Below is my column in the California Post and New York Post on Rep. Ro Khanna confirming that the Billionaire Tax is really not a Billionaire Tax, but rather should be used to target the wealth of others. It is the latest manifestation of the class warfare being unleashed before the midterm elections.
Here is the column:
Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) just moved to outbid his Democratic colleagues in the presidential auction. With the radical left sweeping away establishment figures in favor of socialists, various prospective presidential candidates are offering up key institutions in their effort to appease the mob.
The Supreme Court has been the starting bid. Kamala Harris, Pete Buttigieg and Josh Shapiro have yielded to the mob and embraced court packing.
Khanna is not to be outdone. After his disastrous campaigning for Graham Platner, Khanna is returning to a sure winner: Class warfare.
Last week, Khanna confirmed that the “billionaire tax” is just the start and that they will go on to target the wealth of other citizens as an untapped resource of new revenue.
For years, some of us have warned that the billionaire tax was a ruse. Sponsors like Sen. Elizabeth Warren and Khanna were using billionaires as an easy political target, but they were unlikely to stop there.
The challenge is to get the tax through the courts, which is why it is so essential to pack the court. Warren notably was an early advocate of both changes.
I discuss the tax in my book “Rage and the Republic” as an example of the “eat-the-rich” politics used by demagogues from ancient Athens to the French Revolution. Politicians seek to divide a population into “haves” and “have-nots” with the promise that citizens could have it all if only they are given back power.
Warren tried to use the tax to restart her moribund 2020 presidential campaign. During one debate, she dramatically told the rich she was coming after “your Rembrandts, your stock portfolio, your diamonds and your yachts.” She thrilled the crowd by greedily rubbing her hands together after saying she would take some of the wealth of fellow candidate John Delaney, a self-made millionaire.
The problem is that a federal billionaire tax (which is distinct from California’s billionaire tax that will be on the upcoming state ballot) is, in my view, completely unconstitutional. The federal government secured the right to tax individuals in 1913, but the 16th Amendment only approved income taxes.
As made clear by Warren, Democrats want to tax people for the things that they bought after paying their taxes from homes to art to boats.
If they can pack the Court and greenlight a billionaire tax, there would be no limit to then moving the threshold wealth level downward. Once that Rubicon is crossed, Democrats would suddenly be able to tax trillions in the property and possessions of citizens.
That is precisely what Khanna finally admitted last week in a Substack post, arguing that “the tax should not stop at billionaires; it must reach centimillionaires. The tax has to reach all fortunes $50 million and up.”
The wealth tax is the closest this country has come to an open redistribution-of-wealth effort, a core agenda item for the rising socialist movement.
Other countries such as France tried wealth taxes with disastrous results. Not only did it fail to generate the expected revenue (the wealth left the country en masse), but it also had to be rescinded. In Norway, the government kept reducing the level of targeted assets to six-figure thresholds.
The national tax is meant to address the growing disaster in California, which has reportedly lost trillions as the wealthy flee the high-tax state. Khanna and other Democrats hope to give the wealth nowhere to flee by taking this “hunt-the-rich” effort national.
In making this pitch, Khanna is trying to achieve the political stunt of the century. Khanna is reportedly worth roughly half a billion dollars thanks to his wife’s inheritance. He is not alone among the super wealthy Democrats declaring themselves the champions of the proletariat.
After all, there’s Illinois Gov. Jay Robert “JB” Pritzker, who also inherited his fortune. In a July interview with CNN, Pritzker virtually begged the mob that he is a different kind of billionaire, pointing at Trump billionaires as the rightful targets (not him with $4.3 billion).
Others found themselves on the wrong side of the mob.
Rep. Dan Goldman, who inherited a massive fortune of almost $300 million as a trust baby, unwisely promised to help subsidize his congressional reelection campaign from his family fortune. Goldman fell flat with the socialist and increasingly antisemitic base — and was crushed by over 30 points.
Khanna hopes to stay ahead of that mob by leading it to the homes of other wealthy citizens.
As for California, the state is already showing how class warfare does not quite work if the upper classes simply leave with their wealth, businesses and jobs.
The state is facing a crippling debt of billions as its tax base contracts. Rather than reducing spending and waste, California Democrats and unions are pushing for unprecedented new taxes despite the exodus to low-tax states such as Florida and Texas.
It is an example of economic Darwinism, where citizens who are slow to flee are being fleeced by some of the highest taxes, gas prices and the cost of living in the nation.
At the same time, core services from education to public safety remain subpar at a premium price.
In the meantime, the far left is already moving even further and faster than establishment candidates like Khanna.
The Democratic Socialists have floated possible additions to their platform, including allowing Congress not just to pack the Court but also to pick Supreme Court justices. There is also a call for the elimination of the Senate, the defunding defense and immigration programs, open borders and allowing noncitizens to vote.
Those are the very type of measures that the Jacobins used in France to create “direct” democratic powers.
The Framers rejected such measures as offering little more than a “mobocracy.” It was the reason that our country became the oldest and most prosperous republic in history while France became “the Terror.”
Khanna, Pritzker and others may hope that they can still harness the power of the mob. However, history is not on their side.
For all of their promises of radical changes to our constitutional system and wealth taxes, these establishment figures will be devoured in the very class warfare that they seek to unleash.
Jonathan Turley is a law professor and the New York Times bestselling author of “Rage and the Republic: The Unfinished Story of the American Revolution.”
It is truly fascinating how the low level thinkers here are rushing to defend billionaires who do not pay their share of taxes.
You don’t seem to realize that billionaires simply escape paying ANY income taxes, and in most cases any taxes at all. In most cases the people here are more heavily taxed as a percentage of their income and wealth than the likes of Musk and Bezos.
These proposed wealth taxes are simply an attempt to force them to at least pay something rather than nothing on their vast fortunes.
