California voters reject tax on billionaires' wealth
56% of California voters rejected a one-time wealth tax on billionaires. Bernie Sanders campaigned for it. Here is what happened and how other states voted.
English · Original discussion in Spanish · Published
California has rejected with 56% of the vote a one-time tax on the wealth of billionaires. On the same day, North Carolina, Florida, Iowa and Arizona approved tax cuts or limits with majorities above 60%.
The paradox is striking. The state that left Republicans with **3 of 52** seats in the House of Representatives said no to a tax that **Bernie Sanders** supported during the campaign. It is not a blanket rejection of the left: it is a rejection of this specific rate, which applies once to assets, not income.
## A one-time tax that failed to convince
The proposal taxed the wealth of billionaires and was to be collected only once. **56%** voted against it. Sanders got involved in favor, but the result does not match expectations: in California, a state where the Democratic vote is a broad majority, the measure did not pass the ballot box test.
## North Carolina caps income tax at 3.5%
In North Carolina, where the Democratic Senate candidate won by **20 points**, **62%** voted to reduce the state income tax and cap it at **3.5%**. The same electorate that gave that advantage to the Senate approved a fiscal ceiling that effectively cuts public revenue.
## Florida, Iowa and Arizona also cut taxes
In Florida, **62%** backed a significant reduction in property taxes on primary residences that could cost the state up to **$8 billion**. In Iowa, a rural state that also turned its back on Republicans, voters approved requiring **two-thirds** of the vote for any tax increase. In Arizona, **61%** voted to lower and cap the sales tax on food at **2%** and to force a referendum to approve any tax on food and beverages.
## What the ballots say
The pattern repeats: specific cuts, with clear figures, pass with broad majorities even in states where the Democratic vote advances. The Californian tax was the opposite: a new mechanism, applied once and on wealth. The lesson is not that the electorate is right-wing. It is that the fine print of the tax matters more than the label of who defends it.
The paradox is striking. The state that left Republicans with **3 of 52** seats in the House of Representatives said no to a tax that **Bernie Sanders** supported during the campaign. It is not a blanket rejection of the left: it is a rejection of this specific rate, which applies once to assets, not income.
## A one-time tax that failed to convince
The proposal taxed the wealth of billionaires and was to be collected only once. **56%** voted against it. Sanders got involved in favor, but the result does not match expectations: in California, a state where the Democratic vote is a broad majority, the measure did not pass the ballot box test.
## North Carolina caps income tax at 3.5%
In North Carolina, where the Democratic Senate candidate won by **20 points**, **62%** voted to reduce the state income tax and cap it at **3.5%**. The same electorate that gave that advantage to the Senate approved a fiscal ceiling that effectively cuts public revenue.
## Florida, Iowa and Arizona also cut taxes
In Florida, **62%** backed a significant reduction in property taxes on primary residences that could cost the state up to **$8 billion**. In Iowa, a rural state that also turned its back on Republicans, voters approved requiring **two-thirds** of the vote for any tax increase. In Arizona, **61%** voted to lower and cap the sales tax on food at **2%** and to force a referendum to approve any tax on food and beverages.
## What the ballots say
The pattern repeats: specific cuts, with clear figures, pass with broad majorities even in states where the Democratic vote advances. The Californian tax was the opposite: a new mechanism, applied once and on wealth. The lesson is not that the electorate is right-wing. It is that the fine print of the tax matters more than the label of who defends it.
Also available in: Deutsch
Summary of a discussion on Burbuja.info - Foro de economía, actualidad y política., translated from Spanish and reviewed before publication. Read the full discussion (1 replies).
More summaries
-
Italy plans 26% exit tax on unrealised gains for those leaving
Italy proposes a 26% exit tax on unrealised capital gains for estates above 800,000 euros that leave the country from 2027.
-
France passes first reading of 5.5-cent-per-GB levy
A French amendment approved in first reading would tax data at 5.5 cents per GB: up to €0.77 per film, on theoretical calculations. The Government opposes it.
-
Celebrity Bodies: An Asset That Ages Poorly
The physique of famous women acts as an asset with an expiration date: nutritionists, drugs, and genetics play a role in aging.
-
Spain's Universal Healthcare Campaign in Arabic Sparks Debate
Spanish government promotes universal healthcare in Arabic amid complaints of long waiting lists and political motives.
-
Spain's State Secretary for Communication accused of leaking train crash audio
Lydia del Canto, Spain's State Secretary for Communication, is accused by media outlets of leaking sealed audio from the fatal train accident.
-
Spanish Hospital Urgencies Report Surge in Medical Tourism
A national medicine prize winner warns that emergency rooms are treating serious patients arriving directly from airports. The reality behind medical tourism.