Proposition
40One-time 5% tax on billionaires (mostly for health care)
Our readLean no
A one-time 5% tax on billionaires for health care. Revenue is “very hard to predict,” and the sponsor union offered to drop it for a deal.
Key findings
- The sponsor, SEIU-UHW, has filed dozens of initiatives since 2012 and lost every statewide one it took to a vote: dialysis Props 8, 23 and 29 got 40%, 37% and 32%. Several others were dropped after deals with hospitals. [1][2]
- In June 2026 the union offered to drop this measure for a 2% legislative deal. No deal happened. [3]
- Wealth taxes elsewhere: 12 OECD countries had one in 1990 and 4 in 2017; as of 2025, 3 do (Spain, Norway, Switzerland, per the Tax Foundation), raising 0.6–4.3% of their tax revenue. The OECD says they "often failed to achieve their redistributive objectives." [4]
- Revenue is "tens of billions" but "very hard to predict" (LAO). The sponsor says ~$100B. Six billionaires reportedly left before the Jan 1 cutoff, taking an estimated $26.8B of the projected base. [5][6][1]
- The 90% for health care is one-time money, not an ongoing funding source [5]. Health care spending could indirectly benefit members of the sponsor's union through more secure jobs and pay. [7]
Track record
The sponsor's ballot history
| Year | Measure | Target | Result | Union spent |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2012, 2014 | Hospital initiatives | Hospital pricing and executive pay | Withdrawn after deals with hospitals | n/a |
| 2018 | Prop 8 | Dialysis revenue caps | Lost, 40% yes | $19.3M (vs. $111M+ from dialysis firms) |
| 2020 | Prop 23 | Dialysis staffing | Lost, 37% | $8.9M |
| 2022 | Prop 29 | Dialysis staffing | Lost, 32% | $8.0M |
| 2026 | Prop 40 | Billionaire wealth | ? | $29M+ |
| 2026 | Prop 44 | Community clinics | ? | $16.9M |
| Most commentators read the dialysis measures as pressure to unionize clinics. [1][2] |
Taxes on the very rich in other states
| Tax | Projected | Actual |
|---|---|---|
| Washington capital-gains tax, year 1 (2023) | — | $786M from ~3,000 payments [8] |
| Washington, year 2 (2024) | $1.5B counted in the budget | $433M as of May 15, 2024 (partial). Expected to "fluctuate year to year" with the economy [8] |
Money and conflicts
- Yes $33.4M (mostly SEIU-UHW). No $130.3M, led by Building a Better California (Sergey Brin $102M, Eric Schmidt $40.2M, John Doerr $40M). Peter Thiel gave $3M. [10][11][6]
- The money fight is billionaires vs. a union. Brin, one of the billionaires the tax targets, reportedly left the state before the cutoff. [6]
- Labor is split. CTA, firefighters and the Building Trades oppose it. Teamsters, AFSCME and the Labor Federation support it. [9]
Does it solve a lasting problem?
- No. It is one-time money, not ongoing funding, its revenue is "very hard to predict," and it could shrink the income-tax base if billionaires leave (LAO: probably less than $1B a year lost). Health groups say they "weren't consulted in designing the measure"; Planned Parenthood and the CMA oppose it. [5][9]
If you vote yes: accountability
Bottom line: The tax is collected by the Franchise Tax Board, but where the health money goes is left to the Legislature, up to $22.5B a year. There's no State Auditor review and no independent oversight board. [13]
Who decides, and who answers for it
- The Franchise Tax Board assesses and audits the tax. [13] Its board is the State Controller, the chair of the Board of Equalization, and the Director of Finance. [14] The Controller and Board of Equalization races are both on this ballot.
- The Legislature decides each year how to spend the health money, within broad uses: restoring federal cuts, Medi-Cal and other coverage, safety-net providers, and preventing closures. [13]
- The Department of Finance must report to the Legislature on the fund, and certify that the money adds to existing health spending rather than replacing it. [13]
What to watch
- Collection. Revenue is "very hard to predict." [5] Six billionaires reportedly left before the cutoff. [6] Watch for lawsuits over residency, and how much is actually collected.
