Your monthly support provides voters the knowledge they need to make confident decisions at the polls. Donate today.

California One-Time Wealth Tax for State-Funded Healthcare, Education, and Food Assistance Programs Initiative (2026)

From Ballotpedia
Jump to: navigation, search
California One-Time Wealth Tax for State-Funded Healthcare, Education, and Food Assistance Programs Initiative

Flag of California.png

Election date

November 3, 2026

Topic
Income taxes and Public health insurance
Status

Cleared for signature gathering

Type
Combined initiated constitutional amendment and state statute


The California One-Time Wealth Tax for State-Funded Health Care Programs Initiative (#25-0024) may appear on the ballot in California as an combined initiated constitutional amendment and state statute on November 3, 2026.

The initiative would levy a one-time 5% tax on the accumulated wealth, including shares of capital stock, bonds or other evidences of indebtedness, and any legal or equitable interest, of billionaires in the state to fund state-funded health care programs, such as Medi-Cal, and state food assistance and public education.[1]

Measure design

See also: Text of measure

Click on the following sections for summaries of the different provisions of the ballot measure.

Expand All
Wealth tax on billionaires
Net worth calculation
Revenue allocation


Text of measure

Ballot title

The ballot title is as follows:

“ Imposes one-time tax on certain individuals and trusts. Initiative constitutional amendment and statute.[3] ”

Petition summary

The summary provided for inclusion on signature petition sheets is as follows:

“ Imposes one-time tax of up to 5% on taxpayers and trusts with covered assets valued over $1 billion; covered assets include businesses, securities, art, collectibles, and intellectual property, but exclude real property and some pensions and retirement accounts. Allocates 90% of these tax revenues for health care, 10% for food assistance or education-related programs; prohibits using revenues to replace existing funding for these purposes. Exempts such tax revenues from constitutional requirements for school funding, budget reserves, and state spending limit. [3] ”

Full text

The full text of the initiative can be read here.

Support

Save California Health Care and Public Education sponsored by SEIU-UHW is leading the campaign in support of the initiative.[4]

Supporters

Officials

Unions

  • Teamsters California
  • UNITE HERE Local 11

Organizations

  • California Democratic Socialists of America

Arguments

  • U.S. Rep. Ro Khanna (D-17): "It’s a matter of values. We believe billionaires can pay a modest wealth tax so working-class Californians have Medicaid."
  • Suzanne Jimenez, chief of staff for SEIU-UHW: "Healthcare workers are going to the ballot to prevent California hospitals and emergency rooms from closing. Congress created a $100 billion crisis for California through HR1 last July — and California voters will solve that problem when they pass the billionaire tax act this November."
  • U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders (I): "It should be common sense that the billionaires pay just slightly more so that entire communities can preserve access to life-saving medical care. Our country needs access to hospitals and emergency rooms, not more tax breaks for billionaires."
  • Tony Thurmond, California Superintendent of Public Instruction and gubernatorial candidate: "This emergency measure to save our hospitals, clinics, and healthcare facilities is critical. Without the billionaire tax, California hospitals and ERs will close, healthcare costs will skyrocket, and patients will be forced to drive further, and wait longer, for medical care. That’s not a sacrifice anyone should be asked to make. I’m proud to join with doctors and healthcare workers to support a commonsense one-time tax on our state’s wealthiest 200 billionaires so everyone has access to care when they need it most."


Opposition

NO on the So-Called Wealth Tax is leading the campaign in opposition to the initiative.[5]

Officials

Former Officials

Organizations

  • California Business Roundtable

Individuals

Arguments

  • Gov. Gavin Newsom (D): "It’s really damaging to the state. ... The evidence is in. The impacts are very real — not just substantive economic impacts in terms of the revenue, but start-ups, the indirect impacts of … people questioning long term-commitments, medium-term. That’s not what we need right now, at a time of so much uncertainty. Quite the contrary."
  • Jack Guidi from Americans for Tax Reform: "The tax is retroactive and would apply to all eligible residents beginning January 1st, 2026. However, the earliest this tax could go into effect would be November 2026. This means California could end up losing tax revenue even if the ballot initiative doesn’t pass, as it incentivizes wealthy residents to escape before the tax passes."
  • Alex Skopic, associate editor of Current Affairs: "Ordinary people are taxed this way all the time: as Nina Turner recently pointed out, a property tax on the value of your house is also a tax on 'unrealized gains,' because you haven’t actually sold the house and received the money. Pretending that houses are fair game, but mammoth stock portfolios and Caravaggios aren’t, is just incoherent."
  • Jon Hartley, a policy fellow at the Hoover Institution, and Arthur Laffer, president of Laffer Associates: "California doesn’t suffer from too little taxation. Its top marginal state income-tax rate is 13.3%, the highest in the U.S. Capital-gains taxes, corporate taxes and sales taxes are all at or near the highest in the nation as well. The wealth-tax initiative would amplify the problem of revenue volatility by taxing volatile paper valuations while assuming the tax base will sit still when the bill arrives."


