California Billionaires Are Leaving the State in Response to Proposed Wealth Tax
The wealth tax would discourage investment and likely lower tax revenue for California.
The ultrarich are leaving California as a result of a proposed billionaire tax. "Eat the rich" may be a popular rallying cry, but it's not viable public policy.
The ballot measure, which was submitted in November 2025 by Suzanne Jimenez, a health care union representative, would impose a one-time 5 percent tax on billionaires who were California residents as of the measure's tax "obligation date" of January 1. Even though the initiative has not yet passed, venture capitalist Chamath Palihapitiya estimates that $1 trillion of billionaire wealth "has left California" in advance of the measure's tax obligation date. California billionaires have also taken "income tax revenue, sales tax revenue, real estate tax revenue and all their staffs (and their salaries and income taxes) with them," says Palihapitiya.
The measure would create a Billionaire Tax Health Account, which would receive 90 percent of the revenue generated by the tax. Funds from this account would go "to protect or enhance Medi-Cal," California's Medicaid program. (That same program was found by the Biden administration to have improperly claimed nearly $53 million in federal funding on behalf of noncitizens with ineligible immigration statuses from October 2018 through June 2019.) The remaining 10 percent would go to a new Billionaire Tax Education and Food Assistance Account, which would subsidize public K-12 education, plus two years of community college. This account would also help pay for "CalFresh, CalFAP, CalFood or California's Universal Meals Program for school meals."
The government should not be in the business of redistributing wealth, and a wealth tax is an especially ineffective means of generating revenue for any purpose. Moving costs might make it hard for other individuals and businesses headquartered in California to leave, but billionaires are highly mobile; they can easily become residents of another state by purchasing a house, acquiring a driver's license, and registering to vote there.
California Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom understands this eventuality. The New York Times reports that Newsom opposes "'state-level wealth taxes' because they encouraged those who would be affected to move to another state." To avert this outcome, Newsom has been "relentlessly working behind the scenes against the proposal" and "he would fight the measure if it reached the November ballot," according to the Times.
The act itself recognizes billionaires' ability to evade taxation: "A large percentage of billionaire wealth is never taxed by the State due to billionaires' unique ability to control the timing, location, and amount of income tax that they pay." This tax avoidance is exactly what has happened since the ballot measure was submitted.
Importantly, the tax conflates voting shares with equity, as Garry Tan, president and CEO of venture capital firm Y Combinator, recently explained on X. This means that under the law, Google co-founders Larry Page and Sergey Brin—who each possess 30 percent of the voting rights in Google, but only own 3 percent of its equity—would have to pay a 5 percent tax on the value of their voting control. Tan estimates that this figure would come to about $60 billion each, and in order to pay this, both Page and Brin would have to liquidate 50 percent of their Google shares. The two co-founders recently fled the state to avoid this potential penalty.
But it's not just Google that would be affected. Palmer Luckey, CEO of defense technology company Anduril, recently predicted that the wealth tax would force billionaires to "'sell huge chunks' of their companies, and to 'immediately pivot into profit [obsession] over mission or long-term sustainability,'" reports Newsweek. In an X post, Luckey said the tax "makes founder-led companies practically illegal"—not something California should do if it's looking to expand its tax base.
The measure requires more than half a million verified signatures by June 25 to qualify for a ballot vote in November. Even if it doesn't pass, it has already prompted the flight of wealthy Californians from the state.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please to post comments
"Come back! Come back! [WE] armed-theft gangsters don't really HATE you! We just pretend to HATE you so we can self-justify (make excuses) [OUR] acts of Gov - 'Guns' armed-theft against you!" /s
Your So[zi]alist ZERO-sum resources end-game is showing.
Who will CA pick on next to STEAL from?
The 'conquer and consume' mentality of the criminal-socialist brain on display.
Next tax is a one time 10% tax on everyone with $100 million or more.
I would prefer a 100% tax on everyone registered as a democrat.
Can we just stop paying them welfare?
Why stop 100%?
Don’t run! We are your friends!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_vUrAMxmO_A
CalFAP? I didn't know they had a public masterbation program.
