Newsom Backs National Billionaires Tax, Opposes California Measure
California Governor Gavin Newsom on Friday published a Substack post calling for a sweeping national “billionaires’ tax,” just one day after a healthcare union confirmed it would proceed with a similar state-level ballot measure that Newsom publicly opposes. The apparent contradiction has drawn sharp criticism from both sides of the debate, as the term-limited governor positions himself for a potential presidential run.
The National Proposal
In a Substack post titled “It’s time for a national billionaires’ tax and a new social compact,” Newsom outlined a comprehensive federal tax overhaul targeting the ultra-wealthy. His proposals include a minimum tax on individuals with net worth above $100 million — a “modern Buffett Rule” — along with closing the “tax-free lifestyle loan” loophole that allows the wealthy to borrow against stock portfolios tax-free, rewriting inheritance tax rules, raising corporate tax rates to pre-2017 levels, and creating a national public equity fund to give Americans a stake in AI-driven economic growth.
“When 10% of the people in this country own two-thirds of the wealth, when we have minted the first trillionaire in human history, and yet your wages have stagnated, and your healthcare costs have skyrocketed, something is fundamentally broken,” Newsom wrote. He added: “It’s time for an economic reset for America.”
The California Ballot Measure
The same week, the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) Healthcare Workers West announced it would move forward with a November 2026 ballot measure imposing a one-time 5% tax on individuals with net worth exceeding $1 billion who were living in California as of Jan. 1, 2026. The measure aims to generate approximately $100 billion to fund the state’s Medicaid system following federal cuts signed by President Donald Trump.
Newsom opposes the state measure, arguing it would drive billionaires out of California and erode the long-term tax base for a one-time cash influx. “You may not be able to pick up and move to Texas or Florida to shelter your income from taxation, but I promise you that billionaires can, and do,” he wrote. “Wealth is movable, and it shops for the state with the lowest taxes. The fight belongs at the federal level.”
The Contradiction
Critics on both sides have seized on the apparent inconsistency. Newsom’s national proposal aligns him with the Democratic Party’s populist left on an issue that AP News notes represents a notable shift in the political landscape since Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren struggled to gain traction with a similar wealth tax during her 2020 presidential campaign. Yet at the state level, Newsom is actively working to defeat a measure that would achieve similar goals in his own backyard.
Brian Brokaw, a Newsom political adviser leading the opposition committee, argued that the state measure is “bad policy and an even worse deal for 40 million Californians who will be left holding the bag.” The SEIU’s President Dave Regan, meanwhile, declared himself “all in on this,” accusing opponents of being “totally out of touch.”
Political Context
Newsom is approaching the end of his term as California governor, set to leave office in January 2027, and is widely considered to be weighing a presidential campaign. His Substack, launched in June 2025, has amassed over 459,000 subscribers. The timing of his national proposal — months before the 2026 midterm elections — aligns with the traditional start of overt presidential campaigning.
California has more billionaires than any other state, and the state relies on its top 1% of earners for nearly half of its personal income tax revenue. The nonpartisan Legislative Analyst’s Office has estimated that the 5% tax would generate tens of billions in the first few years, but income tax revenues could subsequently decline by hundreds of millions annually as wealthy individuals potentially relocate.
What’s Next
California voters will decide on the billionaire tax measure in November 2026, with a well-funded opposition campaign already underway. Google co-founder Sergey Brin has donated $82 million to a political committee opposing the tax, which has raised more than $118 million from fewer than a dozen donors. Meanwhile, a coalition of healthcare, education, and housing groups — including the California Medical Association and California School Boards Association — has also mobilized against the measure.
Whether Newsom’s national proposal gains traction in a Congress controlled by Republicans remains an open question. But the debate has already highlighted a fundamental tension in wealth tax policy: state-level measures risk capital flight, while federal action faces steep political hurdles. As UCLA political science professor Martin Gilens told AP, “There’s kind of a perfect storm that sort of bolsters preexisting inclinations to be sympathetic to the idea of raising taxes on the well-to-do.”
For Newsom, the challenge will be convincing voters that his positions are principled rather than politically convenient — a distinction that may well define his next political chapter.