Business
California billionaire tax proposal attracts 1.5 million signatures. Here’s what happens next
California, home to the ultra-rich in Silicon Valley and Hollywood, is embroiled in a heated fight over whether to tax billionaires to fund healthcare.
This week, supporters of the proposed billionaire tax began submitting nearly 1.6 million signatures, nearly twice the number needed to qualify for the November ballot.
Election officials now need to verify that the signatures are valid for the initiative to land on the ballot.
The proposal would impose a one-time tax of up to 5% on taxpayers and trusts with assets valued at more than $1 billion, with some exclusions, such as property.
Supporters of the tax, including the Service Employees International Union-United Healthcare Workers West, say it would raise $100 billion, offsetting federal funding cuts to healthcare. A small portion of the funds would also go toward education and state food assistance.
If the proposal makes it to the ballot, it sets the stage for an intense, costly battle over whether the state’s billionaires should pay for services that lower-income residents depend on. Some tech moguls have pushed back against the idea and threatened to move. Some have already moved.
Voters will probably be bombarded with political ads and arguments from opposing sides as the battle intensifies.
Here’s what could happen next:
What are supporters arguing?
Supporters of the billionaire tax are tapping into people’s frustrations about healthcare and wealth inequality. They’ve pushed back against the idea that billionaires can avoid the tax by moving, noting that it applies to billionaires residing in California as of Jan. 1, 2026.
“When funding is cut, it brings a world of pain,” said Mayra Castañeda, an ultrasound technologist and a member of SEIU-United Healthcare Workers West, in a statement. “It means longer ER waits, fewer healthcare workers, rural hospitals shutting down, delayed care and lives lost that could have been saved.”
Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders has backed the idea.
“At a time of massive income and wealth inequality, the richest people in our country must start paying their fair share of taxes,” he posted on social media site X on Monday.
What are opponents arguing?
Opponents say the tax could harm California’s economy and leadership in innovation without addressing the state’s financial woes.
“Because the state relies so heavily on high-income-earner tax revenue, this measure could lead to reduced budget revenue in the long term as highly mobile wealthy individuals leave the state to avoid this new tax,” said Rob Lapsley, president of the bipartisan California Business Roundtable.
The Legislative Analyst’s Office said last year that it is hard to predict the exact amount the state will collect because of factors such as fluctuating stock prices, which affect wealth. In a December letter, the office said the state would probably collect tens of billions of dollars from the wealth tax, but it could also lose other tax revenue.
California Gov. Gavin Newsom opposes the wealth tax proposal. Earlier this year, he told Bloomberg he had concerns about how the proposal had been drafted. He also expressed fears that wealthy taxpayers will move out of the state.
“The impact of a one-time tax does not solve an ongoing structural challenge,” he told the news outlet.
How much are opponents spending to fight the billionaire tax proposal?
Billionaires are spending millions of dollars to fund groups that are fighting the proposal or promoting other solutions they say would address wealth inequality.
In late December, PayPal and Palantir co-founder Peter Thiel contributed $3 million to the California Business Roundtable, which is opposing the billionaire tax, according to spending data filed with the secretary of state.
In March, former Google Chief Executive Eric Schmidt donated $1 million to that group. Other tech executives have contributed hundreds of thousands of dollars this year. It’s unclear how much of that money goes toward opposing the tax since the donation was made to the entire group.
Since January, tech executives, venture capitalists and business leaders have donated roughly $93 million to a nonprofit called Building a Better California, according to data on the secretary of state’s website. A large chunk of that funding came from Google co-founder Sergey Brin, who donated $57 million to the nonprofit. Executives from DoorDash, Ripple, Stripe and other companies have also contributed to the group.
Building a Better California’s website outlines policies it supports, such as expanding affordable housing and more transparency in state government. The group has told donors that it offers “near-term and longer-term protection against wasteful government spending and any and all new taxes on personal property and personal assets.”
Brin, who relocated to Nevada last year, told the New York Times that he fled “socialism” when his family left the Soviet Union in 1979, and he doesn’t “want California to end up in the same place.”
Are there other proposals that could kill the billionaire tax?
Yes. Another initiative, known as the “Improving Transparency, Effectiveness & Efficiency in California Government Act,” could nullify the billionaire tax act.
It would prevent new taxes from being exempt from a voter-approved state spending limit, in contrast to the billionaire tax measure.