- Supplanting. One-time money can quietly replace regular spending. The Finance Department's certification is the check, so read it.
Who to press, and what to ask for
- Your Assemblymember and state Senator: require a State Auditor audit of how the fund is spent, and publish every grant or payment by recipient.
- Controller and Board of Equalization candidates: they'll sit on the Franchise Tax Board. Ask how they'll publish collections data without exposing individual taxpayers.
Public records to request (CPRA)
Anyone can file a California Public Records Act request (the state's version of FOIA), with no reason required. Agencies must respond within 10 days, or 24 in unusual cases. [15] Individual tax returns are confidential, but how the fund is spent isn't.
To the Department of Finance: Under the California Public Records Act (Gov. Code § 7920.000 et seq.), I request each report and supplanting certification submitted to the Legislature under Government Code section 16355(f) concerning the 2026 Billionaire Tax Reserve Fund, with supporting worksheets.
What it does
- One-time tax equal to 5% of net worth for people worth over $1B who lived in California on Jan 1, 2026. It can be spread over 5 years, at extra cost. Real estate, pensions and retirement accounts generally are excluded. [5]
- 90% to public health care, 10% to education, food aid and administration. Exempt from the state spending limit and the Prop 98 school formula. [5]
- Voided if Prop 41 or 42 gets more yes votes. [9]
Fact-check
- The opponents' ads say it's a "Trojan horse" that lets politicians extend the tax to everyone. CalMatters rated that only partially true. Legislative changes must be "consistent with and further the purposes" of the act; an expert said lawmakers "probably couldn't lower the threshold," and expanding the tax would likely need another vote. [12]
Both sides
- For: SEIU-UHW, Bernie Sanders, CA Democratic Party, CA Labor Federation, Sacramento Bee. Billionaires gained the most from federal tax cuts, and the money prevents clinic and hospital closures. [9]
- Against: Gov. Newsom, Becerra, Hilton, the Business Roundtable, CMA, CTA, Planned Parenthood, LA Times. It's volatile, it drives out taxpayers, and it doesn't fix structural funding. [9][16]
- Poll: 45% support among likely voters, down 3 points from six weeks earlier (UC Berkeley–LA Times poll, late Sept 2026). [7]
Sources 20
- ^ a b c Wikipedia, SEIU-UHW (secondary) Wikipedia Reference
- ^ a b Ballotpedia, SEIU-UHW Ballotpedia Reference
- ^ AP on the 2% offer (June 18, 2026) abcnews.com Other
- ^ Euronews on European wealth taxes (Sept 29, 2025) euronews.com Other
- ^ a b c d e f LAO Legislative Analyst Official
- ^ a b c d Fortune, six billionaires left (Mar 17, 2026) fortune.com Reporting
- ^ a b GV Wire (Oct 13, 2026) GV Wire Reporting
- ^ a b KUOW, Washington capital gains receipts (May 2024) kuow.org Other
- ^ a b c d e CalMatters guide CalMatters Reporting
- ^ SoS, contribution totals Secretary of State Official
- ^ Ballotpedia News (Oct 26, 2026) Ballotpedia News Reference
- ^ CalMatters fact check (Oct 2, 2026) CalMatters Reporting
- ^ a b c d Prop 40 legal text (annotated by GrowSF) growsf.org Other
- ^ LAO, state fiscal functions (Mar 21, 2013) Legislative Analyst Official
- ^ First Amendment Coalition, CPRA deadlines firstamendmentcoalition.org Other
- ^ CalMatters, Newsom positions (Oct 9, 2026) CalMatters Reporting
- · OECD, role and design of net wealth taxes oecd.org Other
- · CalMatters (Oct 2020), union's ballot strategy CalMatters Reporting
- · Wikipedia, 2026 billionaire tax initiative (secondary) Wikipedia Reference
- · Fortune, Thiel donation (Jan 14, 2026) fortune.com Reporting