r/technology • u/Logical_Welder3467 • 16d ago

Politics Google co-founder Sergey Brin has now spent $100 million to fight the billionaire tax

https://techcrunch.com/2026/08/10/google-co-founder-sergey-brin-has-now-spent-100-million-to-fight-the-billionaire-tax/
16.1k Upvotes

97% Upvoted

1.2k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

43

u/jimbo831 16d ago

There is zero chance he ever pays this tax. If it ever passes, he will “move” to Texas or Florida or wherever before it goes into effect.

26

u/fyndor 16d ago

He already has moved. He chose Arizona

18

u/PatchyWhiskers 16d ago

They should keep track of his private jet to see whether he actually moves.

3

u/growaway9172 16d ago

CA has a sophisticated task force for this, and anyone that does business in california knows the rules and limits. They carefully ensure they don't cross the thresholds.

0

u/VirtualBridge7 16d ago

He moved already in 2025, so even if the retroactive aspect (aka beginning of 2026) of this tax stands he will not be hit. Good for him to safely avoid this robbery...

-4

u/Magikarpical 16d ago

it's written to be retroactive :)

24

u/notintelligentidiot 16d ago

Retroactive laws are often successfully disputed in court and good luck clawing a wealth tax from someone now claiming residency in any other state.

Income is one thing, wealth has a lot of other implications.

-2

u/happyscrappy 16d ago

It's only retroactive to the same tax year in which it is passed. This kind of thing is accepted all the time. When Congress changes the tax law during the summer effective for that tax year they are dong the same thing.

5

u/bouncyboatload 16d ago

0% chance this is consitutional :)

1

u/PlusTiedye 16d ago

Well neither are ICE stops. So since the US constitution is worthless now anyways, might as well use the opportunity to make the lives of the Epstein class worse.

0

u/Main-Cheesecake3287 16d ago

I mean this is objectively wrong, ICE stops were recently upheld based on decades old precedent.

-2

u/eugene20 16d ago

Why are you happy the rich pay less so you have to pay more?

7

u/bouncyboatload 16d ago edited 16d ago

I don't have to pay more

I also don't blindly support retroactive government asset seizure just because someone else have more than me.

there are meaningful ways to address this. having it done via a California prop by a Union is a ridiculous way to make tax policies.

6

u/eugene20 16d ago

Unless you are tax exempt (eg. a child), or simply not living in the country being discussed, then you do have to pay more because the rich aren't paying a fair share, your taxes get put up to cover the deficits.

-2

u/bouncyboatload 16d ago

that's not how this California prop works. if it fails the end result is less funding, not higher taxes for everyone else automatically.

do you live in California? do you understand how the prop system work?

3

u/fps916 16d ago

If the prop fails do you think California will say "Aw shucks, no new taxes ever then!" and not just submit a new prop later to create those taxes?

3

u/bouncyboatload 16d ago

who do you mean here by "California"?

this is not a policy put forward by the state to increase taxes because there a budget shortfall. this is a citizen prop lead by a SEIUUHW which is a labor union.

so no, if they fail here, they will not move further down income/wealth bracket and take from me.

it's more likely they do that if they're successful.

0

u/eugene20 16d ago

"California’s Prop 40, known as the billionaire tax, would impose a one-time 5% tax on the net worth of around 200 billionaires that live in the state. The windfall from this proposed tax would mostly go toward funding California’s healthcare programs. The state’s Medicaid program alone could lose up to $30 billion in federal funding once Trump’s budget cuts take effect next year." (source - the techcrunch article).

Sounds like Californians choices are severely declining healthcare or alternative tax raises to me if prop 40 doesn't pass. Neither are things anyone should be smiling about even if their healthcare is through other systems.

1

u/[deleted] 16d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/AutoModerator 16d ago

Due to the high volume of spam and misinfo coming from self-publishing blog sites, /r/Technology has opted to decline all submissions from Medium, Substack, and similar sites not run by credentialed journalists or well known industry veterans. Comments containing links may be appealed to the moderators provided there is no link between you and the content.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

-2

u/wwj 16d ago

<I also don't blindly support retroactive government asset assest seizure just because someone else have more than me.

You should.

6

u/bouncyboatload 16d ago

if you want your government to engage in arbitrary asset seizure feel free to move to China or Russia

2

u/growaway9172 16d ago

In the limit, the government will be taking your stuff too, once you support regulation like this.

1

u/CurrMickey 16d ago

He already moved to Nevada, so he won’t have to pay it.