Supporters of the transparency act, including Building a Better California and Inland Empire Economic Partnership, plan to submit about 1.5 million signatures to county election officials this week.
If voters approve conflicting ballot measures, the one with more yes votes would take effect.
How much have groups spent on a ballot measure in the past?
Hundreds of millions of dollars has been spent on ballot measures in the past. In 2020, a record $200 million was spent on Proposition 22.
The initiative, funded by Uber, Lyft, DoorDash and other businesses, allowed gig companies to classify their workers as contractors rather than employees.
With the battle over the billionaire tax expected to heat up, spending on both sides is likely to climb.
Times staff writer Seema Mehta contributed to this report.
Business
Orange County real estate investor pleads not guilty in $100 million bank fraud case
An Orange County real estate investor accused of criminally defrauding an Arizona bank of nearly $100 million pleaded not guilty Monday and remains in custody.
Mahender Makhijani, 44, of Corona del Mar — who also was ordered by an arbitrator to pay $1.34 billion in a separate civil fraud case — was arraigned in Santa Ana federal court on two charges.
He is accused of bank fraud and making a false statement to a bank in a June 8 case involving a $100 million real estate loan made by Phoenix-based Western Alliance Bank. He was taken into custody on June 10.
Makhijani is accused of providing bogus collateral for the October 2024 loan now in default. In a civil lawsuit, Western Alliance said the outstanding balance as nearly $99 million.
Prosecutors say he falsified title insurance policies that showed the bank would have a first lien on the underlying collateral if the loan went bad, when in fact it did not.
A trial was set for August 11 before U.S. District Judge David O. Carter in Santa Ana.
Michael Schachter, his criminal defense attorney, did not respond to messages seeking comment.
In the civil case, an arbitrator in May ordered Makhijani to pay Laguna Beach real estate mogul Mohammad Honarkar $1.34 billion after ruling he had fraudulently induced him into a 2021 joint venture — and then wrested control and lost to creditors more than two dozen properties Honarkar had owned.
Makhijani has not been criminally charged in that case, but prosecutors alleged in an affidavit in support of the bank fraud charges that he used “force and threats” in his dealings with Honarkar and others — including taking over the landmark Hotel Laguna in 2023 that Honarkar was renovating.
Prosecutors sought to hold Makhijani without bail after his arrest.
The affidavit noted he is a legal Indian immigrant with a home and bank accounts in that country, has access to private jets and threatened to “run away” if caught in a difficult situation.
The request was denied and he was granted $500,000 bail.
However, Makhijani remains in custody after a hearing sought by prosecutors last month before Magistrate Judge Autumn Spaeth.
The judge declined to accept a $450,000 cashier’s check submitted by a Makhijani associate for the bail, finding insufficient proof the source of the funds was legitimate, according to court records.
Makhijani is not prominent outside Orange County real estate circles, but he established a thriving distressed-assets business over the last decade that attracted prominent Southern California real estate investors.
Prosecutors said it paid for a lifestyle that included two multimillion-dollar homes in Corona del Mar, a luxury apartment in Newport Beach and various luxury vehicles.
As of last month, prosecutors had not fully traced his assets, which they believe are not held in his name and some of which may be in India.
The businessman employed an array of shell companies and strawmen to sign documents on his behalf, and to stand in for him as operators of his companies, according to the affidavit.
Makhijani told an associate he took extra precautions because wanted to insulate himself from litigation and that “they were sharks in the distressed world who took advantage of people,” the affidavit stated.
Business
Many indie festival films struggle to get distribution. Alamo Drafthouse is trying to change that
Dine-in movie theater chain Alamo Drafthouse Cinema is launching a new initiative to show unreleased independent films that had successful festival runs, a move that comes as specialty films have struggled to gain distribution.
The Alamo Exclusives program, announced Wednesday, will give limited theatrical runs to films that showed at festivals including Sundance, the Toronto International Film Festival, Tribeca Festival and South by Southwest festival, as well as Alamo’s own Fantastic Fest.
The idea is to help showcase films that received critical acclaim, but did not secure distribution or acquisition deals. The chain will not acquire these films, but instead will enter into agreements with filmmakers to exhibit their films on Alamo Drafthouse screens. By showing these films to audiences on the big screen, these films could get the momentum they need for further opportunities.
The program’s first film will be the documentary “Butthole Surfers: The Hole Truth and Nothing Butt,” which debuted last year at South by Southwest and chronicles the history of the punk rock band.