The wealth of billionaires is tied up in their stock portfolios. They are rarely paid a salary. Musk does not draw a salary from any of his companies. Bezos draws a nominal salary of $81,400 from salary that has not increased since 1998. And yet they all live lavish personal life styles.
How do they do this?
They never sell their stock to fund their lifestyle. They borrow against their stock portfolios. Banks are more than eager to lend them vast sums of money at interest rates as low as 3% when they pledge their stock as collateral. The loans are structured as interest only, so they never have to pay back the principle. They are compensated in the form of new stock offerings that do not trigger a taxable event. Over time they accumulate more stock and the value of that stock is constantly rising. As the value of their stock rises they become eligible to borrow more money which they use to pay off the interest on the loans they already have. They just keep borrowing more and more money, as the value of their stock increases, to pay off the interest of the earlier loans, and still have enough to live a lavish lifestyle.
They never have to sell the underlying assets of their stock, and therefore they pay no income tax or capital gains taxes and the interest they pay can be treated as an expense to write down any income tax that they do actually become liable for.
They effectively escape any form of taxation related to their income and wealth and yet the MAGA morons here are more than willing to defend this situation. You have been sucked in by the mega-billionaires who have used their fortunes to take over the Republican Party, which now acts only in the interests of their billionaire donors and AGAINST the interests of the people who gather here daily to whine about forcing billionaires to pay taxes.
You are all know-nothing suckers.
If there is any truth to your outlandish claims, you will be kind enough to explain how it is that the top 1 percent currently pays 40 percent of all federal income taxes collected. The floor is all yours.
Well put.
Ahhhh!!!
As I said you are a sucker.
You have also fallen for the MAGA propaganda that the top 1% of taxpayers pay 40% of the federal income taxes, and therefore the mega-billionaires must be paying more than their fair share.
Of course the problem here is that the numbers are calculated from TAXPAYERS, who actually pay federal income taxes.
And mega-billionaires like Musk and Bezos do not actually pay significant federal income taxes, so they are not included in the calculation of the top 1% of taxpayers. THEY DON’T PAY FEDERAL INCOME TAXES.
Who are the top 1% of taxpayers???
According to the latest Internal Revenue Service (IRS) thresholds analyzed by the Tax Foundation, a single taxpayer needed an Adjusted Gross Income (AGI) of at least $675,602 to enter the top 1% of filers.
So basically, the top 1% is anyone with an AGI of over $675,602.
The mega-billionaires do not fall into this category, BECAUSE THEY DO NOT HAVE EARNED TAXABLE INCOME as far as the IRS is concerned.
Jeff Bezos, with a net worth of $250 BILLION, draws a nominal salary of $81,400 from Amazon, so as far as the IRS is concerned he is nowhere near the top 1%.
Musk does not draw a salary from any of his companies.
The mega-billionaires escape federal income taxes and are not considered part of the top 1% of TAXPAYERS, for the simple reason that THEY DO NOT PAY INCOME TAXES.
You have been suckered into defending mega-billionaires who pay less tax as a percentage of their wealth than you do.
You are are know-nothing loser and Musk and Bezos are laughing at you.
aww you can’t stand up to scrutiny. gonna cry?
Another communist. So, what else is new with the Democratic party?????
I really believe that many of the “(tax)(eat)(hunt)-the-rich” political officeholders and candidates don’t, in their private hearts, want any legislation like this to succeed. They only want an easy talking point to get votes on the cheap. Now. Now is all that counts.
INMHO all politicians are pander. How else do they get people to donate and support their lavish lifestyle and riches. What did surprise me nicely was that Lindsey Graham had a net worth of about $1.5 million for all his working years in the military and congress. Compare that to Pelosi and others. Now for those of you that will bring up Trump. He had his money prior to running for office.
“Lindsey Graham had a net worth of about $1.5 million”
That may well have been all that Graham had accumulated for all his years in office, I am not privy to his finances. Just keep in mind that a number like that for personal wealth may or may not accurately reflect reality. There are practices wrt setting up 501(c)(3) foundations (etc.) that serve to create wealth that you can manipulate (with some restrictions) as if it was your own, but keep that wealth from showing on your personal balance sheet. For those who don’t seek to make large capital investments, beyond a certain point, wealth becomes less about luxurious items to buy, and more about who and how many you can influence. A foundation that you essentially control can accomplish the latter just as effectively as funds in your own name. I don’t have that kind of money, but I do try to keep at least minimally informed on such things in case a windfall should somehow materialize.
Bah haha – you gotta love Dem Commies and their spin talk. Always starts with “Don’t believe your lying ears or eyes!” Then it moves on to new terminology to describe the same old SCAM! Class warfare is the only thing that works these days as our newest young voting class of sheeple comes online with their low IQ, low information, easily led by the nose style! Just great – illiterate in civics and personal finance – probably won’t make it to 300 years with this bunch in charge!
Democratic leader’s lies before the election: We won’t tax you, we will only tax the rich people.
Democratic voter: Yes tax the rich, tax the rich, tax the rich, tax the rich……
Democratic leaders after the election: I don’t care how little you make, YOU are one of the rich.
The Black Book of Communism Over 94 million Includes genocides, executions, and famines.
All socialist nations so far have been communist. Not all socialist are communist, but all communist are socialist.
Socialism is the lie to get to communism.
Stop wining about Dems packing but pack it now while you have the ability
Enough of this nonsense, it’s past time to rid ourselves of these grifters.
Still think there’s a Democrat party, even the Ragin Cajun is looking a little unnerved.
“The Democratic Socialists just released their platform . . .” (JT)
Their goal is the very horror Madison warned against: a “tyranny of the majority.”
The Founders designed a brilliant system to protect the individual from two evils: an omnipotent government, and an omnipotent mob. America’s socialists/communists want to use the latter to achieve the former.
Framing basic democratic platforms as an “omnipotent mob” completely misunderstands Madison’s federalist philosophy and the mechanics of American governance.
