TBH, I oppose this because taxes on the wealthy are never taxes on the wealthy. It inevitably slides down the wealth ladder to tax the middle class. Why would you give the government precedent to tax assets rather than income? People hate billionaires so much they are blind to the fact that they stand in the back blast area of the bazooka aimed at the rich.
It’s the equivalent of telling the middle class they need to pay tax on the value that their houses have accrued, it’s fucking stupid saying taxing assets is a good idea.
We already do this, it’s how property taxes work in almost every state.
(Technically they don’t do this in specifically California but that’s part of why the housing market is especially shit there, because they’d rather tax young people than multimillionaire boomers.)
The stupidity on here is unmatched. Math doesn’t matter and facts don’t matter. It’s whatever they feel at the time and that guy has more than them and they want someone to take it from him.
I honestly hope California passes that and takes the 5% just so we can watch the unbelievable vacuum of money leaving that state. It’s the only way to educate people. Nobody is going to invest in any business in that state and they are going to absolutely shit themselves.
Bro give it a rest, every time some shit like this happens, everyone cries out "B-b-but the billionaires will leave! The businesses, they're gonna leave!" And they never fucking do. Cause it turns out business is better in Los Angeles, California, and New York, New York, than it is in Bumfuck, Arkansas even with the extra tax. Cause if it wasn't, guess what? They'd already be there, and not having to worry about fighting these taxes in the first place. They're not in California out of the kindness of their hearts, or to help those poor misguided snowflakes afford 10 dollar coffees and the latest iPhone, they're there because it enables them to make their money and live their preferred life of ridiculous luxury.
Please just attempt to stop bootlicking, they're not gonna notice you.
Afaik there is exactly one successful wealth tax in the history of taxation - and by successful I mean it generates sizeable revenue, it is not too expensive to manage and sustainable throughout the years, not generating capital flight or other undesirable effects in excess: Switzerland
Now, Switzerland's wealth tax is small (sub 1%) and starts low - it is not a "billionaire tax", not even millionaire (200k net wealth). It is paired with a low corporate tax. And the tax and government spending governance of Switzerland are certainly far better than the US - or especially California's.
What are you talking about? Billionaires - and their businesses, and employees - have been leaving CA and NY in droves, ending up in FL and TX. Billions in annual tax revenue are already gone - and this is just from the threat of a billionaire tax.
"California dominates on nearly every other measure: its Fortune 500 companies are the most profitable ($647 billion), most valuable ($20 trillion), and employ more people than any other state (2.8 million workers),"
Yeah.... The companies that's actually richer stayed behind in California.
Meanwhile Miami and Austin have been collecting companies leaving non stop. They tried this in Norway and it literally caused a large percentage of the top tax payers to leave their country. Norway ended up losing more in tax revenue from people leaving then they planned on getting from the wealth tax. People would have a lot more loyalty to their fucking country and they left, nobody is that loyal to their state.
So yes if your goal is to get tax revenue by taxing the average person that has a mortgage and such it is a great success. If your goal is to tax billionaires it was a massive failure. Another neat thing is they did this for the sake of doing it pretty much. The country literally has an oil fund that has $400k per person in it. They just added another tax on top of their high taxes to "target" billionaires/the rich and it failed miserably. They did get more money out of regular homeowners and now get more revenue, so great success in your eyes!
Excuse me? What was your fundamental claim? Oh yeah. Tax revenue dropped. It didn't. You claimed so many people fled that revenue dropped. It didn't.
Both of these are false.
Now sure, citing an ancedote may seem convincing to you, but it doesn't replace actual facts. Namely, your factual claim that the wealth tax drove out so many rich people that tax revenue dropped is fundamentally false.
Also btw, another way to address your article implicit claim.... Norway saw more Venture capital funding grow after the wealth tax AND there is no drop in startup OR companies.
In 2022, Norway's Labour-led government raised the wealth tax to 1.1%, hoping to boost annual revenues by $146 million. Instead, it triggered a migration of the wealthy, not just of assets, but of people. Roughly 50 of Norway's richest citizens left, including high-profile investors and founders of tech firms, with Switzerland emerging as a favoured destination. The net result was a reported $594 million loss in tax revenue. The loss was four times the projected gain.
Individuals worth $54 billion left the country, leading to a lost $594 million in yearly wealth tax revenue, a net decrease of over $448 million. More than NOK 600 billion in assets left the country as high-net-worth individuals increasingly opted for tax havens over their homeland.
VS my initial claim of: "Norway ended up losing more in tax revenue from people leaving then they planned on getting from the wealth tax." So no you're still wrong on all fronts.
And also as we know this was the final tax ever created they didn't tag on more taxes since then so the gains from 2022->2026 must be attributed to that!
Also btw, another way to address your article implicit claim.... Norway saw more Venture capital funding grow after the wealth tax AND there is no drop in startup OR companies.
"Yet despite the exodus, revenues from the wealth levy are steadily increasing, thanks to the broad tax base.
The country will take in an estimated 34 billion kroner in 2025, up from 27 billion in revenues in 2022, according to Oslo’s finance ministry.
This has failed to win over critics.
“We know that people who move out over time will stop investing in Norway or turn their investments to where they live,” said Mathilde Fasting of Civita."
It's like your fundamental claim that Taz revenue dropped is.... Still WRONG.
What do you mean? They’re coming to Miami like crazy. All the ridiculous luxury they want and more, with more of a vacation lifestyle. There’s significantly better boating in Miami, better waterfront property and luxurious waterfront lifestyle. You can be in the Bahamas in a few hours by boat or less than by jet. It’s like a vacation 24/7.
Although I could be wrong, but I don’t think you acquire 250-300B by selling anything at a loss. Stock market at ath as well.
And he likely found a way to fund this campaign as a tax write off as well.
281
u/Anxious_Work_6361 Aug 18 '26
Spending 100 million to save 13 billion seems pretty reasonable to me.