The film will be shown in Alamo Drafthouse theaters for a limited time later this summer.
The Austin-based chain, which is owned by Sony Pictures, has a long history of curating indie films for its audiences, giving Alamo Drafthouse confidence that its viewers want to see these kinds of movies, company chief executive Michael Kustermann said in a statement.
“Time and again, they’ve shown they’ll come out to support bold, original films when given the opportunity,” he said. The new Alamo Exclusives “gives us another way to champion filmmaker-driven films that deserve to be discovered and connect them with the wider Alamo Drafthouse audience.”
The initiative comes at a difficult time for indie films. Since the pandemic upended the movie business, traditional studios and distributors have had less appetite for risk, including betting on smaller indie films out of festivals.
And as the 2023 dual writers’ and actors’ strikes thinned out theatrical lineups, that aversion to uncertainty became a push for reliable and profitable hits.
“Too many incredible films premiere at festivals and then never receive the theatrical life they deserve,” Lisa Dreyer, director of Fantastic Fest and film innovation at Alamo, said in a statement. “We are actively searching for films across all genres, from horror to comedy, to everything in-between, to champion in this new, exciting way.”
Business
FDA escalates recall of Utz brand potato chips before July Fourth holiday
The recall of a popular chip brand over salmonella concerns was recently upgraded to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s highest level, just ahead of the Fourth of July holiday and countless backyard barbecues.
On June 24, the FDA designated the recall of several varieties of Zapp’s and Dirty brand potato chips as Class I, meaning it’s “a situation in which there is a reasonable probability that the use of or exposure to a violative product will cause serious adverse health consequences or death.”
FDA has classified the following items as Class I:
Zapp’s
- 1.5-ounce Zapp’s Bayou Blackened Ranch Kettle Chips
- 2.5- and 8-ounce Zapp’s Bayou Blackened Ranch Potato Chips
- 1.5- and 8-ounce Zapp’s Big Cheezy Potato Chips
Dirty
- 1.5- and 2-ounce Dirty Brand Salt and Vinegar Potato Chips
- 2-ounce Dirty Maui Onion Chips
- 2-ounce Dirty Sour Cream and Onion Potato Chips
The chips are produced by Utz Quality Foods, LLC, which on April 28 issued a recall after learning “that a seasoning containing dry milk powder, sourced from California Dairies, Inc. and supplied by a third-party supplier, may contain the presence of Salmonella.”
Salmonella can lead to sometimes deadly infections in elderly people, young children and those with weakened immune systems, according to the FDA.
More than 680,000 bags are included in the recall.
Anyone who has these products should not eat them and should discard them immediately.
What to look for
Salmonella is a foodborne illness that can be fatal to young children, pregnant women, older adults and people with weakened immune systems, according to the National Institutes of Health.
Symptoms may develop 12 to 72 hours after infection, according to the FDA.
The FDA said that people with strong immune systems infected with salmonella may experience fever, diarrhea (which may be bloody), nausea, vomiting and abdominal pain. The illness can last four to seven days.
In rare cases, the infection may produce more severe illnesses such as arterial infections, endocarditis and arthritis, the agency added.
What to do if infected
If you contract salmonella, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommends drinking plenty of fluids to prevent dehydration.
The CDC advises consulting a doctor before taking antidiarrheal medicine or antibiotics. If severe symptoms continue after two days, seek medical help, the agency says.
Because those with diarrhea can spread salmonella to others, it’s also recommended to avoid sharing food or preparing meals for others, sexual contact and swimming in public pools, and to stay home while sick.
Times staff writer Jasmine Mendez contributed to this report.
-
Politics49 seconds ago
Preliminary Hearing for Man Accused of Killing Charlie Kirk Starts in Utah
-
Lifestyle31 minutes agoWhat a divorce coach wishes couples knew before ending a marriage
-
Technology39 minutes agoHoto’s PixelDrive screwdriver is down to $60, matching its best price
-
World46 minutes agoCuba plunges into third major blackout this year as power crisis worsens
-
Politics49 minutes agoTop Platner ally turns on him after bombshell rape allegation rocks campaign: ‘Red line’
-
Health54 minutes agoExperimental vaccine shows promise against dangerous intestinal illness
-
Sports1 hour agoEngland’s Jordan Henderson officially ruled out after freak fall causes fracture, opts for surgery
-
Technology1 hour agoStarship delivery robots leave campuses for cities