# California Property Tax Reform Versus Billionaire Wealth Tax Proposals Economists argue reforming 1978's Proposition 13 could yield more revenue than wealth taxes. - **Source:** [Fortune | FORTUNE](https://brifing.si/source/769282ef-327a-4454-909a-3c7936216004) - **Published:** 2026-10-31 - **Topic:** [Finance](https://brifing.si/c/finance) - **Original article:** - **On Brifing:** https://brifing.si/s/e3751925-dd30-40fe-9f57-bcaacc5cf986 ## The Legacy of Proposition 13 Enacted in 1978, Proposition 13 capped property taxes at 1% of assessed value and limited annual increases to 2%. This measure fundamentally altered California's revenue model, forcing the state to rely heavily on volatile income taxes. Today, the top 1% of earners provide nearly half of the state's total tax revenue. ## The Billionaire Tax Proposal Proposition 40 seeks to implement a one-time 5% tax on assets for residents worth over $1 billion. Proponents estimate this could generate $100 billion to support health spending. However, critics argue this approach is speculative and could trigger significant litigation, making the projected funding unreliable for the state's long-term fiscal planning. ## Property Tax Revenue Potential Economists Owen Zidar and Eric Zwick suggest that reforming property taxes offers a more durable solution than taxing billionaires. Currently, California homeowners pay an average of 0.8% in property taxes. If the state matched Texas's 2% average, residential property tax revenue would more than double, potentially generating massive, stable state income. ## Impact on Housing Markets Beyond increasing state revenue, adjusting property tax structures could influence the housing market. Zidar and Zwick estimate that aligning California's rates with Texas could lower home prices by approximately 13%. This shift would address the rapid appreciation of home values that has historically outpaced property tax growth under current state laws. ## Risks of Wealth Taxation Opponents of the billionaire tax warn of negative economic consequences, including potential capital flight. Laura Tyson and Lenny Mendonca noted that six billionaires already left California before the proposed effective date. Such departures threaten to reduce the tax base, potentially resulting in a net loss of revenue for the state over time. ## Broadening the Tax Aperture Experts argue that relying on a few hundred billionaires is insufficient to fund the state's $540 billion annual budget. Instead, they suggest broadening the tax base to include hundreds of thousands of wealthy individuals through real estate reform. This approach aims to create a more progressive and sustainable fiscal position for California. ## Alternative Revenue Strategies Beyond property taxes, experts propose alternative methods to capture capital income. Suggestions include raising corporate tax rates, taxing realized and unrealized capital gains, and increasing inheritance taxes. These measures target the capital income that feeds wealth, offering a more systemic approach to addressing inequality than a singular focus on billionaire assets. ## Fiscal Sustainability Challenges California faces a structural challenge in balancing its massive budget against a narrow, volatile tax base. While the billionaire tax remains politically appealing, economists emphasize that fundamental reforms to property ownership rules are necessary. Without such changes, the state remains vulnerable to market fluctuations and the mobility of its wealthiest residents. ## Sources covering this story - https://fortune.com/2026/10/31/california-billionaire-wealth-tax-prop-40-revenue-prop-13-texas-taxes/ — --- _Summary written by Brifing from the original reporting. Copyright in the original article belongs to its publisher; read the full piece at the link above._