Five measures on November’s ballot will battle over who should pay the most in taxes in California and who should control the power to raise taxes.
These measures largely concern the state’s wealthiest and how much they will have to pay in taxes, so most of us may not pay these taxes, but the outcome of these measures can determine the future of state funding for services like public education, health care and food assistance.
“Taxes are how we fund public services,” said Kayla Kitson, a tax policy analyst at California Budget and Policy Center. “The efforts to make it harder to raise taxes mean it would make it harder to fund public services that support things like health and human services and education and at the local level, parks and public safety and housing. So people should be paying attention not just to the tax itself, but to what the tax supports and what it means if there are less opportunities to raise revenue.”
One problem is that tax measures are notoriously convoluted and often confusing, and this year, if you vote for certain measures, they could undo other measures on the ballot, even if they both pass.
Here is a breakdown of the five state tax measures, what they will fund if they pass and how some of them are tangled together to help you decide which ones you should vote for:
Prop 3: Continue an existing tax on high earners
Prop 3 would remove the expiration date on the higher income tax rates that California voters approved in 2012 and renewed in 2016. Those rates are currently set to end after 2030.
Only the top 2% of earners — roughly $371,000 of taxable income for a single person, or about $743,000 for a married couple filing together — pay the higher rate.
The tax brings in roughly $5 to $15 billion a year that goes into the state’s general fund, which pays for schools and community colleges, and programs like Medi-Cal that offer health coverage for low-income Californians.
The measure sends the money to schools first, freeing up other state money for everything else, so it supports the whole budget, Kitson said.
According to the California Budget and Policy Center, this tax has also helped pay for:
California’s Earned Income Tax Credit, which boosts pay for low-wage workers
More child care slots for families with low incomes
Homelessness funding for cities and counties
Restored Medi-Cal dental and vision benefits
Higher cash grants for very poor families, seniors and people with disabilities
If the measure fails, the first hit to state revenue would come in 2031. Losing $5 to $15 billion a year would make it harder to protect all of the programs above, especially with federal health and food cuts. Schools alone could see $2 to $6 billion less per year, according to the Budget Center. Without the rates, the richest 1% of Californians would get an average tax cut of nearly $59,000 a year.
“It’s important for schools, but also for basically everything else that is funded by the state’s general fund,” Kitson said.
Who’s for it
California Teachers Association, California School Employees Association, California State PTA, California Democratic Party, California Medical Association, according to CalMatters.
Who’s against it
California Taxpayers Association and Reform California, according to CalMatters.
Prop 40: One-time tax on billionaires
This is probably the tax measure you’ve heard the most about — though many of the mailers and ads you’ve seen against it contain misleading information. This measure would levy a one-time 5% tax on the wealth of billionaires. That means a tax on what they own, like stocks, company shares, expensive art, and not just the income they earn. It would be the first wealth tax of its kind attempted by a state in the country, Kitson said.
Only billionaires who were living in California on January 1, 2026, would pay this tax. That’s only roughly 200 to 250 people. They can pay all at once or spread it over five years. Their homes and other real estate, retirement accounts and pensions, and property kept outside California wouldn’t be taxed, according to the Budget Center.
The money is specifically earmarked — or set aside — for specific things. The vast majority of the revenue, 90%, would go toward health care, including protecting Medi-Cal and clinics and hospitals that serve low-income patients and would be impacted by the loss of federal funding for these programs. The remaining 10% of the revenue would go to food assistance and/or schools. This could include CalFresh and free school meals. But the measure doesn’t say how to split it, so all of the funds could go to food assistance or all to schools.
Federal cuts could cause about 1.3 million Californians to lose Medi-Cal coverage by 2029-2030. More than 3 million households could lose some or all of their food assistance. Prop 40 is meant to soften those blows, according to the Budget Center.
Nobody really knows how much the measure will raise. The state’s nonpartisan budget analyst says “tens of billions” of dollars. Backers of the measure say about $100 billion over five years, CalMatters reports, while the conservative think tank, the Hoover Institute, says closer to $40 billion.
“What happens when the one-time tax expires is another question because, assuming the federal government hasn’t restored any of those cuts, the state would have to find another source of revenue to prevent cuts that would harm people,” Kitson said, describing one of the measure’s concerns.
The measure will likely also be challenged in court. If billionaires leave the state, the state could lose income tax money in the future, though the state’s budget analyst estimates under $1 billion a year.
It’s a first-of-its-kind tax in the country, so there’s a lot of uncertainty, Kitson said.
Who’s for it
SEIU-United Healthcare Workers West (which put it on the ballot), AFSCME California, Teamsters California, California Democratic Party, Sen. Bernie Sanders, according to CalMatters.
