Former Citicorp Inc. chief govt Walter Wriston as soon as mentioned “ capital goes where it’s welcome and stays the place it’s nicely handled.” The road has turn into tax-policy wallpaper. It’s, nonetheless, essentially the most helpful sentence for eager about what’s unfolding in some jurisdictions, together with sure states south of the border.
In late April, the SEIU United Healthcare Employees West introduced it had collected roughly 1.5 million signatures supporting the 2026 Billionaire Tax Act , a California poll initiative imposing a one-time five per cent tax on Californians with a internet price of US$1 billion or extra. That’s practically double the 875,000 required to qualify for the November poll, and early polling suggests it has an actual likelihood of passing.
The mechanics are aggressive. The act makes use of two separate snapshot dates: residency is mounted as of Jan. 1, 2026 (the tax obligation date), whereas internet price is measured as of Dec. 31, 2026 (the valuation date). The tax is then payable on April 15, 2027, in as much as 5 annual instalments, with a 7.5 per cent non-deductible deferral cost on any unpaid stability.
Internet price would use voting-rights values for intently held shares, a strategy the U.S. Tax Basis has said would overvalue founder stakes and will drive the wealthiest Californians to dump monumental blocks of shares to fund their payments. The drafters anchored residency to Jan. 1 to forestall an exodus, a provision unlikely to outlive evaluation.
The behavioural response is already nicely underway. Alphabet Inc. co-founders Larry Web page and Sergey Brin and Oracle Corp. founder Larry Ellison have all reportedly taken steps to depart California or have already left.
These three relocations led roughly 38 per cent of California’s billionaire wealth out the door and the state stands to yearly lose as a lot as US$4.5 billion in different tax income, offsetting any one-time haul, according to the California Tax Basis. Even Democratic Governor Gavin Newsom is opposed.
This isn’t California’s mistake alone. In New York Metropolis, newly elected Mayor Zohran Mamdani is pushing the Fair Share Act , a two-percentage-point enhance on the town’s private revenue tax for earnings of greater than US$1 million. Mixed with state charges, the highest mixed price would strategy 17 per cent, the best within the U.S.
New York Governor Kathy Hochul has to date refused the required cooperation. Mamdani’s threatened fallback is a 9.5 per cent across-the-board property tax enhance, which might fall hardest on these least in a position to bear it.
On the federal degree, Senator Elizabeth Warren reintroduced her Ultra-Millionaire Tax Act of 2026 in late March: a two per cent annual wealth tax on internet price over US$50 million, a one per cent surtax on billionaires and a 40 per cent exit tax on anybody above the brink who renounces U.S. citizenship. The invoice is unlikely to go the present Congress, however the political sign is unmistakable.
The worldwide comparability cuts the opposite method. Australia spent two years pursuing Division 296, a proposal to tax unrealized beneficial properties on superannuation balances over three million Australian {dollars}, earlier than the federal government walked it back in October 2025 after vital political fallout.
In February, the Netherlands’ decrease home handed a 36 per cent tax on precise returns — together with unrealized beneficial properties on shares, bonds and cryptocurrencies — to be carried out in 2028. Shortly after, the Dutch finance minister conceded the invoice “can not proceed as it’s” after the Senate signalled some objections .
Two of the few main economies to have examined unrealized-gains taxation are actually strolling it again.
Canadians have lived by way of a model of this already: the 2024 federal capital beneficial properties inclusion-rate enhance was structured round a poorly designed $250,000 annual threshold that may not be topic to the rise, a focusing on mechanism designed to insulate peculiar taxpayers whereas extracting extra from the so-called rich.
The proposal was eventually abandoned , however the underlying mindset — that prosperous Canadians may be requested to contribute somewhat extra with out behavioural consequence — stays.
The empirical report is apparent. The rich transfer in the event that they really feel their capital will probably be handled higher elsewhere. For instance, there was a net domestic outmigration of roughly 200,000 taxpayers from California in 2023, with the heaviest losses in upper-income brackets, in accordance with Inside Income Service migration knowledge analyzed by California’s Legislative Analyst’s Workplace.
Washington State’s expertise is even cleaner. Jeff Bezos relocated to Florida shortly after the 2022 capital beneficial properties tax took impact and, because the Tax Basis said , saved roughly US$1.1 billion on a single 12 months of Amazon.com Inc. inventory gross sales. France’s two-decade experiment with its wealth tax produced sufficient capital flight that even President Emmanuel Macron abolished it in 2018.
My apply has additionally seen departure recordsdata involving profitable Canadians climb dramatically over the previous decade. Public statistics are too blunt to seize the exodus, which is why I routinely invite Doubting Thomases — together with a Liberal MP final week — to go to my workplace to see the work my colleagues and I are doing, confidentially, in fact.
The California initiative might but go or be struck down. The Mamdani proposal should still be enacted. The Warren invoice nearly actually is not going to. None of that’s the level. Capital has already begun to maneuver, and as soon as it strikes, it doesn’t come again.
This could matter extra to Canada than to anybody. Our productiveness has flatlined for over a decade, our per-capita gross home product is falling and our prime marginal private tax charges exceed these in each U.S. state.
The capital fleeing California and New York is just not headed for Toronto or Calgary; it’s headed for Florida, Texas, Tennessee and different welcoming jurisdictions.
Wriston’s line was not a slogan; it was an outline of behaviour. Canada has spent a decade telling capital it’s unwelcome. Capital is listening.
Kim Moody, FCPA, FCA, TEP, is the founding father of Moodys Tax/Moodys Personal Shopper, a former chair of the Canadian Tax Basis, former chair of the Society of Property Practitioners (Canada) and has held many different management positions within the Canadian tax neighborhood. He may be reached at kgcm@kimgcmoody.com and his LinkedIn profile is https://www.linkedin.com/in/kimgcmoody.
_____________________________________________________________
For those who like this story, sign up for the FP Investor Publication.
_____________________________________________________________
