CaliFormers: Billionaire Edition The proposed Billionaire Wealth Tax has been criticized in many quarters, including by the governor, for its potential to encourage the targeted taxpayers and their companies to move to other states. Both personally (including through philantrophic activity) and through their companies, this group is part of the very limited portion of the […]
Californians have faced steadily rising electricity costs for more than a decade. Today, the state has the highest average electricity rates among the contiguous United States, with residential electricity prices 96.7% higher than the national average and industrial rates 171.9% higher, making California increasingly uncompetitive for employers and more expensive for households. As electricity prices […]
In the preliminary numbers, seasonally adjusted nonfarm jobs fell 6,100 in June, the 4th month to date in 2025 posting a loss. The May numbers were adjusted down by 6,000 to a revised gain of 11,700, with California showing a net loss of 23,700 nonfarm jobs in the first half of the year.
SB 684 (Menjivar) and AB 1243 (Addis) propose the establishment of a de facto carbon tax in California—administered not by elected legislators, but by Cal/EPA through a compressed rulemaking process. These identical bills would authorize Cal/EPA to identify oil and gas companies deemed “responsible parties” and assign them financial liability for climate-related costs spanning from 1990 to 2045. Although structured as corporate penalties, the estimated $51.7 billion per year in cost recovery demands will ultimately be passed on to consumers, echoing the findings of the Center’s previous report on SB 222.
In the latest data from International Monetary Fund (IMF), California—if it was treated as a separate economy—moved from 5th largest in the world to 4th largest as Japan’s economy contracted. However, Japan is projected to resume growth at 4% in 2025, while India is projected to continue moving up the ranks with 7% growth.
SB 222 would fundamentally alter California’s economic landscape by shifting climate policy into the courtroom, exposing businesses to retroactive liability for fossil fuel use dating back to 1965, leading to soaring litigation costs, higher consumer prices, and potential economic destabilization across key industries.
The state’s recent implementation of the $20 an hour minimum wage for fast food chains has produced the standard wave of claims over its effect on jobs, with proponents generally claiming that there has been no effect and even in some cases that the effect has produced an increase in jobs.
These claims to date, however, have been based on estimates using various data sources including the monthly job numbers published by Employment Development Department from the Current Employment Statistics (CES). The core caveat to date is that these are all estimates. The CES numbers reported for the industry containing the affected fast food establishments—Limited Service Restaurants—as with all the CES industries are based on monthly surveys and modeling results.
The Center for Jobs and the Economy tracks closely California’s Trade sector and its importance in creating well-paying, resilient jobs for millions of residents. California’s Trade sector is a national economic powerhouse, with more than 1 in 51 jobs nationwide supported by the sector. To further quantify the impacts of this sector, the Center released a detailed economic study, “Special Report: Economic Importance of Trade & the Ports to Southern California,” which quantified the importance of this sector.
Following the passage of the increase to the minimum wage for specified fast food workers, much attention has been paid to the impacts the wage increase will have on jobs. While anecdotal data, including the closure of legacy fast-food chain stores in California, has made headlines, we are now able to use empirical data to track the law’s impacts on jobs and the economy. Despite what some are saying, the data are clear: newly passed fast food minimum wage laws are leading to job losses in California.
The Center for Jobs and the Economy has released a special report that delves into the tax burden on personal income in California, particularly focusing on its impact on different family types. For additional information and data about the California economy visit www.centerforjobs.org/ca.
The Center for Jobs and the Economy has released a special report that delves into the tax burden on personal income in California, particularly focusing on its impact on different family types. For additional information and data about the California economy visit www.centerforjobs.org/ca.
The Center for Jobs and the Economy has released a special report that delves into the tax burden on personal income in California, particularly focusing on its impact on different family types. For additional information and data about the California economy visit www.centerforjobs.org/ca.
The Center for Jobs and the Economy has issued a special report on California’s Q4 2023 GDP growth, which although rising, continues to lag behind the national average, signifying ongoing economic challenges for the state. Despite maintaining its position as the 5th largest economy, California faces revenue difficulties amidst sluggish growth and declining contributions from the tech industry.
The Center for Jobs and the Economy has issued a special report on California’s Q4 2023 GDP growth, which although rising, continues to lag behind the national average, signifying ongoing economic challenges for the state. Despite maintaining its position as the 5th largest economy, California faces revenue difficulties amidst sluggish growth and declining contributions from the tech industry.
The state’s tax system leans significantly on these few taxpayers. For instance, the amount of income tax Ohtani could save annually by changing his residence in 2033 is equivalent to the total tax liability of the bottom 1.78 million tax filers in 2021 (positive AGI). To use another illustration, finding just 317 more individuals like Ohtani (with no deferrals and MLB approval for the 12 required expansion teams) or doubling the taxes paid by the bottom 3.34 million tax filers could erase the state’s projected deficit for 2024-25.