Who’s against it
California Teachers Association, California Medical Association, Planned Parenthood Affiliates of California, California Business Roundtable, California Professional Firefighters, State Building and Construction Trades Council, Gov. Gavin Newsom, according to CalMatters.
Prop 41: Audits of new tax programs and a block on Prop 40
This measure sounds like it focuses on keeping new tax programs accountable, but a less-advertised part of it would cancel out Prop 40, even if both pass.
The first part of Prop 41 calls for the state auditor to review any program that would get money from a new special tax — i.e. a tax with a specific purpose — before voters decide on it. After that, the state auditor would conduct audits every four years. Each audit must suggest ways to cut the program’s costs by at least 10%, according to the Budget Center.
“If a program is already operating pretty efficiently, cutting it by 10% might cut into core services and actually reduce the number of people that can be served or reduce the quality of services,” Kitson said, though she added that lawmakers would not be required to follow the audit’s advice.
The second part would implement a cap on how much the state can spend, canceling out Prop 40. Since 1979, the state has had a spending limit, and if tax money goes over the limit, the excess is split between tax refunds and schools. But some measures, like Prop 40, say its money doesn’t count toward the limit. Prop 41 cancels any new tax that makes that exclusion. If Prop 41 passes with more votes than Prop 40, it will cancel out the wealth tax.
Prop 41 doesn’t result in anyone directly paying new taxes, nor does it fund any new programs or services, but if it passes, it could make new taxes harder to pass, and programs like health care, housing or food assistance that depend on them could be cut by audit recommendations. Audit costs would come out of the state’s general fund or the new tax if it passes.
Who’s for it
Reform California, Google co-founder Sergey Brin, and Wonderful Company CEO Stewart Resnick, according to CalMatters.
Who’s against it
SEIU-United Healthcare Workers West and the California Democratic Party, according to CalMatters.
Prop 42: Ban on new state taxes on things people own, and on retroactive taxes
This measure would stop the state from creating new taxes on owning things like stocks, business shares or art and from creating new retroactive taxes. The ballot calls it a “personal property” ban, but it wouldn’t change the property tax on homes, according to CalMatters.
“A lot of tax laws in general do involve some type of retroactivity, like they look back towards the beginning of the tax year, and that prevents this like massive avoidance and evasion from taking place,” said Kitson about the retroactive ban.
The measure wouldn’t fund anything, but the state’s own estimate is that tax revenue might not grow as much in the future because the ban would bind lawmakers for good and the state would lose options for raising money in a budget crisis. If the measure passes with more votes than Prop 40, it would cancel it out, but both Prop 41 and Prop 42 can be passed and implemented together.
Voters could change the rule later with a constitutional amendment, but lawmakers couldn’t. And tax laws often reach back to the start of the tax year to stop people from dodging them, so a ban on that could make future taxes harder to collect, according to the Budget Center.
Kitson noted that the advertising for Prop 42 implies that Prop 40 would impact people’s retirement funds, which isn’t true since retirement is exempt under the wealth tax.
Who’s for it
Reform California, Building a Better California, Sergey Brin, Peace Officers Research Association of California, California Professional Firefighters, State Building and Construction Trades Council, according to CalMatters.
Who’s against it
SEIU-United Healthcare Workers West and the California Democratic Party, according to CalMatters.
Prop 43: Two-thirds vote needed for locally proposed special taxes
Local taxes with a specific purpose already need a two-thirds vote when a city or county puts them on the ballot. Courts have ruled that’s not true when residents gather signatures and put a measure on the ballot themselves. Those have passed and can pass with a simple majority. Prop 43 would require two-thirds for measures voters put on the ballot, starting in 2027, according to CalMatters.
If it passes, the measure could impact community-funded services like housing and homelessness programs, parks, public safety, and school parcel taxes. Many local measures addressing these issues in recent years have passed with between 50% and two-thirds of the vote. They’d likely have failed under the new rule, Kitson said.
Who’s for it
Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, Reform California. They say special interests use low-turnout elections to pass taxes, according to CalMatters.
Who’s against it
California Democratic Party and SEIU Local 1000. They say it would let a minority block what most voters want, according to CalMatters.
What happens if I vote for more than one tax proposition?
If you vote yes on...Prop 3 and Prop 40
Both can pass and both take effect. They tax different people in different ways and don’t cancel each other.
If you vote yes on...Prop 40 and Props 41 or 42
They directly conflict. If Prop 41 or 42 gets more yes votes than Prop 40, Prop 40 can be canceled even if it passes.
If you vote yes on...Prop 41 and Prop 42
Both can pass and take effect. They don’t cancel each other, but together they would block Prop 40.
If you vote yes on...Prop 43
Stands alone. It doesn’t conflict with the others.