The wealth tax initiative is drafted to be highly punitive by including large Roth IRAs and negating the benefits of complex trust structures typically used for tax avoidance. This makes it extremely difficult for wealthy individuals to escape its reach if passed.

Congressman Ro Khanna proposes a tax on the total net worth of individuals with over $100 million. Unlike an income or capital gains tax, this targets unrealized wealth, forcing the liquidation of assets like stocks to generate the cash needed to pay the tax.

The SEIU's ballot initiative for a 5% billionaire wealth tax is likely unconstitutional. However, its real purpose may be to force wealthy individuals and politicians to publicly oppose it, creating identifiable political targets for the next election cycle.

A proposed wealth tax in California triggered a significant flight of capital and high-net-worth individuals, even without becoming law. The key factor was the failure of politicians to uniformly condemn the proposal, which was perceived as a threat to fundamental property rights, signaling a hostile business climate.

The wealthiest individuals don't have traditional paychecks. Instead, they hold appreciating assets like stock and take out loans against that wealth to fund their lifestyles. This avoids triggering capital gains or income taxes, a key reason proponents are pushing for a direct wealth tax in California to address this loophole.

The proposed tax on billionaires' assets isn't about the billionaires themselves, who hold a fraction of national wealth. The real goal is to establish the legal precedent for a private property tax. Once normalized, this mechanism can be extended to the middle class, where the vast majority of assets reside.

While popular on the American left, direct wealth taxes have a poor track record in Europe. Countries like France, Sweden, Germany, and others discarded them because they were too complex to administer and ultimately failed to generate enough revenue to be worthwhile. This historical precedent presents a significant practical challenge for proposals like the one in California.

Proponents often describe wealth taxes as a "one-time" event to make them more palatable to voters. However, the true aim is not the initial revenue but establishing a permanent legal precedent for the government to seize private property. The "one-time" language is a deliberate misdirection to cross a legal and political Rubicon.

David Friedberg argues the proposed billionaire tax isn't about targeting the wealthy, but about establishing a legal precedent for the government to audit and tax the private property of all citizens. The real target is the middle class's $170 trillion in assets, not the billionaires' $8 trillion.