Campaign finance

See also: Ballot measure campaign finance, 2026
The campaign finance information on this page reflects the most recent scheduled reports that Ballotpedia has processed, which covered through December 31, 2026, and interim reports available as of February 26, 2026. The deadline for the next scheduled reports is March 31, 2026.


Save California Health Care and Public Education registered in support of the initiative. Through February 26, the committee reported more than $3.5 million in contributions.[6]

Stop the Squeeze and Golden State Promise registered in opposition to the initiative. Together, the committees reported $10.3 million in contributions.[6]

Cash Contributions In-Kind Contributions Total Contributions Cash Expenditures Total Expenditures
Support $1,360,335.00 $2,202,891.14 $3,563,226.14 $68.10 $2,202,959.24
Oppose $10,300,000.00 $0.00 $10,300,000.00 $74,103.60 $74,103.60
Total $11,660,335.00 $2,202,891.14 $13,863,226.14 $74,171.70 $2,277,062.84

Support

The following table includes contribution and expenditure totals for the committees in support of the measure.[6]

Committees in support of One-Time Wealth Tax for State-Funded Healthcare, Education, and Food Assistance Programs Initiative
Committee Cash Contributions In-Kind Contributions Total Contributions Cash Expenditures Total Expenditures
Save California Health Care and Public Education $1,360,335.00 $2,202,891.14 $3,563,226.14 $68.10 $2,202,959.24
Total $1,360,335.00 $2,202,891.14 $3,563,226.14 $68.10 $2,202,959.24

Donors

The following were the top donors who contributed to the support committees.[6]

Donor Cash Contributions In-Kind Contributions Total Contributions
Service Employees International Union-United Healthcare Workers West $1,360,000.00 $2,202,891.14 $3,562,891.14

Opposition

The following table includes contribution and expenditure totals for the committees in opposition to the measure.[6]

Committees in opposition to One-Time Wealth Tax for State-Funded Healthcare, Education, and Food Assistance Programs Initiative
Committee Cash Contributions In-Kind Contributions Total Contributions Cash Expenditures Total Expenditures
Golden State Promise $10,000,000.00 $0.00 $10,000,000.00 $0.00 $0.00
Stop the Squeeze $300,000.00 $0.00 $300,000.00 $74,103.60 $74,103.60
Total $10,300,000.00 $0.00 $10,300,000.00 $74,103.60 $74,103.60

Donors

The following were the top donors who contributed to the opposition committees.[6]

Donor Cash Contributions In-Kind Contributions Total Contributions
Chris Larsen $5,000,000.00 $0.00 $5,000,000.00
Ripple Labs $5,000,000.00 $0.00 $5,000,000.00
Daniel Tierney $200,000.00 $0.00 $200,000.00
Ronald Conway $100,000.00 $0.00 $100,000.00

Methodology

To read Ballotpedia's methodology for covering ballot measure campaign finance information, click here.

Polls

See also: Ballotpedia's approach to covering polls and 2026 ballot measure polls
California One-Time Wealth Tax for State-Funded Health Care Programs Initiative (2026)
PollDatesSample sizeMargin of errorSupportOpposeUndecided
David Binder Research
Question

"Do you support or oppose the Billionaire Tax Act, which would impose a one-time five percent tax on the accumulated net worth of individuals in California with a net worth of one billion dollars or more?"

–
800 LV
± 3.50%
55.0%39.0%6.0%
Note: LV is likely voters, RV is registered voters, and EV is eligible voters.

Background

California Proposition 98, Mandatory Education Spending Initiative (1988)

See also: California Proposition 98, Mandatory Education Spending Initiative (1988)

The 2026 initiative contains a provision that would exclude the revenue generated by the tax from the state’s General Fund for purposes of calculating the state minimum guarantee for education funding established by Proposition 98 in 1988. Proposition 98 was a ballot initiative approved by 51% of voters that amended the state constitution to require a minimum percentage of the state budget to be spent on K-14 education, which is referred to as the minimum guarantee. Proposition 98 established two formulas or tests to determine the minimum guarantee, which is the highest funding level produced by Test 1 or Test 2. Test 1 links the minimum guarantee to about 40% of the state General Fund, which is equal to California's 1986-87 funding level of public education. Test 2 calculates the minimum guarantee by adjusting the prior year's minimum guarantee for student attendance and changes in the cost of living. The initiative authorized the California State Legislature to suspend the education funding minimum for one year by a two-thirds (66.67%) vote. In 1990, the state legislature referred Proposition 111 to the ballot, where it was approved with 52% of the vote. Proposition 111 added a third formula, Test 3, which considers student attendance, the cost of living, and changes in the General Fund revenue.[1][7]

California Proposition 4, Government Spending 'Gann Limit' Initiative (1979)

See also: California Proposition 4, Government Spending 'Gann Limit' Initiative (1979)

The 2026 initiative contains a provision that would exempt the revenue from the tax from the state spending limit established by Proposition 4, also known as the Gann Limit, in 1979. The initiative limited growth in state and local government spending financed from tax revenue and certain fee revenue to 1978-1979 level with an annual adjustment for changes in population and cost of living. The initiative was amended by Proposition 111 in 1990 to require that excess revenues be determined over a two-year period rather than a single year. Proposition 111 also required that half of excess revenue be distributed to school programs, rather than tax refunds and rebates, under Proposition 98.

Wealth tax ballot measures

The California wealth tax initiative would be the first ballot measure in the country to enact such a tax. In 2023, Texas voters approved Proposition 3 by a margin of 68% to 32%, amending the state constitution to prohibit the state legislature from enacting a wealth tax or net worth tax in the future.

Path to the ballot

See also: Laws governing the initiative process in California

A combined initiated constitutional amendment and state statute is a citizen-initiated ballot measure that amends both a state's constitution and state statute. There are at least two (2) states that allow citizens to initiate combined amendments and statutes.

In California, the number of signatures required for a combined initiated constitutional amendment and state statute is equal to 8% of the votes cast in the last gubernatorial election. A simple majority vote is required for voter approval. The requirements to get combined initiated constitutional amendment and state statutes certified for the 2026 ballot:

  • Signatures: 874,641 valid signatures are required.
  • Deadline: The deadline for signature verification is June 25, 2026. However, the secretary of state suggested deadlines for turning in signatures of January 12, 2026, for initiatives needing a full check of signatures and April 17, 2026, for initiatives needing a random sample of signatures verified.

Initiative #25-0024

  • October 22, 2025: Jim Mangia and Suzanne Jimenez filed the initiative with the California Attorney General's Office.[1]
  • December 26, 2025: The initiative was cleared for signature gathering.
  • February 26, 2026: The secretary of state reported the campaign had collected 25% of the required number of signatures.

See also

External links

Footnotes

  1. ↑ 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.8 Attorney General Information: Initiative and Referendum Proposals Pending Review By Attorney General, "25-0023 text," accessed September 25, 2025
  2. ↑ Legislative Analyst's Office, "New tax on the wealth of billionaires." accessed March 2, 2026
  3. ↑ 3.0 3.1 Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributable to the original source.
  4. ↑ Billionaire Tax Now, "Home," February 27, 2026
  5. ↑ No on the So-Called Wealth Tax, " Home," accessed March 2, 2026
  6. ↑ 6.0 6.1 6.2 6.3 6.4 6.5 Cal-Access, "Campaign Finance Activity: Propositions & Ballot Measures," accessed February 27, 2026
  7. ↑ California's Legislative Analyst's Office, "A Historical Review of Proposition 98," January 18, 2017
Flag of California
v • e
State of California
Sacramento (capital)
Elections

What's on my ballot? | Elections in 2026 | How to vote | How to run for office | Ballot measures

Government

Who represents me? | U.S. President | U.S. Congress | Federal courts | State executives | State legislature | State and local courts | Counties | Cities | School districts | Public policy

Retrieved from "https://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php?title=California_One-Time_Wealth_Tax_for_State-Funded_Healthcare,_Education,_and_Food_Assistance_Programs_Initiative_(2026)&oldid=11081070"