When James Madison warned against a “tyranny of the majority,” he was advocating for a representative republic with checks and balances—not a system that permanently paralyzes the legislative branch or protects extreme concentrations of wealth at the expense of everyone else. Madison himself argued in Federalist No. 10 that the primary source of political faction is the “various and unequal distribution of property,” and he fully expected a functional government to regulate these competing interests.
Furthermore, proposing constitutional amendments or legislative reforms—such as structural changes to the judiciary or the legislature—is exactly how the Founders intended the system to evolve. The Constitution explicitly includes Article V precisely because the Founders knew the original framework would need updates to prevent an entrenched minority from choking out the democratic process.
Labeling standard progressive policy proposals as “socialist/communist tyranny” is just a recycled scare tactic. Expanding democratic participation and proposing tax reforms isn’t a “mob” destroying the Republic; it is the constitutional process functioning exactly as designed to ensure the government remains accountable to the people, rather than an unaccountable oligarchy.
“Furthermore, proposing . . . unaccountable oligarchy.”
Kudos.
That’s some slick socialist/communist propaganda — complete with empty euphemisms (“updates’) and a scary bogeyman (“oligarchy”).
Keep that comment in a safe place. If your comrades win, use it to prove your allegiance. You’ll get extra rations. Just beware the first Purge.
@Sam – Well warned to the comrades. Their ardent supporters are usually the first to get fitted with dunce caps.
MB: TY.
ROFL! Paranoid much?
X
Paranoid much?
____________________
Nope, just listening to their words. (like packing the courts) Just maybe george is hard of hearing. As usual.
No, it’s just your run of the mill MAGA paranoia.
the good news is you will certainly be one of the first the communist shoot. They don’t put up with your kind.
So who is lying george. It’s the dems who are saying PACK the court.
So? If they want to pack the court they can. But Turley is being disingenuous with the facts. Some Democrats want to pack the court. The majority want court reforms which is not about ‘packing the court’ more like instituting ethics rules with real bite, implement term limits which is perfectly fine. Even Turley believes in an incremental ‘packing’ of the court over a 12 year period.
oh gawd, not “disingenuous” again! X learned the word disingenuous from this blog and has worn it bare; he uses it almost every day, but he is not smart enough to come up with a synonym.
At least they are learning…you on the other hand can’t seem to learn anything. Shocking
You cannot legislate term limits for federal judges without amending the constitution. Further, you cannot–even by constitutional amendment–deprive any state of equal representation in the Senate without its consent.
Your argument relies on a textbook misunderstanding of constitutional law. You don’t need an amendment to set Supreme Court term limits. Congress has full authority under Article III to alter the court’s structure, which is why modern proposals use the existing federal ‘Senior Status’ framework to transition justices off active panels after 18 years without stripping their life tenure.
As for the Senate, nobody is trying to take away a state’s two seats. The platform focuses on eliminating the unconstitutional filibuster and utilizing Article IV to grant statehood to D.C. and Puerto Rico so millions of tax-paying Americans finally get equal representation.
Hiding behind Article V to protect an entrenched minority that paralyzes the legislative branch isn’t defending the Constitution—it’s weaponizing it to protect a rigged status quo. The Founders gave Congress the tools to reform these institutions, and it’s fully constitutional to use them.
Turley doesn’t “believe in an incremental packing”. He says that if you choose to do it incrementally would be a fair way to do so.
LOL… You just agreed with me george.
So? If they want to pack the court they can.
Moron.
DustOff,
Correct.
Believe them when they say the quiet part out loud. They are not even trying to hide it anymore.
Stop! you’ll give X a big head! Being a slick socialist/communist propagandist is his goal.
Fortunately good ole dumbocrat insincerity always gives him away.
It took 4 paragraphs to share this drivel?
John Say is waiting in the wings to unleash a diatribe longer than the Declaration of Independence – sound and fury signifying nothing.
Sure X, Madison was a commie. no twisting there.
No, he just understood the point of that excessive wealth accumulation can produce harm.
george
No, he just understood the point of that excessive wealth accumulation can produce harm.
_________________________
Like Soros or Bill Gates.
I don’t see your gang wanting to take away their wealth.
Yeah man, even Soros and Bill Gates. “My gang” wants to tax ALL billionaires. Even some Billionaires agree they should be taxed more than they currently are.
BULL.
Let them be the first today not tomorrow….. Or shut up.
he did not. liar. Madison wasn’t a commie and has nothing in common with your stupid greed ideology.
excessive wealth accumulation built this country and today you too accumulate wealth (if you have a brain), more than the 99% of humans.
‘excessive’ is the commie take on it. excessive wealth accumulation is a constitutional right and keeps America strong.
I could just as easily say X has accumulated an excessive amount of wealth.
X: “Proposing tax reforms isn’t a mob destroying the republic…”
Wow. That characterization is some serious slight of hand. You forgot to mention that the so-called “tax reform” being proposed is, as JT noted, unconstitutional (see 16 Amendment) and would require a “packed” SCOTUS. That packing along with its goal of ignoring our Constitution is in effect, “a mob destroying the republic.”
The only problem with your rant is that it flies in the face of economic facts. Every where socialism has been tried it has failed or at best produced an economy with less potential for upward mobility. The law of supply, demand, and competition is as powerful as the law of gravity. Those who deny it are in for a rude awakening.
If you want to talk about economic facts and upward mobility, look at democratic socialist frameworks like Denmark, Norway, and Sweden. These nations utilize high progressive taxation and robust social safety nets while maintaining fiercely competitive, highly innovative, free-market capitalist economies. According to the World Economic Forum’s Global Social Mobility Index, these exact countries consistently rank as the top nations in the world for upward social mobility. The United States ranks significantly lower because unchecked wealth concentration strangles competition and locks regular citizens out of the market.
The claim that wealth taxes or closing corporate loopholes destroys market competition is historically false. The United States experienced its greatest economic expansion, infrastructure growth, and middle-class upward mobility during the 1950s and 1960s. During this golden age of American capitalism, the top marginal income tax rate was over 90%, and the government heavily regulated corporate monopolies. Regulating the excesses of the ultra-wealthy protects the free market; it does not destroy it.
