The RCJ votes Yes. This is a no-brainer. Top rates for the top 2 percent of taxpayers should not be a temporary thing.
Proposition 3 would make permanent the higher California income-tax rates on the state’s highest-income earners that voters originally approved in 2012 and later extended. The rates currently apply to roughly the top 2 percent of taxpayers and are scheduled to expire in 2031. If approved, the measure would preserve an estimated $5 billion to $15 billion annually in state revenue.
The Pro Argument
Supporters say Proposition 3 would provide a stable source of funding for education and other public services without increasing taxes on most Californians. The measure directs 89 percent of designated revenues to K–12 schools and 11 percent to community colleges, while the additional General Fund revenue would also support health care and other programs.
Supporters also argue that the tax rates have been in place for more than a decade and that allowing them to expire would amount to a substantial tax reduction for wealthy Californians while leaving schools and public services with less revenue. The California Teachers Association and California State PTA are among the measure’s supporters.
The Con Argument
Opponents argue that temporary taxes should remain temporary. They contend that California already imposes a heavy tax burden and that the state should address spending and government efficiency before making higher tax rates permanent.
Another concern is that California relies heavily on high-income taxpayers whose earnings can fluctuate substantially with the stock market. The Legislative Analyst estimates that Proposition 3’s annual revenue could range from about $5 billion in weaker years to $15 billion in stronger years. Critics also argue that persistently higher taxes could encourage some wealthy taxpayers to move to states with lower taxes, although the magnitude of such an effect is uncertain.
In Brief
The central issue is whether California should preserve a tax structure that generates substantial revenue from its highest-income residents in exchange for continued public funding, or allow the higher rates to expire in 2031 and require the state to adjust its spending accordingly. The measure does not create a new tax rate; it makes existing higher rates permanent.
For California Proposition 3 on the November 3, 2026 ballot, the organized support and opposition are fairly clearly defined.
Supporters
The official California voter guide lists these principal supporters: (California Voter Guide)
- California Teachers Association
- California School Nurses Organization
- California State PTA
- Planned Parenthood Affiliates of California
The broader coalition also includes major education and public-sector organizations. The California Teachers Association has been particularly prominent because it helped gather the signatures that placed Proposition 3 on the ballot. Supporters argue that keeping the existing high-income tax rates is important for maintaining funding for schools and, indirectly, health care and other state services. (Los Angeles Times)
Opponents
The official voter guide lists: (California Voter Guide)
- California Taxpayers Association
- Family Business Association of California
- California Hispanic Chambers of Commerce
The opposition’s central argument is that the tax increase was originally presented as temporary and should be allowed to expire in 2031. Opponents also argue that California already has unusually high taxes and that the state should address spending and government efficiency rather than make the tax permanent. (California Voter Guide)
The basic political divide
Supporters: Primarily education, school-employee, health-care and progressive organizations that emphasize protecting public-school funding and maintaining existing revenue.
Opponents: Primarily taxpayer, business and small-business organizations that emphasize limiting taxes, keeping the original sunset provision, and addressing state spending before extending taxes.
One important point: Prop. 3 does not create a new tax increase on top of the current rate. It would make the existing high-income tax rates permanent. If Prop. 3 fails, those rates would fall in 2031. The tax applies to roughly the top 2% of California taxpayers. (California Voter Guide)
The Secretary of State estimates that making the tax permanent would preserve approximately $5 billion to $15 billion per year in state income-tax revenue. (California Voter Guide)