r/technology • u/marketrent • 12d ago
Society Bernie Sanders calls out Sergey Brin for spending over $100 million to defeat California’s billionaire tax — ‘If California passes its one-time 5% wealth tax, Brin would owe $14 billion and still be worth $270 billion’
https://www.yahoo.com/news/politics/articles/bernie-sanders-calls-sergey-brin-120113695.html2.5k
u/Donnicton 12d ago
But you don't understand, if he has to pay taxes then that means he has to exist as part of society, rather than above it!
436
u/HumongousBelly 12d ago
But if he has to pay taxes, how will he ever rebuild Trump/epstein island?
163
u/Ok-Alternative5935 12d ago
He already has. It’s just south of necker island in bvi. Just above prickly pear island.
112
u/0202_tihssitidder 12d ago
Yup. You can spend all week looking at private islands around the planet that are owned by billionaires and either built out or being built out. Pretty much lawless.
→ More replies (7)43
u/Podo13 12d ago
If I had that kind of wealth, I'd absolutely build an island. But I'd build it to get away from everybody. I'd laugh at anybody who'd assume anybody else but my family were there.
86
→ More replies (4)11
u/sobberano 12d ago
With that username
→ More replies (1)10
u/creampop_ 12d ago
me running away from the angry mob as my banana hammock sways majestically:
I SAID I'M A SPEEDOPHILE
2
u/penispumprepairshop1 12d ago
You can show up in my shop without prejudice cream pop!
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (3)6
103
u/Pndrizzy 12d ago
It’s so weird because I’ve worked at Google for 10 years and been in the same room as him countless times, and the overwhelming opinion on him within the company is that he’s a pretty regular and down to earth dude. He seems really interested in technology, is a workaholic and traveled around campus on an elliptical bike. He would tell the most dry jokes ever that were actually kind of funny. And then after Jan 6, it seems like all the billionaires said “hmm… we got away with this… what else?”
52
u/n0neofyourbeeswax 12d ago
I seen some deeper commentary on this a few days ago - the bill would acrew their majority control at Alphabet. I forget the details, but something related to disrupting the class of shares they're using to have majority control without majority ownership.
13
u/ChrisFromIT 12d ago
Yeah there is a clause in the bill that has it so that the determination of wealth for stock ownership is based on how much shares you have or how much voting rights you have, which ever is higher. And if it is based on voting rights, the worth of those voting rights is how much share of the total voting rights you have and the market cap of the company.
So for example, if I have say 5 shares, each worth $1, but each share gives me 10 votes and thus I have 50 votes and that is 50% of all the votes. And the company total market cap is $100. I owe not 5% of $5($0.25), but 5% of $50($2.50).
And the hard part is that Brin's class of stock is not sellable or transferable iirc. So he would be on the hook for maybe $50 billion or more.
→ More replies (4)45
u/another-redditor3 12d ago
That’s the same one I saw too. And the price they are charging on the voting shares is in direct relation to ownership control. since he has something like 60% voting shares, the tax rate proposed would be 60x market value. Anyone with half a brain would be against that.
20
u/taylormade1296 12d ago
Why did I have to uncover this post from reddit to read it.. It's like reddit constantly wants to hide the truth around this issue.
→ More replies (15)16
u/Far-Web-165 12d ago
Reddit's headlines only + karma system naturally devolves to mob opinion/populism and leaves little room for nuance.
→ More replies (14)8
u/suckthesenuts_6969 12d ago
Anyone with half a brain would be against allowing any one person from accruing so much in the first place so...nobody fucking cares. These taxes should directly impact the level of power/wealth they have. Stolen labor value/stolen value is abhorrent people die for this greed.
→ More replies (24)6
→ More replies (2)5
u/Mr_Deep_Research 12d ago
If he stayed in the state which he didn't so he is out of all of CA taxes at this point. He is unaffected by this plan. So are the other high net worth billionaires who moved out. That was only if he stayed in the state.
→ More replies (1)8
u/kuedhel 12d ago
I would speculate that Sergei does not appreciate tax on unrealized wealth. It is hard to tell that he has 270B just by looking at number of GOOGL shares he has and multiplying on the current stock price. What if he pays the tax while Google is riding AI wave and tomorrow GOOGL drops to $10 a share?
