California billionaires face proposed one-time wealth tax

“One Time” lol.

FOX: California’s wealthiest residents could face a one-time 5% tax on their net worth under a new proposal aimed at replacing billions of dollars in federal funding cuts to healthcare.

The measure – called the “2026 Billionaire Tax Act” – seeks to counter $30 billion in potential federal funding cuts to California’s Medicaid program, with a portion of the revenue earmarked for public education, according to supporters, which include the Service Employees International Union (SEIU).

Proponents of the measure sent a request to the California Attorney General’s Office on Oct. 21 to get approval to begin collecting signatures. more

27 Comments on California billionaires face proposed one-time wealth tax

  1. We’re dead broke. We’re in debt up to our eyeballs. They’ve done the gas tax to death. Desperate times call for desperate measures. Meet your new President.Wondering how many of these people contributed to brain dead Gavin’s campaign

    9
  2. Poll 100 “tax the rich” advocates, and 99 of them are lazy, envious, and unmotivated to create any wealth themselves.

    Normally, I’m against these types of larceny grabs just on principle but since the vast majority of California billionaires are libs who supported policies that wrecked us, I say ,”Pay up, bitch”.

    11
  3. Considering how much of that wealth is held in investments, would that 5% tax be on the value on the wealth before or after the investments crash because people had to sell them off some of them to pay the 5% tax?

    6
  4. Net worth?
    Think about everything you’ve built up after years of work and then having to fork out 5% cash for that. It’s not based on cash on hand.
    It would be huge. Not going to fly.
    Other peoples money.

    5
  5. One time my ass. In 1971 we had a major earthquake in CA. in 1971 so to help offset some of the cost they raised the sales tax by 1% temporarily to 7.5%. Today it is 10.75%.

    12
  6. The 16th Amendment was passed with the lie that “only” the top 1/2 of 1 percent would be subject.
    DC wanted a “wealth” tax on all those “rich” folks making over $50,000/year.

    Wait til CA starts re-defining “billionaire.”

    mortem tyrannis
    izlamo delenda est …

    9
  7. This extortionate proposal will be scaled back to a very reasonable permanent 10% increase in income and property taxes for “the wealthy”.

    See, wasn’t that easy? Before Newsom’s minions are done the “billionaires” will be eager for a tax they formerly opposed.

    Nothing like a dire threat to clear one’s mind.

    3
  8. Younger brother taxed right out of California. Accountant figured it would take TWO years to break even. Accountant was way off: he broke even in 9 months, mostly because of savings from employee’s health insurance premiums.

    3
  9. @Harry Friday, 31 October 2025, 22:24 at 10:24 pm

    > Why is it that the phrase:
    > “I never worked for a poor man”
    > just doesn’t sink in for most people?

    Because in every group,
    half are less than average.
    (But only half.)

    2
  10. Stupid and unworkable.

    Unlike with the taxation of real estate, billionaires’ assets aren’t all situate in and under the control of a state. They’re not necessarily liquid. They’re not even necessarily measurable.

    Speaking of “situate”, it takes hardly any time for a given “billionaire” to register to vote and etc. in a state in which he has another house, and put the ownership interests in any California businesses/assets into out-of-state trusts (if they aren’t already held that way to avoid state income taxes, see e.g. ING trusts), and to not be domiciled or “resident” in CaLifornia.

    4
  11. MrHappy- Yep, they did the ‘temporary’ tax after the earthquake in 1980something up north. They taxed us in SoCal and never went back to the previous rate.

    And the school unions are still outside the grocery stores trying to get more money. “For the children”, of course. lolol

    2
  12. Then there was co mun ism’s weak-tea sister, s ocia ism. Soci li sts maintained that we shouldn’t take all the money away from all the people since all the people don’t have money. We should take all the money away from only the people who make money. Then, when we run out of that, we could take more money from the people who…hey, wait! Where’d you people go? What do you mean you’re “ta x exiles in Monaco?”

  13. Thank You to who ever fixed my comment.
    MJA lets not forget the Fed phone tax they established in 1898 to cover the Spanish American war, which was repealed in 2000. 102 years later.

Comments are closed.