Vancouver: In private dining rooms, board meetings, and late-night phone calls with lawyers, a question is spreading among California’s (US) wealthiest residents: Is it time to leave?
A proposed California “billionaire tax” has unsettled some of the state’s richest people, not because it is a law , but because it signals a shift in how the state views extreme wealth. For a small but powerful group of billionaires, the proposal has turned California from a long-trusted home into a place of financial uncertainty.
The idea was first floated in late 2024, driven by labor unions and progressive activists who argue the state can no longer afford rising health care and education costs without asking more from those at the very top. The plan would place a one-time tax on residents worth more than $1 billion, targeting wealth tied up in stocks, companies, and investments rather than just yearly income.
Publicly, few billionaires are speaking out. Privately, advisers say many are deeply uneasy.
Some are calling relocation consultants. Others are reviewing residency rules, property purchases, and flight logs— all in an effort to prove they no longer live in California if the tax moves forward. States like Texas, Florida, and Nevada are quietly benefiting from the anxiety, offering lower taxes and clearer rules.
“It’s not just about money,” said a billionaire on anonymity. “It’s about trust. People are asking whether California is changing the rules mid-game.”
For many tech founders and investors, their wealth exists mostly on paper — shares in companies that rise and fall with the market. The idea of taxing that wealth, even once, feels unpredictable to them, especially in an industry built on risk.
Supporters of the tax see it very differently. They estimate the measure could raise as much as $100 billion, drawn from just a few hundred people whose combined wealth far exceeds that of entire states.
To backers, the math is simple: a tiny fraction of residents hold enormous wealth, while millions rely on public services that are increasingly strained. Rather than raising taxes on working families, they argue, California should look upward.
Under the proposal, most of the money would be directed toward healthcare, particularly programs serving low-income residents and people with disabilities. A smaller portion would support public schools, food assistance programs, and the administration needed to manage the tax.
Advocates say the funds could help stabilize services during economic downturns and prevent painful cuts that often hit the most vulnerable Californians first.
The debate has created tension even within California’s Democratic leadership. Some lawmakers see the tax as overdue — a moral correction in a state marked by both staggering wealth and deep inequality. Others worry that even a handful of departures could cost California more in lost investment and philanthropy than the tax would raise.
Governor Gavin Newsom has been cautious, acknowledging the need for revenue while warning that driving wealth out of the state could have lasting consequences.
The proposal is now in the signature-gathering phase and could appear on the 2026 ballot. Until voters decide, the uncertainty remains and so does the quiet planning among some of California’s richest residents.
For a state built on innovation and ambition, the billionaire tax debate has become something more personal: a test of loyalty, fairness, and whether California can ask more from its richest citizens without pushing them away.