This California Congressional Hopeful Opposes a Billionaire Tax. So Do His Tech CEO Backers.

Scott Wiener, the leading progressive candidate to succeed Nancy Pelosi in Congress, is opposing two wealth tax measures set to appear on California’s November ballot. The first, the Billionaire Tax Act, proposes a one-time 5% tax on the state’s billionaires’ wealth. The second, the San Francisco Overpaid CEO tax, targets companies where CEOs earn 100 times more than their median worker—a provision primarily affecting firms led by billionaire executives. Both measures aim to address funding gaps in healthcare and social services following federal Medicaid cuts under the Trump administration. Wiener’s stance aligns with the priorities of two major donors to his super PAC, Abundant Future. Crypto billionaire Chris Larsen, co-founder of Ripple Labs, has donated $100,000 to the PAC and spent over $10 million opposing the taxes through his own anti-tax PACs, including Golden State Promise and Building a Better California, the latter co-founded by Google’s Sergey Brin and former CEO Eric Schmidt. Larsen has also reportedly relocated to avoid the proposed tax. Garry Tan, CEO of Y Combinator, contributed $25,000 to Abundant Future and has publicly warned that the taxes could drive billionaires and startups out of California, though critics dismiss his claim that Google founders would owe 50% of their stock under the tax. The statewide billionaire tax would apply a 5% levy on the net worth of California’s wealthiest individuals, while the San Francisco measure focuses on corporations with extreme CEO-worker pay ratios. Both proposals are framed as solutions to budget shortfalls in public services, but their opponents argue they could harm the state’s economy. Wiener’s campaign has historically relied on support from tech donors like Larsen and Tan, who have backed his housing initiatives in the past. Analysts suggest Wiener’s opposition reflects the influence of his wealthy backers, who view the taxes as a threat to their financial interests and California’s business climate. Larsen’s financial contributions—including $5 million from Ripple and $2.5 million to Building a Better California—highlight the depth of opposition among tech elites. Meanwhile, Tan’s rhetoric emphasizes the risk of capital flight, though tax proponents reject his assertions as exaggerated. The November ballot will determine whether these measures proceed, with Wiener’s position potentially alienating progressive voters while reinforcing his ties to Silicon Valley donors. The debate underscores broader tensions between wealth redistribution efforts and the interests of California’s tech industry.