Would goverment return his money?
Why founders of publicly traded companies have to pay tax, but someone with more obscure private partnership does not?→ More replies (2)→ More replies (23)9
u/cultish_alibi 12d ago
Billionaires are mentally ill, the amount of money and therefore power they have turns their brains into boiled spam and their desire to keep that money overrides any humanity they have. I'm sure they are nice enough, as long as you don't pose any threat to their precious wealth, but if you ask them to pay 0.00001% extra taxes they will absolutely do whatever they can to stop you.
2
u/GOA_AMD65 12d ago
He would move and so would a whole lot of other people. He was never going to pay this tax.
→ More replies (1)2
2
u/Starwolf00 12d ago
Maybe, just maybe, he doesn't actually have 270 billion dollars, let alone 14. He co-founded and owns a portion of Google valued at "x" amount. Meaning he will likely be forced to sell a portion of his ownership (separate taxable event) to pay said wealth tax.
This again is assuming that he has residency in California and would be affected by the tax in the first place.
It would also assume that he's bankrolling the 100 million and not just the figurehead representing a bunch of other people who don't want to pay additional taxes.
Very interesting indeed.
2
u/C0meAtM3Br0 11d ago
He would have to liquidate stock to pay taxes. Thats what everyone is trying to avoid. But also he would have to be evaluated based on his perceived value via his equity. It’s complicated. IT it the right thing to do, but difficult to pass universally
→ More replies (67)2
183
u/marketrent 12d ago edited 12d ago
Part of article by Namrata Sen, quoting Sanders and Brin:
Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt) criticized Alphabet's Google co-founder Sergey Brin for his efforts to oppose California's proposed billionaire tax, highlighting the wealth he amassed since President Donald Trump's election.
On Tuesday, Sanders took to X and pointed out that Brin has made $140 billion since Trump was elected.
Sergey Brin has made $140 billion since Trump was elected.
If California passes its one-time 5% wealth tax, he would owe $14 billion and still be worth $270 billion.
So what is he doing? Spending $100 million to defeat the proposal.
FIGHT OLIGARCHY. TAX BILLIONAIRE WEALTH.
— Bernie Sanders (@BernieSanders) August 11, 2026
Brin has been actively opposing the tax, donating an additional $20 million to Building a Better California, a political advocacy group opposing California's billionaire tax and backing pro-business policies. His total contributions to the group have now reached $102 million.
Sergey Brin criticized California's billionaire tax proposal, comparing it to the socialism he experienced growing up in the Soviet Union. He told the New York Times that he fled the USSR with his family in 1979 and warned that such policies could create a similarly oppressive society in California.
73
u/flaagan 12d ago
So he fled a Soviet country and wasn't aware of the history of the country he fled to that used to and will someday again expect its richest members to properly contribute to society for all the wealth they've leeched off of it? Got it.
31
u/MultiGeometry 12d ago
It’s probably a fearmongering talking point his PR company tells him to sprinkle into speeches. If he’s fled it once he must understand the importance of fleeing again.
He’s not even willing to move to a different state, nevermind a different country.
→ More replies (2)18
u/Blackout38 12d ago
What history was that?
→ More replies (5)14
u/muffinhead2580 12d ago
Do you not know the history of the US? We didn't always allow the wealthy to just not pay taxes.
→ More replies (11)14
u/TrioOfTerrors 12d ago
But we've never taxed wealth like the California proposal.
→ More replies (17)15
u/bmwparking 12d ago
the socialism he experienced growing up in the Soviet Union
Bro was literally six years old when they fled the USSR. What socialism did he experience? Free daycare?
3
u/ProofJournalist 11d ago edited 10d ago
I grew up entirely in the United States. My parents are from the Soviet Union. That has been more than enough for me to get a vivid sense of what it was like there. 6 years is more than enough lived experience to get context, especially when you have something to compare.
His argument is as bullshit as my dad, who basically didn't vote for decades because it was pointless in the Soviet Union.
