In a Long thread Posting on X on Monday, Zucman wrote that he was “shocked” by Newsom’s “efforts to defend Peter Thiel and Mark Zuckerberg at the expense of the health of Californians,” referring to two of the state’s most prominent billionaires. I have thailled Donated millions To an industry group looking to defeat the ballot initiative, which would use revenue from a wealth tax to offset the effects of federal Medicaid cuts approved by Trump and congressional Republicans last year.
“Yet you are now devoting all your energy to preventing this ballot initiative from taking place and depriving Californians of the opportunity to express their democratic will next November,” Zucman wrote. “You have chosen to protect California’s billionaires at the expense of the health of Californians.”
The economist warned that Newsom, by strongly opposing California’s proposed billionaire tax, is lending credence to “familiar conservative arguments against taxing large wealth: the threat of capital flight, tax avoidance, damage to growth, etc.”
“Instead of strengthening these arguments, you could have chosen to challenge them,” Zucman wrote. “Take the risk of tax flight, a classic objection. It doesn’t actually exist.” “Besides the ideological victory you risk handing Trump, you may also be handing him a political victory,” he added.
Politically, Zucman warned Newsom that he would oppose the proposed wealth tax — which he has proven It is very popular This trend among potential Democratic voters threatens to give Trump and his right-wing allies a political victory by weakening momentum for a wealth tax, not only in California, but beyond.
“If ‘yes’ prevails,” Zucman said, “California’s tax could quickly inspire similar efforts in other states.” “Ultimately, this process could pave the way for a federal tax on extreme wealth. That is.” Exactly what happened “More than a century ago with a progressive income tax.”
“The world is watching,” the economist added. “In the struggle between democracy and oligarchy, one must choose a side. I hope you will choose our side.”
Zucman has been vocal in supporting California’s proposed wealth tax, he wrote New York Times editorial pages Last month, along with fellow economist Emmanuel Saez, the proposed tax would be “miniscule compared to recent wealth gains for billionaires.”
“In the past three years alone, the total wealth of California billionaires has risen by a staggering 144%, to more than $2 trillion,” the economists wrote. “Critics of the ballot measure have expressed concerns that even a small number of billionaires leaving the state would lead to lower state tax revenues overall. Their calculations don’t square with reality. California’s billionaires currently pay such a low tax rate that even if they all left the state, it would take 25 years for the loss of their tax payments under the current set of rules to exceed the amount the state would collect if a one-time tax passes this fall.”
“Defending 200 billionaires at the expense of millions of Californians who will lose health care absent a billionaire tax is not a valid position for the governor or the state of California.”
Last week, organizers of the Wealth Tax Initiative offered to withdraw its proposal if Newsom threw his support behind legislation that would impose a 2% tax on California billionaires — a compromise plan that the governor quickly rejected.
“The governor supports making the wealthiest Americans pay their fair share, but this poorly designed state-only measure will defund teachers, schools, clinics and public safety,” Newsom spokeswoman Tara Gallegos said. “Changing the tax rate does not change the fundamental flaws of this measure that harm California workers.”
Susan Jimenez, chief of staff of the Service Employees International Union-United Healthcare Workers West — the union leading the ballot initiative — responded, accusing Newsom’s office of “engaging in Trump-like disinformation tactics, which is sad and indefensible.”
“The billionaire tax explicitly funds clinics, hospitals, schools, teachers and food aid worth billions,” Jimenez said in an emailed statement. “All objective reports have shown that the wealth tax raises billions to fund health care, education, and food assistance — and the revenues that would be raised far exceed any potential erosion of the income tax — in large part because billionaires pay very little relative income tax.”
“Defending 200 billionaires at the expense of millions of Californians who will lose health care in the absence of a billionaire tax is not a defensible position for the governor or the state of California,” Jimenez added.
Source link
