Democratic politicians across the U.S. are increasingly pushing for higher taxes on the wealthy, with figures like New York Mayor Zohran Mamdani, Texas Senate candidate James Talarico, and Georgia Senator Jon Ossoff emphasizing the issue in their campaigns. However, only California currently has a billionaire tax on the ballot. This November, voters will decide whether to implement a one-time tax on the state’s roughly 250 billionaires, requiring them to pay 5% of their total assets. The proposal aims to generate significant revenue, potentially up to $13 billion, but has sparked controversy among the state’s wealthiest residents, some of whom have already moved out. Supporters of the tax include labor unions and progressive lawmakers like Senator Bernie Sanders and Representative Ro Khanna, who argue that such measures are necessary to address wealth inequality. However, moderate Democrats have shown less enthusiasm, and some critics question the long-term effectiveness of the proposal. Among them is Cristobal Young, a sociology professor at Cornell University, who has written about the movement of wealthy individuals in response to taxation. Young notes that while a one-time tax may be acceptable, the broader issue is not a one-time problem. His research suggests that taxing millionaires at the state level has historically been effective in raising revenue without causing significant migration of the wealthy. He points out that although a few billionaires, like Sergey Brin, have left California, the overall impact of such taxes on migration has been minimal. Additionally, the current proposal is unique in its potential scale, with tax bills reaching up to $13 billion, unlike previous tax efforts. A key concern raised by Young is the treatment of unrealized capital gains—gains on assets like stocks that have not yet been sold and therefore are not taxed. He explains that existing federal proposals, such as the Billionaires Income Tax Act, focus on taxing annual increases in wealth rather than total assets. This approach treats capital gains as income rather than a wealth tax. While Young acknowledges flaws in California’s proposal, he sees it as a starting point for a broader conversation about fixing gaps in the current tax system.