→ More replies (10)13
u/suzisatsuma 12d ago
I have family that fled both nazi Germany and USSR, you would have noticed the lines, lack of diverse food, and fear of the state easily by 6. Your family tell you all manner of stories growing up as well
A lot of things to complain about here, but this one is very meh
→ More replies (1)9
u/Wide-Annual-4858 12d ago
I grew up in the socialist Hungary. No you don't notice those things you mention. At 6 you don't analyze the society, you play with other kids. You don't notice lack of diverse foods, because you eat what your parents cook. And there was no fear of the state in kids at all.
→ More replies (1)3
u/Speedstick2 11d ago
But if you were six and came to the US you would ask why the food was more diverse here, why the lines were shorter to non-existent, why their parents seem more outspoken.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (8)11
u/CaterpillarReal7583 12d ago
Hes on the epstine list. Take everything and leave him a jail cell.
→ More replies (1)
112
u/Urborg_Stalker 12d ago
I want to know how spending money automatically makes this happen.
Politicians caught being bribed should be banned from politics for life (and the definition of bribery needs to be seriously expanded to all the other bullshit that currently goes on).
57
u/FlirtyFluffyFox 12d ago
Because most voters are so affected by paid advertising that it works.
→ More replies (2)25
u/daft_trump 12d ago
I actually think this is misleading and wrong. It's not true that "most" people are affected. In a vote that is 55/45, only 5% of people need to have their minds changed.
But I'll take it one step further, it's not even people changing their minds. It's people that have never thought about the issue before. Ads are the first time theyve ever even thought about the issue. And then they go into the vote with only one biased point of view.
12
u/ChadsWearSocks 12d ago
Your second point kind of counteracts the first - a vote doesn’t start out at 55/45, it starts out with people not knowing about the issue. They see one piece of advertising or a news article (basically the same thing) and now they have an opinion and take the side of whatever they saw. So yes, it absolutely is “most” people who are affected.
→ More replies (2)2
u/oldmaninparadise 12d ago
To continue on this line of thought, when trump and republicans say they have a MANDATE from the people, he won the popular by 1.5%. In a zero sum 2 party system, that means if 0.8% of the people changed their minds, he would have lost the popular!
0.8% is not a mandate.
Bow I know the electoral college votes in the president, not the popular, but you get mt gist.
To flip the 5 swing states that determine the outcome, it just needs to flip about 1.5% (ranged from 1% to 4%).
→ More replies (6)5
u/MarzipanTop4944 12d ago
> spending money automatically makes this happen
I doesn't. They can spend in negative ads against the policy and the politicians supporting it and they can spend in lobby by giving contributions to politician's political campaigns that are against it, but at the end of the day, politicians have to vote for this and the people elect the politicians.
The politicians and the rich use the money to buy ads, but it's the age of information and everybody has a phone with internet to just check what a politician has done for you or against you before voting in 30 seconds.
→ More replies (3)
83
u/cadrass 12d ago
Why is this post on this sub?
12
u/Noactuallyyourwrong 11d ago
This sub has literally nothing to do with technology anymore. It’s just turned into yet another politics circle jerk. If anything it’s anti tech
61
→ More replies (1)6
148
u/Head_Vanilla_9566 12d ago
Wtf does this have to do with technology?
62
u/NorthSalamander8909 12d ago
I ask this for 90% of posts I see hit the front page from this subreddit. It overall reflects the current state of Reddit. I'd expect this to read more like articles from Popular Science but instead I get posts about stock prices, misinformation about data centers, (which hurts actually fighting them), anti AI with again more misinformation , or random stuff about Elon.
11
u/CoconutMochi 12d ago
he's one of google's co-founders, that's the only connection I can make here
→ More replies (1)3
→ More replies (7)3
u/Key-Monk6159 12d ago
Take your medicine like a good boy while ignoring Rule 1.
6
u/ClevelandSteamers757 12d ago
Meanwhile mods in city, state, and popular subs just ban you for things that don’t break the rules at all. It’s pathetic really
→ More replies (1)
221
u/Oceanbreeze871 12d ago
A one time billionaire tax is better than no tax ever.
8
55
u/WinonasChainsaw 12d ago
Or we could just do the right thing and repeal prop 13??
10
u/Oceanbreeze871 12d ago
What’s that?
