California’s top elections official said a proposal to temporarily increase taxes on billionaires has enough public support to qualify for the November ballot, setting up another round of elite trench warfare over who pays for the damage when federal cuts hit healthcare for low-income people.
Secretary of State Shirley Weber, a Democrat, said Wednesday night that petitioners have collected more than the roughly 875,000 signatures needed to place the proposed tax before voters. It will qualify June 25 unless proponents pull the measure. The proposal is backed by the Service Employees International Union Healthcare Workers West and would impose a one-time, 5% tax on individuals whose net worth exceeds $1 billion and who were living in the state as of Jan. 1, 2026.
Who Pays When the System Cuts
The measure was designed to counter federal cuts to healthcare for low-income people after President Donald Trump signed major tax breaks and spending cuts legislation last year. The proposal’s stated goal is to generate $100 billion in revenue, mainly to fund the state’s Medicaid system, with some money going to food assistance and education programs. In other words, the people at the bottom are once again left to absorb the fallout from decisions made far above them, while the state scrambles for a patch after the damage is already done.
The union did not respond Thursday to a request for comment on the announcement that the proposal has secured enough support to qualify for the ballot. The silence fits the usual ritual: institutions speak loudly when they want signatures, then go quiet when the machinery of ballot politics keeps grinding.
The Ballot Trap and the Power Behind It
The proposal has already divided Democrats and major labor unions and triggered an expensive campaign to defeat it. The measure is backed by prominent progressives including Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, but it has faced staunch pushback from Silicon Valley tech moguls as well as Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom and prominent players in Sacramento. They include the California Medical Association and California School Boards Association, which helped launch a committee this week to oppose it.
That opposition is not subtle. Since the proposal was announced in October, Google co-founder Sergey Brin has donated $82 million to a political committee called “Building a Better California” that backs a variety of initiatives designed to blunt the billionaire tax proposal. It has raised more than $118 million, counting Brin’s contributions, from fewer than a dozen donors. The ballot may be open to the public, but the moneyed class is already flooding the field with cash to shape the outcome.
Critics say the measure would decrease state revenue over time by pushing the ultrawealthy to leave, taking the money they would contribute in income taxes with them. That would deal a huge blow to a state that relies on its top 1% of earners for nearly half of its personal income tax revenue. Roger Salazar, a spokesperson for Golden State Promise, said, “This flawed measure is the wrong approach for California’s small businesses and working families.”
The nonpartisan Legislative Analyst’s Office estimates that the proposal would generate tens of billions of dollars in the first few years, but that income tax revenues could subsequently decline by hundreds of millions of dollars annually. The numbers show the familiar squeeze: even when a proposal is framed as relief, the whole arrangement still runs through a system where revenue, flight, and dependency are managed from above.
What the Legislature Is Doing Instead
State lawmakers passed budget bills this week that aim to raise revenue in other ways, including by extending a tax on healthcare providers. Newsom and legislative leaders agree to this approach, Senate President pro Tempore Monique Limón said. Monique Limón said, “The budget, as approved by the Legislature and now being negotiated with the Governor, does not include the billionaire’s tax.” She added, “Instead, it reflects additional revenues to address our long-term structural deficit.”
That leaves the core arrangement intact: the state, its elected officials, and its aligned institutions negotiating over revenue streams while low-income people remain exposed to the consequences of federal cuts. The billionaire tax proposal will qualify June 25 unless proponents pull it, but the fight around it has already exposed the usual hierarchy — a small circle of donors, officials, and institutional players trying to decide what happens to everyone else.