cross-posted from: https://sh.itjust.works/post/57052447
A Google founder has more than doubled his financial contribution to the fight against a proposed wealth tax in California. New filings with the state show that former Alphabet president Sergey Brin donated $25m to a Super Pac dedicated to blocking the tax on top of $20m he had already given.
Brin is not alone among Google’s top brass in upping his financial stake in the campaign against the ballot proposal. The company’s former CEO Eric Schmidt donated $1.02m, adding to a previous $2m contribution.
The tech titans are battling the California Billionaire Tax act, often referred to simply as the billionaire tax. It’s a proposed ballot measure that would require any California resident worth more than $1bn to pay a one-off, 5% tax on their assets to help cover education, food assistance and healthcare programs in the state. It’s sponsored by the Service Employees International Union-United Healthcare Workers West, and is still in the signature-gathering phase.
If the measure reaches the ballot and gains voters’ approval, the tax would apply to billionaires based on their residency as of 1 January 2026. For Brin, worth about $247bn, the bill would likely be upwards of $12bn. That stipulation appears to have caused him and several other billionaires to leave California at the end of last year. Brin relocated to a $42m estate on the north-eastern shore of Lake Tahoe in Nevada, and his Pac donations show Reno as his address. Schmidt’s filings show his address as West Hollywood.
Imagine spending that much money specifically to not contribute to society. And not being willing to pay for the public resources you use more than your share of.
Sorry, I can’t imagine possessing that much.
You could almost say a that would be a really unhealthy place to live when the influential and powerful in a society and country think that is the best use of their position.
People jump subway turnstiles all the time and pay money to smart accountants to choose a low tax strategy.
The desire to not pay your share is pretty common in humanity.
Dude spends 0.00018% of his worth to save 5% of his worth. If he just paid the 5% he’d be left with a paltry $235000000000. That’s hardly enough to buy eggs.
The cost of fighting it should be equal or more than what they would’ve paid in taxes, so they would be forced to just accept it instead.
The man clearly disagrees with the implication that he has too much money and he should instead be free to do with it what he pleases, which without irony, includes proving that he has too much money by spending it to lobby against us and convince us otherwise.
It’s one tax act Michael, how much could it cost?
Remember when Google used to say “Don’t be evil”?
Tax the bastard.
Techbro mind virus dissolved his humanity.
shouldn’t have pushed that stupid id verification law through tax these assholes
I find the US legal system more amusing the more I keep stumbling on these cases.
Spend enough money lobbying or just file a suit against the state, win, and you can get a law repealed.
Meanwhile, here…
The governmente draws a project of law.
The parliamente debates, votes it, discusses it in specialty commitee, votes it again, reviews it until it can get a majority to pass, gets shipped to the President for promulgation and if it gets ratified, it becomes law and is it.
You have an issue with, you draw your case against the law itself, take it to the Constitutional Court and if you have a case, the law gets to be reviewed and rectified. Not taken down: reviewed. Once a law, unless it gets completely repealed, by another law, you’re stuck with it.
The rich can lobby in your country too.
The parliamente debates, votes it, discusses it in specialty commitee, votes it again, reviews it until it can get a majority to pass,
Not enough rich people to lobby.