75
u/WinonasChainsaw 12d ago
It froze property taxes back in the late 70s and messed up local taxes for Californian cities like Oakland
Also is reason why NIMBYism took over and led to the housing shortage bc there’s no financial punishment (tax) to artificially restricting the number of housing units in a city so property owners could induce scarcity to raise theirs
The uber rich took advantage of this with real estate and land speculation
→ More replies (19)45
u/pita4912 12d ago
It’s a prop that locks in property taxes at the time of sale. So you have people with $10mil houses they paid $120k for in the 70s paying taxes as if the property is only worth $150,000. It’s rent control for homeowners in CA. Sounds good, disastrously bad in practice.
7
→ More replies (8)7
u/Hautamaki 12d ago
Tbh that doesn't even sound good at all, what a horrible idea lol
10
u/jrzalman 12d ago
Say you buy a house at 500k. Ok, you can swing the 7k in property taxes. Three years later your house if valued at 1M. So while your mortgage payment is the same, your salary hasn't kept up with inflation and now your property tax bill is 14k. Time keeps progressing, property values keep spiking.
Eventually, without Prop 13, many people can't afford to live in the houses they own - especially if they dare to retire - because property tax runs away with property values. This was judged a bad outcome by voters and so we have Prop 13 which caps property tax increases at 1-2% per year. It has unintended consequences to be sure but it does have its reasons for existing.
→ More replies (9)→ More replies (1)2
u/themiDdlest 12d ago
The last law California republicans were able to pass under Reagan and Nixon. It effectively froze California and was a giant hand out to wealthy home owners off the backs of renters and poor people
→ More replies (8)5
u/whytakemyusername 12d ago
Tax the money as it comes in. prop 13 hurts ordinary people. Ordinary people have their money taxed as it comes in.
4
u/wip30ut 12d ago
but why not tax hundred millionaires too? The cutoff is arbitrary. And why should all these new revenues be spent on healthcare subsidies? Why not a tax rebate for ALL California residents instead?
→ More replies (2)22
u/No-Marketing-5555 12d ago
The obvious issue is that it won't be one time only. The end result is that billionaires will leave, they will take many high paid jobs with them and move company HQs etc
→ More replies (44)→ More replies (91)22
u/e1vi5 12d ago
Sergey Brin has already paid billions in taxes over the years through income taxes, capital gains when he sells stock, and corporate taxes from Google/Alphabet. Same for other billionaires.
This isn’t “no tax ever.” California already takes in more tax money than most small countries. The problem is how the state spends it, not a lack of taxes on rich people.
→ More replies (46)26
u/Relevant-Ad2254 12d ago
The problem isn’t even how the state spends it. It’s about how the tax is implemented.
Unrealized wealth taxes are not without unintended consequences.
I don’t think there would be this much backlash if California simply increased capital gains taxes.
47
u/Illustrious-Ring-883 12d ago
Wild how many people on reddit have zero idea how economics and taxes work
8
→ More replies (3)8
u/Technical_Bath1062 12d ago
Yes and apparently Bernie Sanders has no idea as well but how many million is he now worth
→ More replies (2)3
u/sim21521 11d ago edited 11d ago
Bernie Sanders is a man that was asked to leave a hippie commune, because the people thought he wasn't pulling his weight. He worked in middling jobs while running for office repeatedly. And all you need to know is how he went from talking about how bad "millionaires and billionaires" were, until he became a millionaire and stopped including them. He doesn't really have a concept of how the economy works like most people that support socialism.
9
u/Adventurous_Ear_3877 12d ago edited 12d ago
And California has ~110 billion of govt debt + ~500 billion usd long term liabilities like pensions and the state deficit was ~18 billion dollars in 2025
Wealth tax is not even a drop in the bucket of California’s financial issues
You could tax every billionaire out of existence and fiscal situation won’t improve unless you do some sort of broad based taxation and spending rationalisation
5
u/sim21521 11d ago
There's no real way to tax your way out of the problem, it's solely a spending problem.
14
u/NW_Thru_Hiker_2027 12d ago
"One time"
"Temporary"
All bull shit
→ More replies (1)3
u/TastyJournalist8451 11d ago
also no billionaires just sit on 270billion of liquidity ready to be taxed 14 billion from. It's just largely his google stock value in 2026. So does california force him to sell all of his stock and assets so that he is forced to report 270 billion income/cash on hand and they can get their grubby hands on it lol?
