But that is not as strong a position as it may seem: 54% of voters are concerned about wealthy individuals leaving the state, and 63% are concerned about them taking their businesses with them. A UC Berkeley Institute of Government Studies-Los Angeles Times poll from March showed similar division among voters with 52% in support.

Generally, campaigns running ballot initiatives want their early polling numbers to be much higher because support nearly always dwindles as the election creeps closer.

Supported by the California Health Care Foundation (CHCF), which works to ensure that people have access to the care they need, when they need it, at a price they can afford. Visit www.chcf.org to learn more.

This article was originally published on CalMatters and was republished under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives license.