California: SEIU-UHW clears signature threshold for a one-time 5% billionaire wealth tax; measure headed to November ballot

On April 27, the SEIU–United Healthcare Workers West (SEIU-UHW) labor union submitted more than 1.5 million signatures to election authorities in support of a one-time wealth tax of 5% targeting roughly 200 California billionaires.

To qualify, the measure needs 875,000 valid signatures. Signature counting and verification will be handled at the county level before the packet is sent to the Secretary of State’s office. Even so, the buffer appears sufficient to offset losses from errors, unreadable entries, and duplicates.

What the billionaire tax would cover

If voters approve the Billionaire Tax Act in November, beginning in 2026 any California resident whose net worth exceeds $1 billion as of January 1, 2026 would owe 5% of that amount to the state.

For those with wealth in the $1.0 to $1.1 billion range, a lower rate is proposed. A key point: moving after the cutoff date would not erase the obligation—the rule is retroactive.

SEIU-UHW estimates potential revenue of $100 billion over five years. The money is expected to go toward keeping hospitals and clinics open, supporting K-14 education, and funding state food-assistance programs.

In practical terms, that could mean—for example—that if someone’s wealth at the time of calculation is $20 billion, the required payment could be as high as $1 billion, with the proposal calling for installment payments over five years.

Billionaires started leaving before the cutoff

Estimates suggest that six of roughly 214 California billionaires left the state before January 1—the key date used to determine tax liability. Among those who reportedly relocated are Google co-founders Larry Page and Sergey Brin, as well as former Uber CEO Travis Kalanick.

According to SEIU-UHW calculations, the departure of these individuals reduced the taxable base by about $26.8 billion—more than one quarter of the projected revenue.

And it’s not limited to a few names. In February 2026, Chamath Palihapitiya said that since the initiative was announced, up to $700 billion could have moved out of California. Some reporting also points to investment purchases made on the Nevada side near Lake Tahoe as part of potential tax planning.

David Lesperance, managing director at Lesperance & Associates, described the signature drive as a hard-fought campaign: after prolonged efforts to secure enough signatures, SEIU managed to “spark” the “Tax the Rich” push, and many would-be taxpayers have already begun preparing “escape plans” by moving to other states.

At a Monday press conference, SEIU-UHW representatives—including Susanna Jimenez—rejected the claim of mass flight. Their argument: most billionaires built their lives in California and won’t leave the state over a one-time levy.

Counteroffensive: billionaires prepare competing ballot initiatives

Opponents have rallied around a proposal called Building a Better California, which media reports was founded by Sergey Brin and former Google CEO Eric Schmidt. The group raised more than $80 million in its first quarter of 2026 and is now advancing three competing initiatives on the ballot.

The most aggressive option would amend the state constitution to prohibit retroactive taxes. If successful, it could effectively neutralize the core enforcement mechanism of the tax.

A second initiative targets rules for distributing education funding, aiming to challenge compliance with requirements governing how money from new taxes is spent.

The third measure would add additional audits and restrict how revenues from any new tax can be used.

Among those named as participants in the opposition effort are Peter Thiel (Palantir), Chris Larsen (Ripple), and Patrick Collison (Stripe). Fortune reports that total election spending by ultra-wealthy donors in California for the 2026 cycle exceeded $270 million.

Governor Gavin Newsom has publicly opposed the initiative, warning that if top earners leave the state, it could lead to budget cuts. His argument is tied to economic statistics: the top 1% of taxpayers generate nearly half of the state’s personal income tax revenue.

Lesperance characterizes the coming months as a “communications battle” with lopsided odds. In his view, supporters of the tax need to keep voters’ attention long enough to overcome the campaign’s simple “Tax the Rich” messaging.

Political fault line: support from the left, splits within the progressive camp

Bernie Sanders and former U.S. Secretary of Labor Robert Reich both backed the tax. Sanders promoted the initiative at a Los Angeles event in February. However, no major candidate for California governor has echoed their position.

According to CalMatters, progressive Democrats in the state legislature are not unified: three union leaders and five members of the Legislative Progressive Caucus criticized the measure unofficially, and only one lawmaker criticized it publicly. At the same time, Jensen Huang, CEO of Nvidia, distanced himself from the class-based stance taken by some peers—urging people not to stay in California, but to move into states rather than leaving it.

Why “investment migration” and other jurisdictions are in the spotlight

When SEIU-UHW filed the initiative in October 2025, Lesperance warned that his clients think beyond a single-state frame. Now that the signature threshold has been met, those calculations are even more relevant.

He said SEIU’s success could inspire progressive federal politicians to sell voters their own ideas for taxing wealth. In response, Lesperance argues that wealthy individuals with capital starting at $50 million may increasingly bring in lobbyists, restructure financial models, and consider scenarios for exiting the U.S. tax system—including if Democrats win federally in November 2028.

Lesperance points to three parallel lines of action. The first is political: identifying and funding lobbyists to counter wealth-tax laws.

The second is a structural tax strategy: using legal tools available right now (including gift and estate tax breaks, mechanisms like GRAT, and arrangements involving assets through Puerto Rico’s Act 60 regime).

The third is directly tied to the investment-migration theme: a “fireproof plan and evacuation routes”—securing second citizenship and structuring ownership to reduce the risk of being pulled back under tax oversight, including through inheritance and exit scenarios.

In this context, interest is growing in citizenship by investment (CBI) programs, residency options in Portugal, and approaches used by Gulf countries with territorial tax systems. Academic research from Sweden and Denmark finds a correlation: a 1 percentage-point increase in wealth-tax burden is associated with roughly a 2% rise in outbound migration among wealthy taxpayers.

The proposed California rate is, in effect, five times the threshold the initiative is targeting. If the measure is approved, legal challenges are expected: lawyers argue that the retroactive portion may conflict with the state-level guarantees of due process. Still, the initiative’s fate will be decided by a simple majority of voters in November.

Our Telegram channel about various types of Greek residence permits, digital nomad programs, and the Greek Golden Visa: @digitalnomadgr