SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
california
As Billionaires Seethe, Organizers Say Proposed Wealth Tax in California Is 'Not Radical'
"Asking the handful of wealthiest Californians to contribute less than the annual appreciation on their fortunes to mitigate these crises is a small, reasonable, and administrable request," argued a group of experts.
Jan 02, 2026
Billionaire outrage against a proposed one-time wealth tax on the richest Californians reached a fever pitch in recent days as organizers began the process of gathering the hundreds of thousands of signatures needed to get the initiative on the November ballot.
Without providing specifics, billionaire Bay Area investor Chamath Palihapitiya claimed in a social media post that he knows people "with a collective net worth of $500 billion" who "scrambled and left California for good yesterday" to avoid the potential 5% wealth tax, which would apply to billionaires living in California as of January 1, 2026. (The evidence for significant billionaire tax avoidance via physical relocation is virtually nonexistent.)
Palihapitiya characterized the proposed ballot initiative, which is aimed at raising revenue to avert a healthcare crisis spurred by federal Medicaid cuts, as an "asset seizure tax."
Bill Ackman, a billionaire hedge fund manager who lives in New York, similarly described the proposed tax as "an expropriation of private property."
The Jeff Bezos-owned Washington Post, meanwhile, published a hostile editorial on Thursday denouncing the proposed tax and mocking its supporters, including Service Employees International Union-United Healthcare Workers West (SEIU-UHW).
"Many progressives think of taxation the way teenage boys think about cologne: If some is good, more must be great," the editorial reads. "California, already reeks of overtaxation, but it’s thinking about trying out its most potent scent yet: a wealth tax. Just a whiff has some of the state’s wealthiest residents fleeing."
The Wall Street Journal reported that "the firms of two high-profile California investors issued announcements on New Year’s Eve about establishing new offices out of state, without saying anything about the proposed Golden State tax."
"Tech investor Peter Thiel’s investment firm, Thiel Capital, said it signed a lease in December for office space in Miami," the newspaper added. "The office will 'complement Thiel Capital’s existing operations in Los Angeles,' the company said."
Supporters say the response from billionaires and other opponents of the proposed tax—including California Gov. Gavin Newsom, who is helping raise money to fight the initiative—badly misses the mark. According to organizers, most billionaires see larger capital gains increases in months than the amount they would pay if California voters approved the tax.
“Asking those who have benefited most from the economy to contribute more—particularly to stabilize healthcare systems under direct threat—is not radical. It is reasonable,” Suzanne Jimenez, the chief of staff of SEIU-UHW, told the Journal.
Earlier this week, as Common Dreams reported, US Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) endorsed the proposed wealth tax, which proponents say would raise roughly $100 billion in revenue from around 200 California billionaires. Under the proposal, most of the resulting revenue would be allocated to a Billionaire Tax Health Account, while the rest would go toward an account to fund food assistance and education.
A new expert analysis of the proposal, authored by some of those involved in drafting the initiative, argues that the one-time tax is urgent because "decisions at the federal level have put—and will put—California's healthcare system, education system, and broader economy under severe stress."
"Asking the handful of wealthiest Californians to contribute less than the annual appreciation on their fortunes to mitigate these crises is a small, reasonable, and administrable request," the experts write. "And that is all that this ballot measure does."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Sanders Backs Push for Billionaire Tax in California as Newsom Raises Money to Fight It
"Yes: We need a wealth tax on billionaires," said US Sen. Bernie Sanders.
Dec 31, 2025
US Sen. Bernie Sanders on Tuesday endorsed an effort in California to impose a one-time tax on the wealth of the state's billionaires, a grassroots campaign that has drawn opposition from Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom and powerful investors.
Sanders (I-Vt.) said the proposed ballot initiative, which is currently in the signature-gathering phase, "is a model that should be emulated throughout the country." The senator said he plans to introduce a proposal for a national wealth tax in the near future.
"In my view, in a democratic society, we cannot continue to tolerate a rigged economy in which 60% of our people live paycheck to paycheck—struggling to pay for housing, food, and healthcare while the top 1% now owns more wealth than the bottom 93%," Sanders said in a statement posted to social media. "We must not continue a trend in which, over the past 50 years, $79 trillion in wealth in our country has been redistributed from the bottom 90% to the top 1%."