Notice george don’t say about the high taxes they pay. Of the fact, these are not huge countries.
No, Denmark, Sweden, and Norway are not socialist. They operate robust free-market capitalist economies paired with an extensive social safety net—a system known as the Nordic model.While they provide universal healthcare, tuition-free education, and generous pensions, these benefits are funded by heavy taxation and a thriving private corporate sector
Congratulations, you just argued my exact point for me. Nobody called the Nordic countries socialist. The entire point is that Denmark, Sweden, and Norway are highly successful free-market capitalist economies that prove heavy progressive taxation doesn’t destroy prosperity. It funds it.
Trying to dismiss their success by saying they are ‘small countries’ is just a weak excuse to dodge the math. Economics scales. A larger country like the U.S. actually has better economies of scale to fund public services. You can’t scream ‘socialism!’ when we ask billionaires to pay their fair share, and then pivot to saying ‘well, that’s just capitalism’ when we point out that high-tax models work perfectly in Europe. Pick a struggle.
By the way the their free education, universal healthcare and generous pensions are all borne out of Democratic Socialist ideas and you just admitted they work. Including high taxes. Thanks.
DustOff,
You are correct.
Trotting out those CAPITALIST nordic countries again huh X? how many times do I have to put you in your place?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Norwegians_by_net_worth
X says Norweigians accumulate excessive wealth! World Economic Forum agrees
These countries are more capitalist than the USA today. They ARE NOT SOCIALIST. AT ALL.
man, you’re an idiot.
You are so blinded by your own semantics that you’re completely missing the point. Nobody said Norway is a Marxist state, but calling a country with universal healthcare, tuition-free university, and a massive state-owned sovereign wealth fund ‘more capitalist than the US’ is hilarious.
Those are explicitly democratic socialist programs. Norway takes the profits of a strictly regulated market and socializes them to fund human rights rather than billionaire playground subsidies. Having billionaires exist doesn’t erase the fact that the state literally owns 35% of the Oslo stock market and uses high taxes to guarantee healthcare and education for everyone. It’s called a mixed economy, buddy. Try reading the rest of the encyclopedia instead of just looking at the rich list.
Wow, Turley went full tinfoil hat with the inflammatory rhetoric. Talk about the “age of rage.” He sure loves spooking gullible MAGA voters like easily startled goats.
California losing “trillions”? Give me a break. The state isn’t experiencing anything close to that kind of wealth flight. He’s just fearmongering about court-packing and wealth taxes—both of which are entirely constitutional. In fact, the Founding Fathers themselves used wealth taxes to fund this newborn nation.
Then he drops this gem: “Democrats want to tax people for the things that they bought after paying their taxes from homes to art to boats.”Well, duh. They’re called property taxes, Professor. Every single state has them, including the deepest red ones. Of course, the ultra-wealthy avoid these taxes by registering their mega-yachts in foreign tax havens like the Bahamas.
The fact that Democratic Socialists are winning races makes one thing crystal clear: Republicans are completely dropping the ball on the economy and foreign policy. Trump is making a mockery of the U.S. abroad, losing the war with Iran in the most embarrassing way possible, and demanding the Strait of Hormuz be restored to how it was before he attacked Iran at Israel’s behest. What an idiot.
Meanwhile, inflation and grocery prices are still climbing, and he is depleting the Strategic Petroleum Reserve just to temporarily mask soaring gas prices. Once that cushion is gone, the pain at the pump will linger for a long time.
The 2026 midterms are going to be an absolute bloodbath for Republicans.
“California losing “trillions”? Give me a break. The state isn’t experiencing anything close to that kind of wealth flight.”
Yet again, just making stuff up.
You won’t prove your assertion. But I’ll provide evidence for JT’s (which, by the way, is a well-documented fact and widely known):
Numerous billionaires have already fled the People’s State of California, along with some 100,000 millionaires. Page and Brin recently fled to the freer state of Florida. And took with them a net worth of some $600 billion.
Sam, you’re an idiot. JT claims California is losing trillions. Not possible, not even mathematically. California’s GDP is $4.3 Trillion. Losing “trillions” would mean California’s economy collapsed.
Billionaires fleeing the state does not mean their wealth leaves the state. They still need their money making infrastructure and talent and that still stays in California.
The “net worth” is not the same as actual wealth. Their “net worth” is always going to be associated with their person. Their physical wealth will still be attached to the state.
Leaving the state as a person does not mean they moved their entire operations. It’s prohibitively expensive to move entire operations out of state.
A billionaire’s net worth isn’t sitting in a personal bank account; it is tied up in corporations, real estate, and equity. If a tech mogul moves their residency to Florida or Texas, their company’s physical infrastructure, employees, and operations stay right in Silicon Valley. California law dictates that any income sourced within the state—meaning profits generated by businesses operating or selling inside California—remains strictly subject to California corporate and income taxes, no matter where the CEO sleeps at night.
Billionaires do not create wealth in a vacuum; they rely on the state’s economic ecosystem. As Representative Ro Khanna accurately pointed out, the global AI revolution and the world’s most robust venture capital networks are rooted in Silicon Valley, not Miami or Austin. If wealthy founders want access to the world’s top-tier tech talent and capital infusion, they have to keep their money actively deployed inside California’s $4.3 trillion economy.
“Sam, you’re an idiot.”
Sure. I always reply to comments that start with a playground insult. (Didn’t even read the rest.)
To me, you have always been a prop.
Now you are persona non grata.
Sam, you read the rest. It’s obvious. Making idiotic statements by saying I’m making stuff up without backing it up is….well, idiotic. Just stating a fact.
X –
You are without a doubt the best GOTV the GOP could possibly ask for on this platform.
Your skill at creating new prompts for chatgpt is sharpening up. But the empty buzzwords and lack of any foundation gives the game away.
