California Billionaire Tax Clears Path to November Ballot

California voters may soon decide whether to impose a one-time tax of up to 5 percent on residents and trusts holding more than $1 billion in assets. The measure would raise an estimated $100 billion, with 90 percent directed to healthcare programs and the rest to food assistance and education. It would apply to those who lived in the state on January 1, 2026, and allow payment over five years, with property excluded from the base.

The proposal reached this point after supporters submitted nearly 1.6 million signatures in April. On June 17 the secretary of state confirmed enough valid signatures, so the initiative will appear on the November 3 ballot unless its backers withdraw it by June 25. Federal healthcare funding reductions approved by President Trump and Congress form the immediate backdrop; backers argue the new levy would offset those losses.

Governor Gavin Newsom has opposed the measure, citing risks that wealthy residents would leave the state. The Service Employees International Union-United Healthcare Workers West supports it. Other Democratic-aligned groups, including Planned Parenthood affiliates and the California Teachers Association, have lined up against it. Prediction markets on Kalshi and Polymarket placed the chance of ballot placement near 50 percent after reports of Newsom’s efforts to block it, down from above 80 percent earlier; the same markets gave the measure roughly an 18-19 percent chance of voter approval.

Opponents have raised more than $118 million through groups such as Building a Better California. Sergey Brin supplied the largest share. Separate committees backed by Ripple Labs and investor Ron Conway have also received millions. Some billionaires have already shifted assets or opened offices outside California. The state’s legislative analyst has noted that actual collections would be difficult to forecast because of stock-price swings and possible taxpayer relocation.

If the measure and any competing initiatives both pass, the version receiving the most votes would prevail under state rules. The central question remains whether voters will accept a large levy on a small number of residents to address healthcare shortfalls or will reject it over concerns about revenue stability and economic effects.