Yes: We need a wealth tax on billionaires. pic.twitter.com/2OUwSos5De
— Bernie Sanders (@BernieSanders) December 30, 2025
If placed on the November 2026 ballot and approved by voters, the California Billionaire Tax Act would levy a single 5% tax on the wealth of the roughly 200 billionaires who reside in the state. Those subject to the tax would have the option of paying the amount owed all at once or over a period of five years.
Organizers say the measure would generate $100 billion in revenue, which the state could use to avert a looming healthcare crisis fueled by the unprecedented Medicaid cuts that US President Donald Trump and congressional Republicans enacted over the summer.
“California is facing massive federal healthcare cuts—$20 to $30 billion a year for the next five years," said Suzanne Jimenez, chief of staff of Service Employees International Union-United Healthcare Workers West, a top supporter of the proposed ballot initiative.
"The billionaire tax would raise dollar-for-dollar emergency funding of $100 billion through a one-time 5% tax on the worldwide net worth of California’s billionaires," Jimenez added. "Any reductions in state income tax would be negligible in comparison to the billions that will be raised by the billionaire tax. And billionaires would still be taxed at lower rates than were in effect under President Reagan."
"We need a tax system that demands that the billionaire class finally pays their fair share of taxes."
Last week, California Attorney General Rob Bonta formally issued the title and summary of the proposed initiative as prominent billionaires—including Peter Thiel and Larry Page—threatened to leave the state over the measure, which would apply retroactively to those living in California as of January 1, 2026. Thiel is facing a potential $1.2 billion tax, while Page would have to pay roughly $12 billion.
The New York Times reported last week that Newsom, "who has been close with people like Mr. Page, is raising money for a committee to oppose the measure."
"The committee received a $100,000 donation from the venture capitalist Ron Conway in November, according to state campaign finance records," the Times added.
Other lawmakers from the state are supporting the measure, including US Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.), who represents Silicon Valley.
Sanders, in his Tuesday statement, applauded Khanna, saying he is "absolutely right to support this effort."
"From a moral, economic, and political perspective, our nation will not thrive when so few own so much while so many have so little," said Sanders. "We need a tax system that demands that the billionaire class finally pays their fair share of taxes."
Keep ReadingShow Less
New State Laws Aim to Protect Environment, Consumers as Trump Wages All-Out War on Climate
"The gridlock and partisanship we see in Washington, DC can be dispiriting. But history shows that states can build momentum that eventually leads to change at the federal level."
Dec 29, 2025
Even as President Donald Trump and his administration have been ripping up environmental and consumer protection regulations, a number of state laws are set to take effect next year that could at least mitigate some of the damage.
A Monday statement from Environment America and the Public Interest Network highlighted a number of new laws aimed at curbing corporate polluters and enhancing consumer welfare.
First, the groups highlighted "Right to Repair" laws set to take effect in Washington, Nevada, Oregon, and Colorado, which give people the right to repair their own appliances and electronics without burdensome costs or barriers.
The groups lavished particular praise on Colorado's "Right to Repair" laws that they said provide "the broadest repair protections in the country," with new regulations that will give businesses in the state "access to what they and independent repair providers need to fix their electronics themselves."
Illinois, meanwhile, will fully phase out the sale of fluorescent lightbulbs, which will be replaced by energy-efficient LED bulbs. The groups estimate that eliminating the fluorescent bulbs will collectively save Illinois households more than $1.5 billion on their utility bills by 2050, while also reducing energy waste and mercury pollution.
Illinois also drew praise for enacting a ban on polystyrene foam foodware that will take effect on January 1.
The groups also highlighted the work being done in Oregon to protect consumers with legislation mandating price transparency to eliminate surprise junk fees on purchases; prohibiting ambulance companies from socking out-of-network patients with massive fees for rides to nearby hospitals; and placing new restrictions on the ability of medical debt to negatively impact a person's credit score.
California also got a mention in the groups' release for closing a loophole that allowed supermarkets to continue using plastic bags and for creating a new privacy tool for consumers allowing them to request that online data brokers delete all of the personal information they have gathered on them over the years.
Emily Rusch, vice president and senior director of state offices for the Public Interest Network, contrasted the action being taken in the states to protect consumers and the environment with a lack of action being done at the federal level.
"The gridlock and partisanship we see in Washington, DC can be dispiriting," said Rusch. "But history shows that states can build momentum that eventually leads to change at the federal level. As we build on this progress in 2026, we look forward to working with anyone—Republican, Democrat, or independent—with whom we can find common ground."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular