Gavin Newsom opposes a California wealth tax. He's proposing a national billionaire tax instead

[GJGCA]

Source: CNN

California Gov. Gavin Newsom on Friday proposed a national tax on billionaires that he says is the first part of an “economic reset for America” agenda, which aides explicitly say is part of his considering to launch a presidential campaign.

Newsom explains why that he will personally vote no on the California proposal, which would levy a one-time 5% tax on residents with a net worth over $1 billion.

"We’re competing with 50 states,” Newsom told the World Economic Forum earlier this year. “Capital flows and move(s). That’s real. It’s not imagined. It’s very, very real.”

Read more: https://www.cnn.com/2026/06/26/politics/gavin-newsom-billionaire-tax-california

[Fiendish Thingy]

1. That's because he knows such a bill would never pass

Between the filibuster and the wholesale purchase of congressional votes by techbros, Newsom knows a national tax on billionaires would be DOA.

A referendum, like the one in California, on the other hand, cannot be stalled, obstructed or bribed into defeat,

[GJGCA]

2. Forgive my skeptical take...

... (not on your main point)

...but about "A referendum ... cannot be stalled, obstructed or bribed into defeat", because I fear that's exactly what will happen (attempted anyway), a flood of advertising $$$ if nothing else.

[Fiendish Thingy]

4. The oligarchs will give it their best shot

But in the end the voters will have their say.

[hookaleft]

6. That bill is gonna pass in California

I love Newsome but he is wrong on this bill. I cannot understand his opposition. And don't tell me he is corrupt, I don't believe that bullshit and I WILL vote for him to be president. I just wish he would explain himself.

[Fiendish Thingy]

7. It's not a bill

It’s a referendum, and if it passes, it will be because the voters supported it, and it couldn’t be defeated through politics-as-usual.

[thebigidea]

8. pretty obvious he doesn't want his presidential run defined by driving business out of CA

and you know that's how it would be depicted by our beloved liberal media. They wouldn't give two shits about it balancing budgets or whatnot.

[Silver Gaia]

17. From what I've read, this is basically what his opposition is about.

(And no, I don't have a link, but I did read his words.) He indicated that he thought all this would actually do is cause many of the billionaires to just leave the state, so in the long run, it could cause more harm than good. That fits with him saying he thought such taxation would be positioned better at the federal level than the state level. That makes sense to me.

I am a Californian and I do support Newsom, so this matters a lot to me. He seems to think things over pretty carefully rather than spewing out lnee-jerk nonsense like so many politicians do these days. That, the "knee-jerk nonsense," has become so common that I think we tend to expect it, and sometimes judge a carefully expressed opinion to its detriment by that same standard. I've been watching and listening, and am willing to consider the merits of his viewpoint.

[The Grand Illuminist]

18. Personally I think it should be $300 million and up

nt

[Prairie Gates]

11. Exactly right

California could absolutely pass this bill.

No national billionaires tax will ever pass without drastic structural (revolutionary) change. You can propose it all day long because it will never go anywhere.

[not fooled]

14. My first thought exactly

Unfortunate.

[groundloop]

3. A National Billionaire Tax is the right answer..... HOWEVER getting it passed is another story.

Eloon and all the other oligarchs will spend very heavily to convince us that it's an evil, unAmerican concept.

[Buddyzbuddy]

5. I'm guessing he wants billionaire's money in his pocket

but not in Californian's pockets. What a shame to throw away his political career for so little from so few after all the good that he has stood for. He will run in '28 but I will not vote for him in the primary. That means about 30 votes at least, in my extended family that will not vote for him in the primary.

He had no problem raising our gasoline taxes to pay for Cal Trans or turning tax payer funded highways into private toll roads, or raising car registration fees but when it comes to taxing billionaires to raise money to fund a State Medical cost shortfall he's very concerned with saving them money.

[thebigidea]

9. signing free college into law was better than anything Bernie ever managed

[Prairie Gates]

12. This is also true

Newsom is a complex character.

[Buddyzbuddy]

13. What does Bernie have to do with this?

He's not part of the conversation and not part of California, but he is critical of billionaires, which tells me where you might be coming from.

Yes, free community College was a good thing, which is one of the reasons I supported Newsom, for Governor. When you are an executive, what you say and do carries more weight than when you're part of a collaboration like Bernie. Bernie has not changed his tune ever, to capitulate to anybody's favor. What you see is what you get. Can you say the same about Newsom?

[LudwigPastorius]

15. Sad, but true.

His calculus must be that he needs the money of the left-leaning rich techies and Hollywooders if he's going to run for the White House in '28.

[dwilso40641]

10. Any wealth tax would have to be national.

It would be impossible to do it state by state.

[Bluetus]

19. It could be state by state, but that would be a nightmare

Billionaires would just park their wealth elsewhere,. That wouldn't hurt the billionaires, but would hurt the taxpayers of California.

Maybe there could be some system that says if a company wants to sell to Canifornians , then they must be subject to a minimum tax. That could be enormously difficult to administer, and that would not reach the billionaires directly.

[tirebiter]

16. I'm for taxing the billionaires at both state and local levels.

And breaking them up. We need to democratise capitalism.

[miyazaki]

20. CA will allow them an installment plan of five years at one percent

per year.

Over half a decade most of em' can make back their tax liability in interest should it pass. Not that they need to because I won't mention their off shore tax schemes and lifetime corporate welfare.

[Mark.b2]

21. Multi-millionaires are loving all the focus on billionaires only....

There are way more millionaires than billionaires.

I don’t know why they wouldn’t start around $20 million or so.

[hookaleft]

22. Here is what I don't get. Why the hell are the opposed to paying taxes??

They are filthy rich and could never in their lifetimes spend the amount of money they have. The live in a state that has the best climate in the world. There are a million reasons to want to live here. Yet they want to fight against a tax that would help Californians. It would be miniscule to what they are worth. They make me sick

[fujiyamasan]

23. If you have a net worth of over a billion

And don’t want to pay this tax, what’s to keep you from leaving ASAP to establish residency elsewhere? I could also see constitutional issues if say, CA tries clawing the 5% from those that have left.

When you have a net worth that high, everything essentially becomes free. It’s not as though a short private jet or chartered flight from Austin or some other city in a red state, is anything more than a mere inconvenience. For the poor and middle class, progressive policies and a robust safety net on healthcare and abortion matter. For the ultra wealthy, not so much.

Say their companies are based in CA, does it still tax them accordingly? What’s to stop them from doing what Tesla and others have already done — by moving their headquarters elsewhere, and maybe keeping a small office in state, just to retain some talent that won’t move?

I’m not sold on Newsom for president, and I certainly agree that SV has an absurd amount of influence in Sacramento (as well as DC of course), but I’m not sure if this measure will generate the income it’s supposed to for the state.

I’m way too cynical to believe there won’t be loopholes for them to get out this…But I'm also not cynical about Newsom s motivation in opposing this. I think he brings up some real good points about how this is structured at the state level and capital outflows and economic competitiveness. If he were really cynical in vying for the nomination he’d be full bore in support of this given the direction the democratic base is heading. It’s an easier “win” for him to simply give in and back this.