On Election Day, Californians can vote to collect a one-time tax of 5% on the wealth of billionaires residing in the state as of January 1, 2026. The wealth tax was put on the ballot by the SEIU. It has been endorsed by Joseph Stiglitz, Paul Krugman, and four less-famous Nobel-Prize-winning economists. “Endorsed” is too weak a word. On Sept. 19 they predicted in a “support letter” that a yes vote could be “a turning point in the battle between democracy and oligarchy.”

• “If it passes, Proposition 40 would be the first-ever tax on billionaire’s wealth enacted anywhere in the world.

• “Contrary to the claims of its opponents, taxing billionaires will not doom Silicon Valley, quite the opposite. Since the beginning of 2026, after the wealth tax initiative was announced, California has attracted 80% of all new venture capital funding in America, up from about 50% before 2025.

• “Proposition 40 offers the first opportunity for the people to start reining in the power of billionaires. If the state that houses some of the country’s most powerful billionaires votes to tax their wealth, it will kickstart a movement to tax ultra-high-net-worth individuals in other states — and eventually at the federal level and in other countries.

•  “Ten years ago, the wealthiest 0.001% of California residents weremworth a combined $700 billion. Today, that same fraction of the population, California’s 250 billionaires, are collectively worth $2.3 trillion.

• “During the 2000 federal election cycle, billionaires accounted for about 1% of total donations; in 2024 this number had risen to 19%.

• “Our failure to tax their returns on capital—a myriad of loopholes they’ve taken full advantage of—has allowed their wealth to compound, while ordinary Americans have paid higher rates. Over the 2019-2025 period, the total amount of California income tax paid by billionaires amounted to only 1.6% of their $1.4 trillion wealth gain, much less than what ordinary Californians pay on their paychecks.

• “A one-time tax of 5% on the wealth of California’s 250 billionaires would be large enough to offset the federal cuts to Medicaid.

• “What will allow California to thrive in the future is not letting a handful of billionaires live tax free: it is adequate public spending on health, education, and public infrastructure, key engines of economic growth to which it is only fair to ask the ultra-wealthy to contribute.”

–Daron Acemoglu, Abhijit Banerjee, Peter Diamond, Esther Duflo, Paul Krugman, Joseph Stiglitz

Soon after the economists’ posted their cogent and hopeful letter, a glossy, a four-page “No-on-40” flyer arrived in the mail.  It was deceitful and expensively produced. (Sergey Brin, co-founder of Google, has already donated $138 million to defeat the wealth tax.) It made false charges to induce fear in the voter/reader: “Prop 40 makes healthcare funding worse” and “Prop 40 exposes all Californians to higher taxes.”

The graphic on the front page of the slick flyer was aimed at the woke-but-easily-lulled California voter. Brown, Pink, and Tan hands are holding up signs that say “Vote” “No” “Prop 40.” The Tan hand is almost making a fist (like the one that replaced the two-fingered peace sign long, long ago).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The most annoying thing about the flyer was the list of leading Democrats calling for a “No” vote. I was sad to see Katie Porter and Fiona Ma joining Gavin Newsom in the Billionaires’ Buddies’ club. I could hear an echo of 2016, when Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton were competing for the nomination.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The Democrats wouldn’t let us elect a President Sanders in 2016 and they won’t let us collect a Wealth Tax in 2026.

California voters can’t stop Donald Trump from escalating “our” war on Iraq, or enlarging “our” military presence in Greenland, or invoking the Insurrection Act. But we can hit the oligarchs where they live. We may never get another chance like this.

To repeat the economists’ hopeful message: “Proposition 40 offers the first opportunity for the people to start reining in the power of billionaires.” We can “kickstart a movement to tax ultra-high-net-worth individuals in other states —and eventually at the federal level and in other countries.”

Add Hit Pieces

The “No on Prop 40,” continued its assault on our mailbox in late September, lobbing in two glossy, four-page, 8.5 x 11 f-lyers. The front-page of one features a beautiful middle-aged nurse in black scrubs, with a stethoscope over her shoulder. She looks hip, with three silver bracelets on her right wrist.  There’s a silver streak in her hair, which is parted down the middle. The text consists of two false assertions: “Healthcare providers oppose Prop 40 because it jeopardizes funding for vital services,” and “It will make our healthcare problems even worse.” Slick of them to acknowledge that we have “healthcare problems.”

The front page of the second flyer shows the crossed fingers that a middle-aged WM in a business suit is hiding behind his back. He supposedly represents “The special interests behind Prop 40.” The wealth tax was drafted and put on the ballot by the SEIU-United Healthcare Workers. (If only the working class saw itself as a  “special interest!” )

Page two asserts that “Prop 40 was never intended to be just a ‘one-time’ tax. The special interests behind the measure included a hidden provision that gives the State Legislature the power to expand the tax.”

If only the working class saw itself as a “special interest!”

Page 3 warns that “Prop 40 taxes savings and retirement accounts for the first time in state history.” True, but only the savings and retirement accounts of billionaires. As Dennis Peron used to say, “Bwa, Bwa, Bwa!”

On page 4, a Stanford professor foresees Prop 40 “chasing out business leaders who have helped power the state’s strong economy and job climate for decades.”

We don’t know how much the corporations have given to buy the support of Planned Parenthood Affiliates of California –a lobbying group that reports getting donations from “Levi Strauss & Co (via the Levi Strauss Foundation), Pfizer (via the Pfizer Foundation), Adobe, Starbucks (matching employee contributions), Nike (ditto), Bank of New York Mellon, PayPal (via PayPal Charitable Giving Fund) and Lyft.”

Reality check   As of Sept. 30, the SEIU had raised $36 million, most of it in labor donated to get the Wealth Tax on the ballot. The billionaires and their buddies have already spent $205 million to kill the measure, and their campaign has only just begun. A billion is a thousand million. Sergey Brin’s $138 million donation represents .0128% of his net worth.

Google’s “AI Overview” is still fair and balanced in summarizing the arguments:

“Proponents state Prop 40 implements a one-time 5% tax on state residents with a net worth over $1 billion (affecting roughly 200-250 residents).  It will raise an estimated $100 billion, with 90% going to restore healthcare funding cuts from federal legislations, and 10% to education/food assistance.

“Critics, including business groups, tech executives, and some prominent Democrats like Gov. Gavin Newsom, argue it drives wealthy residents and assets out of California and harms the state’s economic competitiveness.”

Bernie Sanders, Ro Khana and Insurance Commissioner Jane Kim will be speaking in favor of Prop 40 at the Warfield in SF on Saturday, 5 pm.