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 might 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 Ok-shaped economic system has benefited larger earners, many working Californians can not afford healthcare. By exhausting work but in addition unearned benefits, I’ve benefited from that divide.
As a substitute for the proposed billionaire tax, a 0.25% state earnings surtax on earnings above $400,000 might increase 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 is determined by 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 exhausting to learn the whining from billionaires against a one-time tax that may assist present healthcare to the state’s most weak populations. Billionaires are threatening to take their riches out of state if this had been to go. We’re speaking about roughly 200 individuals with greater than they may spend in a lifetime. What’s notably 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 Stunning Invoice Act is barely stunning for the wealthy. Based on an evaluation by the Joint Committee on Taxation, beneath the act, a median family making lower than $15,000 per 12 months will see a tax enhance of greater than 9% in 2027. In the meantime, individuals making greater than $1 million a 12 months 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 probably 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, baby care and healthcare whereas the federal government cuts SNAP advantages and Inexpensive 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 huge taxes on the wealthy drive their millionaires and billionaires to tax havens. The town of Los Angeles put a “mansion tax” on its luxurious houses. What adopted was luxurious householders 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. of us are transferring to cities like Calabasas or to seaside cities.
Now, the state desires to tax billionaires to the tune of 5% to prop up Medi-Cal. Now greater than ever, states like Texas and Florida, which haven’t any state earnings taxes, are wanting good to California billionaires who don’t need to pay tens of thousands and thousands to bolster their state’s economic system. As I see it, the billionaires make use of tens of hundreds of individuals in California, so the politicians ought to cease incentivizing a few of their finest employers to depart 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 wish to remind them of a 2025 research 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 Individuals to the highest 1% of Individuals. Isn’t this obscene?
Billionaires and massive 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 bizarre Individuals. A wealth tax on billionaires that may barely contact the huge fortunes they’ve could be a superb begin in correcting that loopy imbalance.
Keep 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 presently seeing right here.
Zareh Delanchian, Tujunga