Keep up the good work comrade!
However you analyze it these blue states and cities are losing their tax base. Slicing open the goose that lays the golden egg doesn’t get one more gold.
“Sam, you’re an idiot. JT claims California is losing trillions. Not possible, not even mathematically. California’s GDP is $4.3 Trillion. “
Sam is not an idiot. You are. You are so dumb when it comes to economics; you don’t understand what the GDP is. That is why you so frequently get tricked up by AI.
If California sold $1 Trilion dollars of California sh!t to X and he paid and ate it, the GDP of California would rise by $1Trillion.
SM: Thanks for that.
And notice the sophist’s typical sleight of hand: The issue is California’s loss of trillions in *net worth.* When caught with its pants down, the deceptive one switches that to GDP. Those are two very different economic facts.
My pleasure, Sam.
GSX is an idiot copying incompletely from AI because he is unable to think. He is not a worthy debater, but he does raise misconceptions, many of which the left holds, so I like to clear them up without him feeling he is deserving of comment. Such a feeling, he does not deserve, and I don’t want a continuous debate with a moron.
GSX forgets the losses California sustained when Musk moved his corporate offices. California still retains much of the corporate tax, but it is a loss in many other ways. through many other lost tax revenues. The biggie is Musk himself. Personal taxes in California are above 13%, and California loses all of that revenue over the remaining years of Musk’s life. We should not forget all the future corporations Musk creates.
The narrow-minded thinking of GSX prevents him from realizing that other taxes on stock options not collected by California will never be collected, and there may be a huge performance payout in the future. When Musk buys billion-dollar companies, in part, he does that by selling off Tesla and other holdings, which again is a tremendous loss in tax revenue for California.
There is a multiplier effect on California’s losses by Musk’s move. That includes 13+% of tax revenues on many high-earning executives, lawyers, accounting firms, top-earning engineers, suppliers, etc. One cannot calculate the future losses to California because the impact keeps compounding and expanding.
So far, some have said that California has lost around $20 Billion of personal tax at over 13%. That will continue to expand into the future.
You are correct in your assertion that millionaires are leaving. What most people do not realize is that most homes are worth over $1 million dollars. So if someone was careful or in the house a long time, their sales price would put them over the net worth of $1 million.
Also, look at the businesses that have fled, they are worth at least a $trillion.
Moral of story, don’t wait to bail out or your $M nest egg house will go poof!
First, California’s median home price is around $915,000—so no, ‘most’ homes are not over a million. More importantly, a $1 million house with a massive mortgage doesn’t make someone a millionaire. Net worth requires subtraction, buddy. Regular homeowners aren’t the ones being targeted by wealth taxes aimed at fortunes over $50 million.
Second, claiming California ‘lost a trillion’ because a few corporate headquarters moved is a complete joke. A company’s global stock market valuation isn’t cash sitting in a state vault. When a tech giant shifts its executive suites to Texas, the actual data centers, factories, engineers, and local operations stay right here in California, generating local revenue. You can’t pack up a $4.3 trillion economy and move it in a moving truck.
What george didn’t post
California’s statewide median price for an existing, single-family home reached a record high of $930,260. Depending on the specific housing metric and property type, overall median home values hover between $750,000 and $782,000, making it the most expensive housing market in the United States
Nearly none of that wealth was invested inside of California, and what was is certainly not being removed. All that is moving are the markers, plastic chips. As in a casino those chips can leave but the wealth remains in the casino until they cash out. And the billionaires cannot afford to cash out because that would bring capital gains taxes which they most certainly don’t want to pay.
California’s GDP is approximately $4.25 trillion as of 2025.
California lost a mind-boggling nearly $1 trillion in wealth in the past month alone thanks to fears over its proposed “Billionaire Tax,’’ according to one of the state’s wealthiest residents. nypost
Show us the evidence that California lost nearly a trillion dollars in wealth?
Has the state shown that in revenue loss?
Net worth is not the same thing as actual wealth, as in property, business, supply chains, and employees still working for the company at said state.
Rank Company Approx. Annual Revenue HQ moved to Year
1 Chevron ~$200+ billion Houston, TX 2024
2 McKesson ~$360 billion Irving, TX 2019
3 Tesla ~$95–100 billion Austin, TX 2021
4 Oracle ~$60–65 billion Austin, TX (later Nashville area) 2020
5 Charles Schwab ~$20–30 billion Westlake, TX 2021
6 CBRE ~$35 billion Dallas, TX 2020
7 Hewlett Packard Enterprise ~$30 billion Spring, TX 2020
8 AECOM ~$16 billion Dallas, TX 2021
9 SpaceX Private (est. ~$15–20+ billion revenue) Starbase, TX 2024
10 Palantir Technologies ~$4 billion Denver, CO 2020
11 FICO ~$1.7 billion Bozeman, MT 2021
12 Playboy <$1 billion Miami, FL 2021
You are confusing global corporate revenue with localized economic output.
When a corporation shifts its official headquarters to Texas or Florida, it does not stop paying taxes to California. Under California’s tax code, any revenue generated from sales, services, or operations inside the state of California remains 100% subject to California’s corporate tax. Shifting a C-suite executive office to Austin doesn’t magically erase the billions of dollars these companies pull from the California market every single year.
A company’s “headquarters” is often just a symbolic legal address or a building full of executives. Look at the actual footprint of the companies listed:
Tesla: Elon Musk moved the legal headquarters to Texas in 2021, but Tesla’s global engineering headquarters remains squarely in Palo Alto, California. Furthermore, Tesla significantly expanded its massive manufacturing workforce at the Fremont, California factory long after the “move.
“SpaceX: While the corporate address shifted to Texas in 2024, SpaceX’s main rocket manufacturing facility and global headquarters remains actively anchored in Hawthorne, California, employing thousands of high-wage engineers and technicians.
