To the editor: The controversy over the proposed wealth tax on California’s billionaires captures deep frustrations about healthcare-funding shortfalls (“Billionaire tax proposal sparks soul-searching for Californians,” Jan. 2). Supporters see it as a path to shore up Medi-Cal, whereas critics warn it may disrupt innovation and drive expertise away. I share the objective of sustainable healthcare help, however a billionaire-only tax faces authorized uncertainty and income volatility and dangers capital flight.
Because the Okay-shaped financial system has benefited larger earners, many working Californians can not afford healthcare. By onerous work but additionally unearned benefits, I’ve benefited from that divide.
As an alternative choice to the proposed billionaire tax, a 0.25% state earnings surtax on earnings above $400,000 may elevate comparable funds whereas spreading duty throughout roughly 700,000 households. Somebody incomes $500,000 would contribute $250 yearly — lower than many month-to-month automotive funds.
Medi-Cal’s sustainability depends upon dependable income and broad civic help. True solidarity means those that’ve prospered contribute proportionally, not pitting teams in opposition to each other. A shared base strengthens each funding stability and public belief.
Thomas Klitzner, Culver Metropolis
..
To the editor: It’s onerous to learn the whining from billionaires against a one-time tax that will assist present healthcare to the state’s most susceptible populations. Billionaires are threatening to take their riches out of state if this have been to go. We’re speaking about roughly 200 individuals with greater than they may spend in a lifetime. What’s significantly galling to me is that I by no means hear any billionaires complain in regards to the many tax breaks President Trump has given them.
The One Large Lovely Invoice Act is barely lovely for the wealthy. In line with an evaluation by the Joint Committee on Taxation, below the act, a mean family making lower than $15,000 per yr will see a tax improve of greater than 9% in 2027. In the meantime, individuals making greater than $1 million a yr will see their taxes go down by $97,000. Once more, I haven’t personally examine or heard anybody making greater than $1 million expressing opposition to their very own tax break. And with this new proposal, solely billionaires will likely be affected.
The ultra-rich Californians say they’re bored with “feeling focused.” What in regards to the residents working two jobs a day to afford meals, little one care and healthcare whereas the federal government cuts SNAP advantages and Reasonably priced Care Act subsidies? The place is the compassion? The place is the humanity?
Peggy Jo Abraham, Santa Monica
..
To the editor: Cities, states and international locations that levy large taxes on the wealthy drive their millionaires and billionaires to tax havens. Town of Los Angeles put a “mansion tax” on its luxurious houses. What adopted was luxurious owners like Brad Pitt and Mark Wahlberg promoting their houses in L.A. proper earlier than the tax took impact. Slowly however absolutely, the wealthy L.A. people are shifting to cities like Calabasas or to seaside cities.
Now, the state needs to tax billionaires to the tune of 5% to prop up Medi-Cal. Now greater than ever, states like Texas and Florida, which don’t have any state earnings taxes, are wanting good to California billionaires who don’t wish to pay tens of thousands and thousands to bolster their state’s financial system. As I see it, the billionaires make use of tens of 1000’s of individuals in California, so the politicians ought to cease incentivizing a few of their greatest employers to go away the state.
Mark Walker, Yorba Linda
..
To the editor: To those that say {that a} wealth tax on billionaires will kill entrepreneurship and innovation, I’d prefer to remind them of a 2025 examine by the nonpartisan Rand group that regarded into earnings and wealth inequality. It concluded that, from 1975 to 2023, about $79 trillion in wealth was transferred upward from the underside 90% of People to the highest 1% of People. Isn’t this obscene?
Billionaires and large companies complaining that such a wealth tax would quantity to a horrible class battle don’t point out that we’ve been in a category battle for many years — nevertheless it’s been one-sided, waged by the wealthy in opposition to peculiar People. A wealth tax on billionaires that will barely contact the huge fortunes they’ve could be a great begin in correcting that loopy imbalance.
Bear in mind: The better the wealth hole in a rustic, the extra possible that nation is to show away from democracy and embrace autocracy, as we’re at present seeing right here.
Zareh Delanchian, Tujunga
