{"id":11481,"date":"2026-10-26T12:47:16","date_gmt":"2026-10-26T12:47:16","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/sotnews.agency\/?p=11481"},"modified":"2026-10-26T12:47:16","modified_gmt":"2026-10-26T12:47:16","slug":"the-wealth-tax-where-did-all-the-money-go","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/sotnews.agency\/?p=11481","title":{"rendered":"The wealth tax: Where did all the money go?"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n
\n \t<\/i> Read Time:<\/span>2 Minute, 28 Second <\/div>\n\n <\/div>


\n<\/p>\n

\n

Shocker alert: A new study concludes that California\u2019s latest soak-the-rich tax proposal could result in a loss of revenue. Hard to believe.<\/p>\n

California voters in November will decide on Proposition 40, a supposed \u201cone-time\u201d 5 percent net worth on the assets of billionaires. The rest of the nation \u2014 including Nevada \u2014 should pay close attention to the results because this is a dry run for Democrats and the 2028 election. If Prop 40 passes, expect the effort to go national \u2014 particularly as supporters of the far left and socialists gain a significant foothold in the Democratic Party.<\/p>\n

Supporters of the tax estimate it will raise $100 billion, which they claim will be used to offset federal Medicare \u201ccuts\u201d in coming years.<\/p>\n

But, CBS News reported this week, a Stanford University review of the proposal argues that it may generate only $30 billion, given that seven billionaires \u2014making up 30 percent of the state\u2019s billionaire wealth \u2014 have already moved out of California rather than be subjected to such punitive and confiscatory tax policy. In addition, the study\u2019s authors note, those who have fled will no longer pay California income taxes on an annual basis, amounting to potential revenue losses for the state of up to $3.5 billion a year.<\/p>\n

\u201cIf those losses persist permanently,\u201d CBS News reported, \u201ctheir value in today\u2019s dollars would exceed the wealth tax proceeds by about $39 billion,\u201d the paper found.<\/p>\n

\u201dThese findings suggest that the Billionaire Tax Act will not fulfill the primary functions for which it was designed,\u201d Stanford economists Benjamin Jaros and Joshua Rauh wrote. \u201cAlthough the act was designed to raise revenue, behavioral response prior to voting has eroded most of the projected tax base.\u201d<\/p>\n

And if you think this tax will truly be a one-time confiscation of wealth or won\u2019t eventually be expanded to cover other well-off Californians, we\u2019ve got a slew of oceanfront property in Needles available for sale.<\/p>\n

The reality of fleeing capital isn\u2019t the only problem with this awful idea. If passed, this tax will no doubt generate immediate litigation. \u201cThe measure\u2019s constitutional flaws far exceed what can be accomplished through judicial reformation and point toward striking the tax down in its entirety,\u201d argues Jared Walczak, a senior fellow at the Tax Foundation.<\/p>\n

Walczak also notes that, if the courts step in, \u201cCalifornia will have the worst of all worlds: a threat that drives away some of the state\u2019s wealthiest taxpayers and spooks the next wave of startup founders, costly litigation that could drag on for years, and not a single dollar in new revenue. This is not a minor concern. The tax is legally dubious as well as economically damaging.\u201d<\/p>\n

Polls show Prop 40 running slightly ahead, once again highlighting California as the testing ground of progressive folly.<\/p>\n

This editorial was published by the Las Vegas Review-Journal and distributed by Tribune Content Agency.<\/span><\/em><\/p>\n

<\/div>\n\n

\n
\n \n
\n \n \"Happy\"\n <\/a>\n
\n Happy <\/div>\n
\n 0<\/span>\n \n 0<\/span> %<\/span>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n
\n \n \"Sad\"\n <\/a>\n
\n Sad <\/div>\n
\n 0<\/span>\n 0<\/span> %<\/span>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n
\n \n \"Excited\"\n <\/a>\n
\n Excited <\/div>\n
\n 0<\/span>\n 0<\/span> %<\/span>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n
\n \n \"Sleepy\"\n <\/a>\n
\n Sleepy <\/div>\n
\n 0<\/span>\n \n 0<\/span> %<\/span>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n
\n \n \"Angry\"\n <\/a>\n
Angry<\/div>\n
\n 0<\/span>\n 0<\/span> %<\/span>\n \n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n
\n \n \"Surprise\"\n <\/a>\n
Surprise<\/div>\n
\n 0<\/span>\n 0<\/span> %<\/span>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n ","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Shocker alert: A new study concludes that California\u2019s latest soak-the-rich tax proposal could result in a loss of revenue. Hard to believe. California voters in November will decide on Proposition 40, a supposed \u201cone-time\u201d 5 percent net worth on the assets of billionaires. The rest of the nation \u2014 including Nevada \u2014 should pay close…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":11482,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"rop_custom_images_group":[],"rop_custom_messages_group":[],"rop_publish_now":"initial","rop_publish_now_accounts":{"facebook_2277560469115098_106292521332774":"","twitter_aToxNzczMzI3Njk4OTg4ODUxMjAxOw==_1773327698988851200":""},"rop_publish_now_history":[],"rop_publish_now_status":"pending","_monsterinsights_skip_tracking":false,"_templately_pack_id":"","_templately_imported_at":"","_templately_source":"","_templately_import_session_id":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[16,14],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-11481","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","category-korea","category-trending-news"],"aioseo_notices":[],"aioseo_head":"\n\t\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t