Chevron: Even after announcing its 2024 executive move to Houston, Chevron explicitly confirmed that its massive refining operations, oil fields, and thousands of non-executive employees would stay right where they are in California.
If this list represented an actual, devastating drain of wealth, California’s economy would be shrinking. Instead, the exact opposite is happening. California’s GDP has surged to a record $4.3 trillion, securing its position as the fourth-largest economy in the world and growing faster than most peer states. The vacuum left behind by a few moving executive suites is instantly filled by California’s roaring artificial intelligence boom and unrivaled venture capital ecosystem.
California continues to tax the immense revenue these companies generate inside its borders.
“Has the state shown that in revenue loss?”
GSX is an economic dummy. If revenues haven’t decreased, then:
Thanks to Trump: The stock market rose.
Thanks to Newsome: Increased taxes
Sam,
You are correct.
California’s proposed billionaire tax has Silicon Valley titans fleeing for Florida — where they’re on the prowl for grand homes
https://nypost.com/2026/01/08/real-estate/tech-titans-leaving-california-for-florida-over-billionaire-tax/
Zuckerberg Follows Billionaire Exodus To Florida As California Pushes New Wealth Tax
https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/zuckerberg-follows-billionaire-exodus-florida-california-pushes-new-wealth-tax
Upstatefarmer,
Using celebrity real estate gossip to prove an economic collapse is hilarious. Mark Zuckerberg buying a mansion in Miami doesn’t change the text of the law. The proposed wealth tax uses a January 1, 2026 snapshot date—meaning billionaires can’t escape it by moving their address after the deadline.
More importantly, buying a vacation home in Florida doesn’t move Meta’s headquarters or its engineers out of Silicon Valley. California still taxes all business revenue generated inside its borders. If this ‘exodus’ was actually bleeding the state dry, California wouldn’t have just logged a $4.5 billion budget surplus backed by a roaring tech sector. Tabloid real estate listings aren’t macroeconomic data.
Sam,
You are correct.
California loses one taxpayer per minute, Florida gains
https://justthenews.com/nation/states/center-square/california-loses-one-taxpayer-minute-florida-gains
California says it lost $2 billion in state income taxes from earners leaving
https://justthenews.com/nation/states/center-square/california-says-it-lost-2-billion-state-income-taxes-earners-leaving
Outmigration cost California $24B in departed incomes as poorer people move in
https://justthenews.com/nation/states/center-square/outmigration-cost-california-24b-departed-incomes-poorer-people-move
Sam,
But wait! There is more!
NY sees dramatic exodus of millionaires — causing nearly $11B loss in tax revenue: study
https://nypost.com/2026/07/13/us-news/ny-sees-dramatic-exodus-of-us-millionaires-causing-nearly-11b-loss-study/
@X
Yes, trillions. And it isn’t just the wealthy leaving, and that adds up. Keep whistling in the dark, and be assured the rest of us will at the least do our level best to prevent CA’s dumpster fire from spreading nationally. I suspect you are on board with those holding the match, though.
There is no American democratic party, hasn’t been for some time, and we are very much in the middle of an attempted hostile takeover by globalists and their allies.
James, Trillions you say? So where’s your evidence? Show California’s budget losing trillions in revenue. Pretty please.
BTW, California just closed the books for the year with a $4.5 Billion surplus.
Fun fact. California has a healthy $28.8 billion into a rainy day reserve. Why? Because the tech boom in Silicon Valley is generating so much revenue that the state has plenty of money, completely debunking his ‘economic Darwinism’ fairytale…”
Those “fleeing” billionaires are still relying on California to make their billions. Shocking.
It’s trillions X. just accept facts. It’s trillions. Socialism sucks, no defense of it. slipping X slipping.
What Trillions? You haven’t shown evidence California has lost trillions in revenue. You haven’t shown any facts.
Pretty please show evidence California has lost trillions in revenue. I’ll wait.
Jezzzzz you liar
george. Now post the debt.
If you dare
What’s the lie Dustoff?
Fun fact, Texans are significantly more debt-burdened than Californians; 3.9% of Texas consumer debt is 90+ days delinquent compared to just 1.9% in California. Why? Because Texans can barely afford living in Texas compared to California. Crazy huh?
The DEBT you dummy. Which they can’t pay.
I know because I retired from San Diego as a fire/medic and CALPERs is running out of cash
The California Public Employees’ Retirement System (CalPERS) carries an unfunded pension liability (pension debt) of over $179 billion.
$4.5 Billion surplus?! That’s a bald face lie. They’re at a deficit of several billion dollars. Look beyond Newsom’s cooked book.
Lie you say? Nope.
According to the official California 2026–27 State Budget Summary released by the Department of Finance and signed into law by Governor Gavin Newsom, the state closed its previous deficit gap and built a $4.5 billion operating reserve surplus.
https://ebudget.ca.gov/2026-27/pdf/Revised/BudgetSummary/FullBudgetSummary.pdf
GSX continues to demonstrate ignorance:
It’s bookkeeping shenanigans from a temporary tech-stock windfall parked in reserves, hiding a $30-$40 Billion deficit
Sure george
______________________
But that trend has winners and losers, and California is the second. A 2022 report by the Hoover Institution noted that the state lost 352 company headquarters from January 2018 to December 2021 and that the number of departures accelerated: More companies relocated in 2021 than any other year in that period. The authors blamed high taxes, punitive regulations, high labor costs, high utility and energy costs and high costs of living, especially housing.
California’s combined state and local public debt exceeds $1.4 trillion, representing about $82,245 per taxpayer. This total includes roughly $648 billion in direct state obligations and $816 billion in local government debt.
Dropping a report from 2022 to argue about the economy is embarrassing. You completely missed the entire artificial intelligence boom that has poured trillions into California over the last few years, driving the state’s GDP to a record $4.3 trillion.
Your debt math is equally imaginary. Claiming every taxpayer owes $82,000 is a total fiction created by think tanks that count future obligations as immediate debt. California’s actual state bond debt is $112 billion, which is an entirely healthy 2.7% of its GDP—virtually identical to Texas’s 2.5% ratio.
