Tax Researchers Oppose California Proposition 40

A survey of 105 tax experts shows a majority oppose the proposed one-time tax on assets exceeding $1 billion.

Updated on Oct. 28, 2026 in Financial Planning

Tax Researchers Oppose California Proposition 40

Live Poll

Should states impose additional taxes on high-value assets to fund health and education programs?

A majority of tax researchers surveyed oppose California Proposition 40, a measure appearing on the November 3, 2026 ballot. The proposal seeks a one-time tax of up to 5% on individual assets valued above $1 billion.

Why it matters

The measure aims to generate significant funding, with 90% of revenue earmarked for health care and 10% for food assistance or education programs. However, experts remain divided on the economic impact of such an asset-based levy.

The survey recorded a 21.6% response rate from 486 targeted email addresses. Respondents included 69 economists and 20 accountants, with the majority of both groups signaling opposition.

The players

California Voters

Residents of the state who will cast their ballots on November 3, 2026.

The details

The survey results released on October 13, 2026, show that 73 of the 105 respondents intend to vote against the measure. While researchers generally oppose the proposal, a separate poll of 1,103 likely voters indicated 52% support for the tax.

January 1, 2026: Residency date for Proposition 40 asset tax eligibility.
September 4-10, 2026: Public opinion survey of California likely voters.
October 13, 2026: Researcher survey responses received by organizer.
November 3, 2026: California voters decide on Proposition 40.

Market Dynamics

This proposal mirrors the ongoing debate surrounding the California Wealth Tax proposal. It reflects broader national discussions regarding the feasibility and economic implications of taxing high-net-worth assets to fund public services.

If passed, individuals with assets exceeding $1 billion would face a 5% one-time tax obligation. Retail investors and residents should monitor final ballot results to understand potential shifts in state tax liabilities.

The takeaway

The sharp divide between tax professionals and the general public underscores the complexity of implementing asset-based tax measures. Residents should carefully review the full ballot language to understand how the allocation of funds toward health care and education might affect state services.