45% Support, 42% Oppose: Why California’s Bold Billionaire Tax Measure Is Splitting Voters in Half
A new poll reveals deep divisions over a plan to tax billionaires assets amid fears of federal healthcare cuts
The Nov. 3 ballot provides California voters with a rare legislative opportunity to reshape how the state addresses its budget through targeted taxation of the ultra-wealthy. In past years, the prospect of taxing the rich has consistently drawn strong support from the state’s left-leaning electorate. However, the slate of statewide measures offers two distinct paths to achieve this goal. Only one of these measures has secured firm footing with the public while the other has ignited a contentious political slugfest that has created a visible rift among the Democratic Party's leadership.
The measure that has captured the most attention and generated the highest spending is Proposition 40. This proposal represents a novel financial mechanism designed to address a looming budgetary crisis. It calls for a one-time tax of 5 percent on the assets held by billionaires. The impetus for this measure stems from congressional legislation passed by Republicans and signed by President Trump last year. That legislation threatens to cut federal healthcare funding by $100 billion. Proponents argue that this billionaire tax is necessary to compensate for those losses and prevent the shuttering of rural hospitals. The Institute of Governmental Studies poll released Friday by UC Berkeley shows that likely voters have mixed feelings about this approach.
According to the data, 45 percent of likely voters support the billionaire tax while 42 percent oppose it with 13 percent undecided. This represents a decline from six weeks ago when support stood at 48 percent. The shift in sentiment comes after nearly $100 million was spent on television ads social media messages and mailers largely by opponents. The high price tag reflects the intensity of the opposition. Gov. Gavin Newsom has formally expressed reservations about the measure arguing that the tax on billionaires assets is risky and could harm the state’s long-term financial stability. The governor is reportedly considering a presidential run in 2028 and this position highlights the political risks involved in challenging the wealthy.
The billionaire tax is the brainchild of Dave Regan president of Service Employees International Union-United Healthcare Workers West. The proposal would retroactively apply to billionaires who were California residents as of Jan. 1. To avoid the tax some billionaires are reportedly considering a preemptive move out of the state. The financial breakdown of the measure is strict. Ninety percent of the revenue would be directed toward healthcare programs while the remaining funds would support education programs and food assistance. However the measure faces significant headwinds from two competing propositions on the ballot. Proposition 41 and Proposition 42 seek to nullify the wealth tax if they receive more votes than Proposition 40. These counterproposals have raised $144 million combined to fight the billionaire tax.
Proposition 42 has gained traction with 43 percent of voters supporting it versus 34 percent opposing it. It focuses on limiting situations where a ballot measure or state lawmakers can impose or raise taxes retroactively. Proposition 41 is more polarized with 37 percent supporting it 33 percent opposing it and 30 percent undecided. Voters are struggling to understand how these specific measures interact and what consequences they hold for the state budget. The sheer complexity of the ballot suggests that voters are overwhelmed. Mark DiCamillo director of the poll noted that the confusion is palpable and many voters may wait for more information before making a decision.
Despite the focus on the billionaire tax there is another financial proposal on the ballot that is receiving warmer reception. Proposition 3 appears to be a much less controversial endeavor despite its potential for significant revenue. This measure would make permanent a tax increase that was enacted in 2012 and is set to expire in 2031. The tax applies to individuals who earn at least $360000 a year. Those with incomes over $721000 face a higher levy of 12.3 percent. The vast majority of funds raised through this established tax go to K-12 schools with the remainder spent on community colleges and healthcare. The stability and predictability of this existing structure likely explains why it enjoys greater voter support than the new asset tax.
The split among California Democrats illustrates the tension between fiscal caution and progressive economic policy. While Democratic voters outnumber Republicans by nearly two to one in the state the party’s top leaders are deeply divided on the billionaire tax. Gov. Newsom and the two men vying to replace him Democrat Xavier Becerra and Republican Steve Hilton are among the opponents. In contrast Rep. Ro Khanna of Fremont a potential contender for the White House in 2028 supports the measure along with the California Democratic Party. This ideological conflict is further complicated by the personal controversies surrounding the measure’s primary architect. Dave Regan has been accused of threatening and intimidating women who worked for the union’s parent organization and of physically assaulting one individual. An investigation commissioned by SEIU also suggested Regan tried to extort the union’s state council by suggesting it could face governance issues if it did not support the measure. Regan has denied these claims calling them a smear campaign orchestrated by opponents.
The broader political context includes other measures that are shaping the landscape. Proposition 39 is a voter ID proposal that follows claims by President Trump that elections are being rigged. The measure would require voters to present government-issued ID or provide a PIN or the last four digits of their Social Security number when submitting mail-in ballots. It also mandates verification of citizenship using government data. The poll indicates that 52 percent of likely California voters oppose the voter ID proposal while only 39 percent support it. This indicates a resistance to policies that many view as restrictive to voting rights. As ballots begin to arrive in the mailboxes of the state’s 23.2 million voters the electorate faces a lengthy and complex decision-making process. Californians are fatigued by the length of the ballot which includes 14 statewide measures and numerous other elections. The Berkeley IGS/Times poll findings are based on an online survey of 6989 registered California voters with 4512 considered likely voters. The results have a margin of error of about 2 percentage points. The confusion evident in the poll results suggests that the outcome of these measures will not be determined by a clear mandate but by the nuances of voter understanding and engagement. The debate over how to tax the rich is not just about policy but about the trust voters place in the institutions and individuals proposing these changes. The coming weeks will be critical as voters navigate these intricate proposals to determine the future of California’s tax and healthcare landscape.
First reported by LA Times: California.
More in California
- UC Berkeley Lab Proposes New Civic Framework for California’s Next Governor
A research-driven agenda calls for institutionalizing 'co-governance' to address low public trust and lack of resident influence in state decision-making.
- Five Tax Measures on California’s Ballot Aim to Reshape State Finances
Propositions 3, 40–43 would alter income, wealth and local taxation rules—marking the highest number of tax measures on a general election ballot since 1994.
- Catalina Helicopter Crash Highlights Risks of Island Medevac Flights
A medical evacuation chopper carrying Catalina Romero, pilot, and nurse Jessica Devries crashed into the ocean shortly after takeoff, killing all three; federal investigators are assessing causes including night flying, spatial disorientation, and the island’s challenging Pebbly Beach heliport.