If the state were actually losing this economic war, it wouldn’t have just signed a budget boasting a $4.5 billion operating surplus and $28.8 billion in rainy-day reserves. Try updating your calendar and your calculator.
The repubs will keep on winning like currently and ya know, before, and right now and midterms, and you know it or you wouldn’t be getting so desperate with your lame ‘points’.
‘property taxes,’ there’s that insincerity again. did you think JT was discussing property taxes?
Reading is fundamental X.
You tell me reading is fundamental, yet you managed to miss the part where Turley literally wrote that Democrats want to tax the ‘property and possessions of citizens.
An annual tax on property and possessions is a property tax, buddy. Red states have absolutely no problem charging regular people annual property taxes on their houses and trucks. But the second a policy suggests charging billionaires an annual property tax on their mega-yachts and art portfolios, you lose your mind.
The Founders themselves passed the Federal Direct Tax of 1798 to tax accumulated wealth and property. If you think Republicans are ‘winning’ by protecting corporate loopholes, you’re dreaming. California just posted a $4.5 billion budget surplus and hit a $4.3 trillion GDP. The economic engines of this country are moving forward, whether you can read the data or not.
your lame defense shows how desperate you are with all the losing on your side.
A prominent radio commentator has been predicting for months that this idea will trickle even further downward beyond $50 million dollars. They will have a piece of ass out of every asset worth seizing.
1st Ro is REQUIRED to give up all his $100’s of millions!
Why?
socialism said so
“Ro is REQUIRED to give up all his $100’s of millions!”
I trust you realize that Ho Khanna and his ill-making ilk will engineer some ruse into their tax code that will effectively exempt their own assets from seizure.
LOL! Ro simply uses the same tax code every Billionaire relies on to keep their money. He’s advocating for a tax hike even he is willing to pay for. Trump is more likely to try to exempt himself from tax audits and any scrutiny of his money by the IRS. Like his “settlement” with the IRS that was recently shot down.
you are SO negative and hateful. every single morning. BTW, “every Billionaire” is a SINGLE noun; “keep their money” is plural. YOu obviously are not as educated as you pretend to be.
Hateful? Posting an opposing view is hateful? Weird.
Oooh grammar police on the prowl. Watch out!
Lying again. The IRS did not. A lib judge did.
Dustoff, I know reading is difficult for you. Please try harder. You will eventually get it. Thanks.
I think it’s funny all these DSA brats are running around like they own the democrat party now. Dude, it’s a fire sale, you can have what’s left afterward.
The current ‘normal’ democrats haven’t gone anywhere and they still vote. Not everyone is a communist revolutionary, some of them still have capitalist jobs!
If they confiscate every penny from every billionaire, it won’t be enough to satisfy them.
They don’t need to. They just need them to pay their share of taxes like everyone else. They can start by eliminating loopholes. Taxing billionaires won’t bankrupt them or put them in the poor house. It won’t even hurt their status as billionaires. You know how they can survive? By truly living frugally and avoid obscene excesses that require them the need to make even more money just to maintain the excesses they love.
Nobody is trying to bankrupt the ultra-rich; we just want them to pay their fair share of taxes like the rest of us. They can start by closing egregious loopholes. Take the carried interest loophole, which allows billionaire private equity and hedge fund managers to mask their regular income as capital gains, paying a top tax rate of just 20% instead of the 37% working Americans pay on their wages.
One reason they keep accumulating massive fortunes is to outdo their peers. It is a toxic game of high-society one-upmanship, played entirely at the expense of this nation’s financial health.
“You know how they can survive? By truly living frugally and avoid obscene excesses that require them the need to make even more money just to maintain the excesses they love.”
This is not for you or anyone to decide.
“Nobody is trying to bankrupt the ultra-rich; we just want them to pay their fair share of taxes like the rest of us. ”
Such a boring statement. Since no socialist will ever tell you what “fair share” is. It’s just a made up term. What about the 40% or so of Americans that pay no taxes? What about their “fair share”? To me, they should not be allowed to vote, especially on policies that determine how much the govt. is allowed to steal of others property.
No one escapes paying taxes. Real estate, personal property, and sales taxes are nearly universal. Even if they rent, part of their rent is passed through the owner for taxes.
I’d like to see a 5% sales tax on stocks and bonds. That should slow the microtraders who siphon off the wealth while producing nothing.
~40% of the population pay no taxes. And a large percentage of those are on welfare programs. The ones who use the govt. to steal others property to be given to them, should have no say on election day.
“siphon off the wealth while producing nothing”
You just described the govt.
Suggesting we strip voting rights from working-class Americans because they don’t corporate-hoard wealth is about as un-American as it gets.First of all, your claim that 40% of Americans ‘pay no taxes’ is a complete myth. Regular workers pay payroll taxes, sales taxes, gas taxes, and property taxes out of every single dollar they earn. In fact, they pay a vastly higher percentage of their income into the system than billionaires who hide behind the carried interest loophole to pay lower rates than a frontline nurse.
You want a definition of ‘fair share’? It means billionaires like Kevin O’Leary paying for their own data centers instead of demanding working-class taxpayer subsidies while telling the public ‘welcome to America.’ Expecting the ultra-rich to pay their own bills instead of leeching off the public sector isn’t deciding how they live—it’s called a level playing field. Try defending actual free enterprise instead of a rigged billionaire protection racket.
fair share?
Despite X’s rhetoric to the contrary, “we just want them to pay their fair share of taxes like the rest of us.” the federal income tax system is highly progressive.
The top 10% of US income earners pay the majority of federal individual income taxes, contributing 70% of the total revenue
Top 1%, 38.4%
the United States has the most progressive tax system in the developed world and among OECD member states
high-income individuals pay the highest amount and share of income taxes.
Tax and spend, eh X? road to serfdom.