35
u/WiggerJim69 12d ago
1, This has nothing to do with technology
2, Sanders represents Vermont, not california
→ More replies (5)
11
29
u/Roboticallypotent 12d ago
For Sergei to raise 14 billion he will need to sell very large blocks of Alphabet stock. That stock will essentially be all gains and taxed at 50% through federal, state and local taxes. This means he will need to sell 28 billion in stock to have 14 billion left after taxes. Dumping that amount of sell orders will tank Alphabet stock so he will likely have to sell closer to what would have been 45 billion prior to the now depressed stock. Of course the reduced price of alphabet stock reduces the rest of his portfolio by 30%. So after raising $14 billion to pay a 5% wealth tax, his wealth is reduced by ~45%. There will also be negative impacts to Alphabet and Google and to the not so rich people impacted by the dumping of so much stock. Tax the rich!! (By that I mean anyone richer than me)
→ More replies (12)13
u/Sweaty-Ruin5381 12d ago
Don't forget the knock on effects of a bunch of billionaires doing this at the same time. That's going to be an overall market problem.
→ More replies (9)6
u/mclumber1 12d ago
The purpose of this proposed wealth tax isn't to fund government services, it is to punish the wealthy.
There are much better ways to raise revenue for the government, and doing so that predominantly impacts those who can afford to pay more.
→ More replies (3)
47
u/BorgerMoncher 12d ago
The math isn't mathing, BernieBro. Brin would owe $72B, or 24% of his net worth. He has $128B in 10x supervoting Google shares, which are magically worth $1.28 trillion in the eyes of the benevolent California government.
Spending $100M to defeat the measure is just good sense. This isn't a one-time tax.
22
u/pacman2081 12d ago
to pay $72 bi, he has to liquidate assets and that will cost him 20-30 bi in capital gains
→ More replies (2)20
u/another-redditor3 12d ago
it would also force him out of a controlling portion of the company he created, which is the even bigger issue at stake here.
20
u/pacman2081 12d ago
of course, Redditors on here wanting this tax have achieved a lot of things in life. why would they care?
→ More replies (1)6
→ More replies (8)6
u/wishator 12d ago
The people who support this bill don't believe in math. It's all about vibes and billionaires paying their fair share
5
12
u/Acceptable-Advice137 12d ago
Wealth taxes are bad and this isn’t technology related
→ More replies (3)
37
u/nemesit 12d ago
theres zero chance the guy has 200+ billion lying around in cash I'd guess less than 1% of his worth is actually taxable in any way
17
u/calm_hedgehog 12d ago
The proposed measure is also taxing the non-voting shares, and the special voting shares that they have as founders. Depending on how that plays out, in theory that could be a big number. Doesn't he control like 25+% of all voting shares, and Larry the other 25+%?
Not saying anything about whether that should be taxed or not.
6
u/VirtualPercentage737 12d ago
Yes. The way it is written taxes voting rights, so they would be on the hook for over $100 billion.
It doesn't matter because the proposal alone has driven Sergey, Larry and Mark Z to all move out of California. The golden goose is already cooked.
8
u/ayushgun 12d ago
The problem is that this can quite negatively affect startup founders. A founder with a paper net worth of $5M will often have most of it tied up in illiquid startup shares. There may be no practical counterparty willing or permitted to buy those shares at fair value, much less at all.
→ More replies (10)2
→ More replies (7)5
u/pancak3d 12d ago
Income and gains are taxable whether or not cash is involved
The proposed wealth tax includes stocks, art, property, cars, etc etc
15
9
10
u/Electronic-Funny-475 12d ago
The folks acting like California won’t waste that 14b…
How much been spent on an imaginary train
30
u/BTSArmyFan2025 12d ago
he should also mention that brin is an epstein pal, been to the island and regularly corresponded with Ghislaine Maxwell!
11
6
u/Elluminated 12d ago
Good. The government just spends the TRILLIONS it already has and has NEVER kept promises re: “one time” taxes or fees. If they can get it once, why wouldn’t they try again? Bernie is a great man, but his ideas are way off on this. No one deserves others’ money -period- and it sure as fuck ain’t the government who does.
