A proposal moving toward California’s November ballot is setting up a high-stakes clash over wealth, taxation, and the state’s economic footing.
The measure, backed by the Service Employees International Union–United Healthcare Workers West, would impose a one-time 5% tax on residents with assets exceeding $1 billion. Supporters frame it as a necessary intervention, aimed at stabilizing healthcare funding while supporting public K-14 education and food assistance programs.
But a newly released study paints a far more disruptive picture. Commissioned by Stop the Squeeze, a campaign led by political consultants Dan Newman and Brian Brokaw, the analysis estimates that the tax could trigger the loss of more than 108,000 jobs across California. Alongside that, it projects $28 billion in lost wages, tying the potential fallout directly to shifts in business activity and capital flight.
The report centers much of its argument on the behavior of ultra-wealthy residents. It estimates that at least 40 billionaires could leave California if the measure passes. That departure, the study claims, would remove roughly half of the $2 trillion currently held by billionaires in the state.
The implications extend beyond individual taxpayers. When high-net-worth individuals relocate, the report argues, companies often follow or scale back operations, leading to fewer jobs, reduced consumer spending, and diminished investment in future growth.
The long-term fiscal outlook presented in the study is equally stark. It projects an annual loss of $12 billion in personal income tax revenue by 2046, adding up to $122 billion over two decades. According to the authors, those losses would place additional strain on public services, countering the intended benefits of the tax.
Despite these warnings, public support for the measure appears solid. Polling indicates that a majority of Californians favor the proposal, suggesting that concerns about inequality and public funding carry significant weight with voters.
Opposition efforts, however, are gaining traction. Competing initiatives are also headed for the ballot, including the so-called Transparency Act. That measure would require audits of special state taxes and impose limits on how those funds can be spent.
Backers argue it introduces accountability into a system where large sums are collected with limited oversight.
