A recent poll has revealed that a remarkable 60% of California voters are in favor of a proposed billionaire wealth tax, despite recognizing that it could lead to companies leaving the state and potential job losses.
Interestingly, even when faced with various economic and political arguments against the tax, 54% of respondents still expressed support for it, based on a survey conducted by NestPoint, a public relations firm focused on political strategies.
John Thomas, co-founder of NestPoint and an experienced Republican strategist, noted, “California voters are making something very clear.” He added that they seem to prioritize the cost of living and public services over concerns for billionaires and warnings from political and economic leaders.
In the poll, 52% of likely voters acknowledged the tax could push entrepreneurs and jobs out of California. However, only 48% were worried about the long-term revenue the wealth tax might generate, and just 42% expressed concern that it would negatively impact Silicon Valley.
“California voters are going with their values, not just numbers,” Thomas remarked, suggesting that this tax has a good chance of passing. It’s quite ironic, though—voters seem unconcerned about the departure of billionaires, but the wealth itself is likely to leave.
Progressive activists are quickly collecting the 875,000 signatures required by late spring to place the Billionaire Tax Act of 2026 on the ballot. This tax would impose a one-time 5% levy on those with a net worth exceeding $1.1 billion, phasing down from that threshold.
Notably, the tax would apply retroactively to individuals who resided in California as of January 1 of this year. The state is estimated to have around 246 billionaires, according to Forbes.
The retroactive aspect of this proposal has caused apprehension among some billionaires, prompting some to reconsider their ties with California, which might already impact taxpayer revenue, though the exact figures are unclear.
Governor Gavin Newsom, a Democrat possibly eyeing a 2028 presidential run, has criticized this progressive approach, warning that it might backfire. He stated at a Bloomberg News event, “A one-time tax won’t address ongoing structural issues. You’ll get an initial boost but likely see significant declines in tax income as people move away.”
Figures like Senator Bernie Sanders have long supported wealth taxes, claiming that the ultra-rich benefit from assets that aren’t taxed until sold, allowing them to largely avoid income taxes that the average American faces.
Some nations have experimented with various forms of wealth taxes, but many have since reduced or eliminated these measures.
Critics argue that predicting the value of a person’s assets can be tricky, given their fluctuations throughout the year. There are also concerns about the complexities involved in selling substantial illiquid assets, and whether such taxes might drive capital out of the state.
As the scope of the wealth tax expands, there’s worry that entire fortunes could disappear.
Polling on the wealth tax is limited, with mixed results from surveys sponsored by various groups. In a recent poll by the Melman Group, for instance, 48% supported the tax, while 38% were against it, leaving 14% undecided.
The NestPoint poll had a larger sample size compared to others, indicating a more comprehensive view of voter sentiment.
“Voters are serious. Taxing wealth is reasonable. The ones who should be concerned are not the politicians, but those capital allocators who are discreetly planning moves to states like Texas and Florida,” Thomas asserted, emphasizing it’s really about fairness for Californians.
According to NestPoint’s findings, a sustained campaign opposing the tax could theoretically defeat it, yet achieving that would require substantial financial resources, likely in the tens or hundreds of millions.
The NestPoint survey sampled 907 likely voters in California from January 2nd to 12th, with a margin of error of plus or minus 3 percentage points.