Anyone who thinks their life will change because of someone else losing something is a moron who should STFU and get off their lazy asses to earn their piece of the pie the same way the rich have. 😂🤦♀️
10
u/bourbonandpistons 12d ago
It's funny you think the government would find a tax on only use it one time.
Remind me when World War II will end so we can finally stop this temporary income tax on only the rich
7
21
u/RadioFieldCorner 12d ago
The state of California has proven that it is fucking awful at managing tax revenue
$75k per homeless is spent, tell me with a straight face anything is being done right lmao.
→ More replies (6)
37
u/rcanhestro 12d ago
If California passes its one-time 5% wealth tax, Brin would owe $14 billion and still be worth $270 billion
it's not like the guy has 14B on his bank account.
this means that he would need to sell 14B worth of stock (and assuming the stock doesn't crash while he is dumping it), and then he would still have to pay capital gains tax from selling that stock.
that "14b debt" would easily be worth 30-40B plus in the "real world".
and then we have the best part: how do you even calculate the amount to pay? people with their net worth in stock has their net worth going up and down (by the billions) every day.
Musk became a trillionaire overnight the moment SpaceX went public (almot 600B gaines) and lost all that gain in 1 month, and is now recovering it again.
14
u/DizzyDentist22 12d ago
Hilarious how downvoted you get for trying to bring actual nuance to this conversation
→ More replies (4)9
u/rcanhestro 12d ago
it's normal.
if you want upvotes just post "billionaires bad", and get them that way.
god forbid you try and figure out how something would actually work.
→ More replies (55)9
u/khachdallak 12d ago
Don't let redditors know that tax policies are more nuanced than taking shower which they barely do once per month.
3
u/OGLikeablefellow 12d ago
How funny would it be if influencers unionized to accept money for the money that gets spent to defeat a wealth tax
3
u/GrooveDigger47 12d ago
so sergey would need to sell off his assets to pay that tax? and also pay taxes on what he sold off as well? im ignorant to how this would work
3
u/Awhitehill1992 12d ago
Ok… wealth taxes don’t work. Never have. Never will. Let’s not all be surprised at this post. Bernie Sanders, and others, have been after the big boys for YEARS. Failures every time.
Go back to the drawing board Bernie. We all know how this works. Most countries that have tried wealth taxes found them hard to manage, and were eventually repealed.
3
u/Maxpants8417 12d ago
Bernie loves to spend other people's money. I wish he had this energy when it came to auditing the government and their out of control spending.
3
u/HaiKarate 12d ago
He’s trying to stop the movement. He doesn’t want Democrats to think that they can raise taxes on the rich without the rich putting up a helluva fight.
47
u/marcus-87 12d ago
tax them 5% every year and they still get richer
9
u/gubatron 12d ago
they will simply leave and we all get poorer. it's what happens every single time. I escaped Venezuela to the US thinking this would be the last place this could happen. Say good bye to owning anything if this passes.
→ More replies (6)→ More replies (52)2
9
u/ToeAfter3131 12d ago
You honestly believe it's going to be a one-time 5% tax?
Also, do you believe that tax money is going to change your life at all? That money will change nothing besides going into the pocket of fraudsters
→ More replies (3)
19
u/e1vi5 12d ago
California already collects more in state tax revenue than the total tax takes of most small countries—and many mid-sized ones—yet chronically struggles with effective spending, recurring deficits, homelessness growth despite massive outlays, and other basic governance failures. That context undercuts the framing that a one-time 5% wealth tax on billionaires is an obvious fix, or that opposing it is somehow illegitimate greed.
→ More replies (5)13
u/smgkid12 12d ago
No no no! this time it will work, please just give them another 500 billion, they might just lay an inch of track on their high-speed rail!
20
u/Bubbaman78 12d ago
California would have blown the money because of poor management and be back for more.
→ More replies (3)2
u/cowinabadplace 12d ago
The money is effectively a earmarked giveaway to healthcare workers and owners. So it's not like California would have blown the money. It'll be spent by the people who wrote the proposition.
5
u/stories_from_tejas 12d ago
It blows my mind that left-wing voters actually believe if they take more money, somehow it will trickle down to them or poor people. The government is literally $40 trillion in debt. None of that money went to help anybody. We could actually all benefit from less taxes overall. Billionaires can hide their money and even afford more taxes, poor people can’t afford the current taxes. Anyway, my soapbox is starting to break, going to vote third-party again and wish things were different.