It’s their new youth outreach program. They passed it as part of the bill that decriminalized statutory rape.
Reason waiting to write this story after even Newsome renounced it earlier is peak Reason.
It appears Newsome finally figured out this won’t help him become president.
Who would ever imagine a truly retarded policy would have catastrophic results? This has been pumped by members of Congress and Senators as smart policy, but now we're about to get a year of this wasn't our idea and it's bad before it ultimately passes and all of the billionaires bail.
They won't collect a dime, but they'll be on the hook for millions in legal fees while they try to defend it in court for the next decade and ultimately never get to implement it. Nothing like politics of hatred and jealousy having real consequences and no benefits as always.
I want this to pass.
Seriously. I want to see it all burn to the fucking ground, popcorn in hand.
All the Silicon Valley assholes said they were libertarian until Obama, when they found out how fun it was to use the power of regulatory capture and all the other perks of being closely aligned with the ruling party. They all went Democrat hard, even when the Democrats went hard-core progressive.
Fuck those people. Reap what you sow assholes, this is what you get for your party over philosophy idological bent.
I mean, it's obviously stupid, and unconstitutional, and there will be all kinds of fighting and court battles and even the notion of defining "wealth" is nearly impossible to sort out, but I don't care anymore. Proggy Bay Area fucktards deserve this, and they should have to go to court and scream "But it's mine! I Earned it!" while we all mock and laugh. Maybe they'll learn a lesson. Probably not. But Bayarea democrats have ruined the state, so fuck them. Hard. Glass in the vaseline.
They bought their tickets, they knew what they were getting into. I say let them crash.
The whole state should be under martial law.
There's a house down the street for sale. Hopefully a billionaire moves in Just sayin'.
If a billionaire moved in anywhere near me, I would prefer it be one of the Ecclestone girls.
So what? Let them go.
How do you think that will work out for California?
Armed-Theft robbers don't care about the destruction they do.
They just 'immigrate' to someone else's greener pasture after 'conquering and consuming' CA along with all her leftarded self-entitlement-ed, criminal-minded, useful-idiot friends and rob the community bank again, then 'immigrate' to another greener pasture and do it again and again and again and again.
To say otherwise would acknowledge people are able to LEARN from their past mistakes with socialism and not keep trying to repeat it.
Walz +10
CA is having budget troubles. How is it going to help next year if you drive out a significant portion of the whales at the high income end of the tax base now?
Fuck off commie scum.
Breaking: Scott Adams dead at 68
Yes and the leftists have been very so gleeful. I can’t waitt until, they escalate their insurrection into a full on civil war so we can finallyy get rid of them.
I should be more clear:
Scott Adams, conservative youtuber, dead at 68.
Cool story dude. But what does this have to do with the Epstein files? Too 2025? How about the Minnesota Mom who was just dropping her kid off at school and got a lead sandwich? Too local? What about the war on artistic baristas? Look. I love billionaires as much as the next guy but maybe the shoulder shimmy grease ball isn't the best go to spokes model for a libertarian website.
At least it’s the one libertarianism thing that Koch approves of them writing about. For altruistic reason, of course.
a wealth tax to fund social services fraud an order of magnitude worse than minnesota
Not even the best ophthalmologists can fix Progressive politician's myopic thinking and policies.
The ACLU is making itself look ridiculous before SCOTUS in transgender athlete case:
https://notthebee.com/article/aclu-tells-supreme-court-it-cant-define-what-it-means-to-be-a-man-or-woman?from_social=twitter
"ALITO: To decide if there is discrimination on the basis of sex under Title IX, we need to define what sex is, right?
ACLU: Yes.
ALITO: What does it mean to be a man or woman, boy or girl?
ACLU: We do not have a definition for the Court."
The ACLU apparently could find no way to define "sex" that did not undermine their case, so they simply chose not to provide one.
Would it not also undermine their case if they can't identify a plantiff?
The other 49 states need to issue a 5% wealth tax on ALL californias moving to thier state. The cancer needs to be stopped from spreading.