235
The California billionaire tax is headed to the ballot.The ultrawealthy are bracing for what comes next.
(www.businessinsider.com)
this post was submitted on 28 Jun 2026
235 points (99.6% liked)
politics
31112 readers
2020 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles. Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to US politics and contain quality and original content. Social Media adjacent hosts like Substack are allowed, but ONLY if they tie back to a company/subsidiary. No personal or friend group blogs and no self-promotion. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and re-hosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing other users of being bots or paid actors.
- No memes, trolling, misinformation, or low-effort posts/comments (including reposts). If you see posts like this that anger you, do not engage. Report, block, and live a happier life than they do. Any slap-fight is subject to comment removals. Fights full of rule violations will result in temporary bans to cool off.
- No manipulating votes via bots or alt accounts; this will result in permanent bans. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in an account ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be permanently banned.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules and use critical thinking when reading, posting, and commenting. Users that repeatedly have comments or posts removed, weaponize reports, or violate the code of conduct, will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users. The reason(s) behind moderator action(s) are publicly available through the Modlog.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Is one time even a tax? Why not recurring
Make it 1% and make it yearly.
Make it 10, make it yearly, and make examples of a couple of them in advance.
Or just make it 99.9999 once every time there's a new name on the list of eligible payers.
Nobody deserves that many digits in their name. Literally zero people have ever deserved that.
They should have never had it, and that should be a worldwide rule.
The fact that individuals can accumulate that kind of wealth is a flaw in the system.
Exactly. Huge flaw.
You're not thinking about the headlines. This looks like a war chest.
Fr fr
Recurring would be nice, but they would move away immediately.
We need to have international regulation that set a minimum wealth tax, so the billionaires can't escape it.
Until then it has to be modest like 0.5% to have a chance to work.
People always say this, but I haven't seen it play out that way. That was the narrative for NY before Mamdani won as well. It was claimed the wealthy would all flee the city. And then it didn't happen. It just seems stupid that we keep defeating ourselves before we even attempt it.
Just pass actual taxes on the wealthy. If they flee, then oh well. What is anyone losing? They already weren't paying taxes. They are parasites. If parasites leave, that doesn't seem like a loss.
That was the narrative in Ma before the extra tax on income above $2M and it ended up raising even more money than predicted.
Right? Where are they going to go? You can't take your real estate with you. You can't pick up culture and move it.
They won't move, this is where they make their money. They need us more than we need them
I don't think the billionaires move because of a 1 time 5% wealth tax, depending on the rules, many won't be able to move in time anyway.
But if the tax is 5% every year, I'm pretty sure most billionaires would. Even if it's not all of them.
But when it's easy to move not too far away and avoid it many will.
Remember most billionaires don't register an income nearly as extreme as their fortune.
If a billionaire pays 30% tax on $100 mil. income, and most don't because of deductibles and outright cheating, then that's $30 mil. in tax.
I they pay 5% in wealth tax on a fortune of $1 billion, that's $50 mil. That would mean the wealth tax is higher than their income tax.
And if they can move almost anywhere else to avoid it they will.
Also the psychological effect of suddenly introducing a high yearly wealth tax would be worse than starting moderately with 0.5%, which my own government in Denmark has suggested they might, and even that the rich threw a hissy fit over. But start moderately, with 0.5%, then wait a couple of years and increase by 0.25%.
It's not that I think this is really fair, I personally think the very rich should pay more for the privilege of enjoying to be rich.
And the money should go to make conditions better for the poor and middle class.
I also very much agree with what Mamdani has done. Because they can't just move away to avoid those taxes on for instance their luxury houses that make a British castle look modest. They can't just move away and then come visit as they please, they would have to actually sell the property to avoid the tax.
Good. Why would we want people who take vastly more than they contribute to remain in our state? And make no mistake - billionaires cost us more than they contribute and regular taxpayers always foot the bill.
Just like how we have proved that trickle-down economics does not work, the wealthy will not pack up their entire business operation and move elsewhere to avoid paying a tiny fraction of their wealth back to the state in taxes.
That's a good question, but the rich are good at making the poor fight for the scraps. And their riches may come from the whole of USA and even the entire world, so local states fight each others to keep the rich in their state, because their taxes are still often significant even when they pay to little.
As I mentioned, the best way to stop this is by mandatory international agreement on a wealth tax. But unfortunately such an agreement is not likely. But we should all at least support it.
Citation needed.
do move on you indolent scum!