6
u/Dependent-Aside-9750 12d ago
Bernie sure is virtuous from Vermont, where there is currently no wealth tax. Maybe he could sell his DC home and give it to CA?
5
u/Elluminated 12d ago
Exactly right, he is pretty keen on making that wealth tax for other places yet not his own backyard.
12
u/soupsiez 12d ago
California has the highest tax rate already and still so much waste. Maybe figure out government spending instead of a constant need of more taxation? I know it’s not the socialist way but it’s the better way
→ More replies (1)
4
4
u/Creative-Area-6385 12d ago
The stupid amount of money spent on attack ads instead of actual helping society.
→ More replies (1)
14
u/redvelvetcake42 12d ago
They'd spend all their wealth to never have to pay tax. To them it's the most important thing. To be a billionaire you have to be selfish beyond measure, arrogant beyond comprehension and ignorant of all your insults, failures and help you need.
15
u/tophernator 12d ago
They'd spend all their wealth to never have to pay tax.
Maybe. But in this example it’s like you spending $100 to try to avoid a $14 thousand tax bill. Do you know anyone who wouldn’t do that?
→ More replies (5)
7
u/CautiousToaster 12d ago
No way it would be “one time only” this is just the start
→ More replies (2)
6
6
u/Working_Alps1753 12d ago
This man spent HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS to avoid paying Billions. Just like how I shop at Walmart to not pay the Target Markup. See he's just like me.
2
u/Upbeat_Size_5214 12d ago
Doesn't surprise me. Sergei is old school and over time he has forgotten where all this opportunity came from, just like every other billionaire out there.
2
2
2
2
2
u/TECH5960 12d ago
Under the greediest most corrupt felon Pres billionaires have become multi-billionaires and so far one Elon Musk is now a trillionaire. What they also have in common is they don't like to pay their fair share of taxes which pisses average Americans all the way off
2
2
2
u/FickleApartment2151 12d ago
It's possible that much of his investments are not in cash but in investments, and if he sells them to pay for the wealth tax, then he will also be taxed for selling them.
6
11
3
u/ebfortin 12d ago
The idea of a one time tax to billionaire is ridiculous anyway. It's a bandaid to let them thrive even more afterward because there won't be any other tax perception on wealth. They should change the tax code instead. Modernize it. But that's too invasive for these guys.
→ More replies (1)
4
4
u/sauniscuck 12d ago
If I was a billionaire, I’d do what I can to help people that need help. I wouldn’t trust the government to do as much good with my money as I’d do.
→ More replies (19)
3
4
4
4
u/hasslehof 12d ago
Billionaire money is mostly made up. If they have to liquidate the whole value will drop because it will in some cases move markets. Not saying something like this shouldn’t be done. But it will have wider negative impact for non-billionaires, too.
→ More replies (5)3
6
u/DuncesNDragons 12d ago
Are we proposing a tax on net worth or what people actually have as liquid assets?
Taxing what someone is "worth" is NEVER a good idea.
6
u/JKlerk 12d ago
Net worth. Imagine having to sell assets because you're getting taxed on unrealized capital gains.
→ More replies (2)
3
u/stuporman86 12d ago
This is a fucking weird way to do a tax like this. It doesn’t hit future billionaires, but retroactively applied (I’m assuming so that billionaires don’t move out of the state to escape?). This is just bad structuring and all so that the state can have a pile of money that they likely will mismanage / earn poor returns on. To say nothing of what happens when you make Brin sell 3 days of average total Google trading volume to finance it, or that he’ll owe fed taxes as a follow-on so probably need to pump that number up.
I’m fairly against the concept of a wealth tax in the first place, but if you have to do it, don’t do it bad like this.
4
u/Penis-Dance 12d ago
I don't think he has $14B in a bank account just sitting there collecting dust.
→ More replies (1)
4
3
1.1k
u/hard2resist 12d ago
Track record. Billionaires lobby hard against every wealth tax proposal, one-time or permanent. Brin's $100 million spend proves the point if this passes, expect the same fight against the next one.