Isolating federal income tax to prove the rich are oppressed is the oldest trick in the book. Regular working people are crushed by payroll taxes, sales taxes, and state taxes that eat up a vastly higher percentage of their income than a billionaire’s. The top 1% only pays a high share of income taxes because they capture a historic, unequal share of the nation’s total wealth in the first place.
Trying to use OECD rankings to dodge the debate is a complete joke. In European nations, citizens get universal healthcare, free college, and real public services for their tax dollars. In America, working-class families pay into the system and get nothing back, while our rigged tax code protects billionaire private equity loopholes and funds corporate subsidies for the ultra-rich. Asking a multi-millionaire to pay the same effective rate as a frontline nurse isn’t a ‘road to serfdom’—it’s stopping the ultra-wealthy from freeloading off the society that built their fortunes.
Still lying george.
The Rich do pay.
__________________
In the United States, high-income earners pay the majority of federal individual income taxes. The top 1% of earners contribute over 38% of all federal income tax revenue. Overall, the top half of all taxpayer
The top 1% only pays a high share of income taxes because they hoard a record-breaking amount of the nation’s income in the first place. But the moment you look at payroll taxes, sales taxes, and state property taxes, regular working families are the ones getting squeezed.
Meanwhile, billionaires use the carried interest loophole to pay a lower tax rate than a schoolteacher. Crying about the ‘tax burden’ of the ultra-rich while they use legal gymnastics to dodge their fair share isn’t a valid point—it’s just embarrassing billionaire bootlicking.
DustOff,
Several years ago, there was a big “Tax the Rich!” movement.
Bill Maher was arguing about how much he pays in taxes, looked right into the camera and said to the effect, “You do that, and you [Democrats/liberals] are going to lose me.”
Around the same time, IIRC, actor Will Smith said he would be willing to pay more in taxes. Then the person interviewing Smith asked if he would support a 60 or 70% tax rate on his wealth. Smith said something like, “Whoa! Lets not get crazy here!”
There seems to be a myth that all rich people do shady things to not pay taxes.
During Trump’s first admin, he passed a bill to change up the tax brackets. That put more money into our pockets. Meanwhile, a friend of ours who is the millionaire next door, had to pay more in taxes. Trump’s bill worked exactly as it was designed.
“The Democratic Socialists just released their platform,”: Human suffering for all but the top.
These DSA dopes can’t see all the evidence before their eyes.
Ro “I Love Rapist Platner” Khanna is a disgrace. He married his wealth, and is living in luxury protected at all times by security, behind high walls. He and his wealthy wife do not give away all their money, or share their mansions with homeless people and illegal immigrants. Instead, Khanna goes to Israel and manufactures a situation so he can pretend he’s down with the anti-Semites running the Democrat party today.
Give away? Why should they?
hey dopey, try and keep up.
If you don’t know, you never will
Typical of Calif.
Instead of controlling spending, they go this route.
______________________________
In the shadow of the San Gabriel Mountains, Pasadena stands as a cautionary tale of what happens when local governments prioritize expansive spending over fiscal discipline. City leaders are now floating as many as five new tax measures for the November ballot, claiming a “widening structural deficit” threatens essential services.
Spending and taxing is all dem-o-rats know.
Instead of … are you really as stupid as you sound? Yup!
YOU have narcissistic TDS! dumbocrat!
More taxing in a state that is broke.
Doe that make any sense.
You must be a lib
You might want to avert your gaze from what this fully Republican controlled Federal administration has been doing lately in regards to reigning in spending to match revenue raised.
DustOff,
And while they want more taxes, they try to pass bills to protect FRAUD, committed by illegals and even legal people.
Consider if Ro, Liz, Bernie, et al, socialists succeed. Is it possible they can manage the perils of a wealth tax? These double-down, talking-point actors haven’t the capacity to even understand the ramifications of a wealth tax. Personally, I cannot image even the entire Congress, working in harmony, could ferret their way through this minefield of problems. By reducing fraud and waste, the socialist gang (aka Democrats) could gain every dollar they hope to get from the rich. But they want to punish as much as tax.
Here are some of those perils.
The Challenge of Valuing Wealth
The Birth of a Valuation Industry
Endless Litigation
Corruption and Administrative Discretion
The Rise of Wealth Concealment
Capital Flight and Taxpayer Mobility
Reduced Investment and Entrepreneurship
Taxation Without Liquidity
Administrative Complexity
Political Pressure and Growing Complexity
Distortion of Economic Decisions
Privacy Concerns
Revenue May Fall Short of Expectations
How the Burden May Trickle Down
Historical Experience with Wealth Taxes
Dems are the problem eh?
The socialist gang (aka Democrats) eh? Trump and gay boy Bessent just got smacked down by a federal in an attempt to steal $1.2 billion from the IRS.
As more of the truth leaks out. Communist is here folks, and it’s coming for you!
Truth? What truth? That you’re an idiot. We all know that. BTW, learn to write a coherent sentence.
You need to go back to the basement and stop the incessant need to bash anyone who posts a comment.
Communism isn’t here and never will be. America will never be a communist or socialist country.
Communism is against the law here, sorry commies!
Doesn’t anybody read anymore?
try living in Seattle or LA…and get back to us
In NJ I am required to pay into a fund to pay electric and nat gas for others who don’t want to pay their bills. Why?
Why? Because you haven’t yet relocated to a state where you are not obliged to.
Someone let them do it. Get some solar panels and make your own electricity. Never been a better time to get free from the energy monopoly.
Government forces ‘bad’ companies to give away profits (because government is always ‘good’ doncha know) so companies pass the cost onto the consumers as expected they should.
Vote.
Democrats want Fascism…where the few make all the rules and jail all opposition!
No Democrat wants socialism or communism…they want YOUR MONEY and TOTAL POWER!
You got it! Tax and spend isn’t about kindness. It’s about raw power to make humans subservient to government whims.
Plain and simple, Ro is a phony.