California ballot measure · November 3, 2026

California Proposition 42, explained

Ban on new state personal property and retroactive taxes. A ballot measure is a yes-or-no question put directly to voters — no candidate is involved, and the wording on the ballot is the wording that becomes law. This page shows that wording first, then what it actually changes.

The official wording

PROHIBITS NEW STATE PERSONAL PROPERTY TAXES AND CERTAIN RETROACTIVE STATE TAXES. INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT. Prohibits any new state tax (1) imposed on the ownership of personal property (all things people own other than real estate), or (2) that applies retroactively based on taxpayer's past activities. Nullifies taxes enacted after January 1, 2026 that conflict with this measure. Fiscal Impact: Possibility that tax revenues will not go up as much in the future.

This is what appears on the ballot. Everything below explains it.

What it actually means

Amends the state constitution to ban any new state tax on owning personal property, meaning everything other than real estate, including business interests, financial assets and retirement accounts. It also limits new taxes that apply to things that happened before the tax took effect. It covers taxes enacted or taking effect on or after January 1, 2026.

If you vote YES

The state could not create new taxes on owning financial assets, business interests, intellectual property or other personal property.
New state taxes could generally not apply retroactively to a taxpayer's past conduct, activities or status.
Taxes enacted or taking effect on or after January 1, 2026 that conflict with the measure would be void, and the measure says conflicting measures on the same ballot are void if it receives more yes votes.
Existing personal property taxes, such as the vehicle license fee and property tax on business equipment, would not be affected.

If you vote NO

The Legislature or voters would keep the option to create new taxes on owning financial assets or other personal property.
Existing rules on when a tax may apply retroactively would continue.
Owning stocks and investment accounts would remain untaxed unless a future law or measure, such as Proposition 40, changes that.

The numbers that matter

Fiscal effect: Possibility that future tax revenues will not rise as much; amount unclear
Applies to taxes enacted or effective: On or after January 1, 2026

Why supporters say YES

Californians already pay income tax on money when they earn it; the constitution should not allow it to be taxed again while it sits in retirement or savings accounts, and six such proposals have been introduced in recent years.
— Official argument in favor, signed by the California Small Business Association, AMVETS Department of California and the California Senior Alliance
People plan retirement over years and deserve stable rules; the measure protects pensions, 401(k)s and IRAs for workers, public safety officers and retirees.
— Official rebuttal, signed by the California Professional Firefighters, the State Building and Construction Trades Council of California and the Peace Officers Research Association of California

Why opponents say NO

The measure is designed to cancel out Proposition 40, the one-time billionaire tax, if it receives more votes; retirement savings are not at risk from Proposition 40, which applies only to billionaires.
— Official argument against, by Suzanne Jimenez, SEIU-United Healthcare Workers West
The measure is funded in part by Google co-founder Sergey Brin, who has spent more than $57 million on measures opposing a billionaire tax.
— Official rebuttal to the argument in favor, by Suzanne Jimenez, SEIU-United Healthcare Workers West

What’s genuinely uncertain

Whether Proposition 42 blocks Proposition 40 would be decided by courts if both pass; the Legislative Analyst says courts could find they conflict.
Both official arguments against were submitted by one organisation, SEIU-United Healthcare Workers West. Ballotpedia lists the Democratic Party of California and the League of Women Voters of California among opponents.
The Legislative Analyst says future revenue could be lower because the state's options are narrowed, but when and by how much is unclear.

The bottom line

A constitutional guarantee against new taxes on savings and other personal property, against permanently narrowing how the state can raise revenue, including through Proposition 40.

One neutral sentence describing the tradeoff — not a recommendation.

Sources:vig.cdn.sos.ca.gov ballotpedia.org

Checking it against the official text

The California Secretary of State publishes the certified measures and, in most states, an official voter guide with fiscal notes. That is the authoritative version. Everything here is an explanation of it, not a substitute for it.

Confirm this with the official source

Your ballot is determined by your election authority, not by us. Verify your registration, precinct, and sample ballot at California Secretary of State.

Other measures on the California ballot

Candidates on the same ballot

Everything on the California ballot →