SACRAMENTO, CA — The No on 40 coalition released a new statewide ad today exposing its author’s callous disregard for the tax’s impact on California’s people, budget, and economy — in his own words.
“It’s going to be an experiment…If it passes, we will all be very eager to learn the lessons from the experiment,” said French economist Emmanuel Saez in the ad.
Saez is among the professors who drafted Proposition 40 and will appear later today at debates on the measure organized by USC at 12pm and UCLA at 6pm.
Proposition 40 would be the first net wealth tax in modern U.S. history, and its architects see California as the ideal place to test their idea.
A transcript of the ad, which is now airing statewide, is below.
The Prop. 40 wealth tax is just “an experiment” according to the guy who wrote it.
“It’s going to be an experiment.”
“If it passes, we will all be very eager to learn the lessons from the experiment.”
But studies show his experiment will cost $25 billion in tax revenue.
Cutting money from schools and first responders.
No wonder teachers, firefighters, and Governor Newsom are against it.
California can’t afford the wealth tax experiment.
Vote no.
While Proposition 40’s backers pitch the measure as a “temporary,” “emergency,” and “one-time” tax to voters, it is increasingly clear that its architects are hatching plans for something much bigger. As fellow French economist, Saez research partner, and Proposition 40 booster, Gabriel Zucman, recently put it: “California could absolutely implement an annual wealth tax…This one-time tax is just the starting point of what could be.” Zucman is responsible for a similar measure (known as the “Zucman tax”) that was rejected last year in France — a country that repealed its previous wealth tax in 2018.
Over the past three decades, the vast majority of countries with wealth taxes abandoned them. In 1990, 12 industrialized countries levied a wealth tax. By 2025, nine countries had repealed theirs because of capital flight, adverse effects on entrepreneurship and innovation, administrative costs, legal problems, and disappointing revenue. The few that still have these taxes face massive economic consequences. According to MIT economists, capital flight and avoidance remain a problem in countries that have maintained their wealth tax.
This ad follows others released in recent weeks by the campaign, including a spot featuring doctors and Planned Parenthood Affiliates of California warning that the measure will not improve healthcare in California and another spotlighting the strength and depth of the No on 40 coalition.
A broad and growing coalition of doctors, teachers, small business owners, community clinics, labor unions, firefighters, veterans, healthcare providers, first responders, affordable housing organizations, and working families are all opposed to Proposition 40. Together, they warn that this measure is bad for California’s budget, economy, and future.
Among the organizations opposing Proposition 40 are the California Teachers Association, California Medical Association, Planned Parenthood Affiliates of California, California Primary Care Association Advocates, California Hospital Association, California Professional Firefighters, State Building & Construction Trades Council of California, Housing California, the California School Boards Association, and many others.
The coalition’s detailed fact-check on the false and misleading claim that Proposition 40 is just a one-time tax, and that wealth taxes like this actually work is here.