'Billionaire Exodus? California Drew 10x More Venture Capital Than Any Other State This Year' (yahoo.com)
- Reference: 0184431218
- News link: https://news.slashdot.org/story/26/07/12/2326225/billionaire-exodus-california-drew-10x-more-venture-capital-than-any-other-state-this-year
- Source link: https://finance.yahoo.com/technology/ai/articles/billionaire-exodus-california-drew-10-100000589.html
> Its next biggest competitor, New York, raised less than a tenth of California's total. Texas raised 1/40th of the amount... Although a campaign for a new tax on billionaires has convinced some ultra-rich residents to shift to other states and businesses often complain that high property and energy costs and an anti-business regulatory regime make it too tough to make money in the state, the inability of the top talent, companies and investors in AI to set up elsewhere shows California's enduring attraction.
>
> The state's economy grew 5% last year to a record $4.25 trillion, making it larger than every country other than the U.S., China and Germany. It is home to nearly 400 billion-dollar startups — more than any other state, according to CB Insights... Among metropolitan regions, Los Angeles ranked behind only Silicon Valley and New York, which attracted $98 billion and $11.5 billion in venture investment, respectively... Investors poured in nearly $8 billion across 207 deals in the Los Angeles, Long Beach, and Santa Ana metro areas, up 28% from a year earlier, according to PitchBook...
>
> Nearly 90% of invested dollars [in California] went to AI firms, up from last year, when around 65% of new funds were allocated to AI. "If you're a tech company and you're not an AI company, you have a very, very difficult opportunity ahead of you to raise capital," Stanford said.
[1] https://finance.yahoo.com/technology/ai/articles/billionaire-exodus-california-drew-10-100000589.html
Leaving. Billionaires or billionaires' money? (Score:4, Insightful)
Sure the billionaires can leave CA. No loss there, because their money will stay there. That's where the businesses they want to fund are. That's where the talent they want to attract is. And billionaires themselves pay jack shit in taxes, it's the businesses that the money's in that matter. And for that matter, where are the billionaires going to move? Manhattan, Kansas?
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Please explain it, because his comment seemed reasonable.
The money matters, not the billionaires.
Re: Leaving. Billionaires or billionaires' money? (Score:2)
If the billionaires leave, their wealth goes, and then CA doesn't get to collect their billionaires wealth tax of 5%.
The issue is the tax on wealth, it has nothing to do with the companies (companies don't have to pay wealth taxes, just individuals), so a company like Apple with billions of dollars doesn't owe 5% of their holdings to the state, just the less than 300 individual billionaires that live in the state.
Sergei left CA to avoid the tax, Google is still in CA, Sergei wont pay the 5% tax CA loses.
Non
Re: Leaving. Billionaires or billionaires' money? (Score:2)
> Sure the billionaires can leave CA. No loss there, because their money will stay there.
The 5% tax is a wealth tax.
The wealth tax is paid by individuals that reside in the state.
When the individual moves out of state, like to Florida as a Google founder did, they are no longer a resident of CA.
Being a resident of FL, they do not owe CA the 5% wealth tax.
The billion dollar company (like Google) may stay in CA, but the state can't collect the wealth tax from the billion dollar corporation.
Re: (Score:2)
That works short-term, but then they become a non-resident with CA-based income which means they have to file CA taxes under non-resident rules. Much less favorable, and leaves them open to CA doing any number of things to tax rules. One would be considering loans secured by stock options (not actual shares) to be income.
Going to be interesting in CA (Score:2)
Once, the one time 5% is spent the state will have to figure out how to do the one time 5% more than once to keep feeding the spending machine.
The problem is Fraud, Grift and run away Government spending can not co exist so they will need to do something different at some point.
Re: Going to be interesting in CA (Score:2)
Oh, what, like the current federal administration? Lol.
Re: (Score:2)
> Once, the one time 5% is spent the state will have to figure out how to do the one time 5% more than once to keep feeding the spending machine.
The money to be raised is already budgeted as a separate fund for a specific purpose. It is not intended to be general funds nor is it intended to be ongoing funding.
Think of as a bond. When the government wants to raise money for a project or investment in the future, they will often issue and sell bonds to raise that money. Bonds mature and pay back with some
Re: Going to be interesting in CA (Score:1)
> The money to be raised is already budgeted as a separate fund for a specific purpose. It is not intended to be general funds nor is it intended to be ongoing funding.
That sounds great, did they also budget for a third of the targeted billionaires leaving the state to avoid the 5% wealth tax? I think not - CA thinks it's so special they can try and seize 5% of billionaires wealth and they'll stick around! LOL, other states have sunshine, and beaches, and lower property/income taxes...
Re: (Score:2)
> ... need to do something different ...
Wasn't " Fraud, Grift and run-away Government spending" fixed by DoGE? California can just do what DoGE and the GOP did: Lower taxes and divert billions to another can't-win war. I recommend that California declare war on Texas: Take advantage of recent experience bombing oil-fields.
Problem solved: I'm sure the billionaires (and you) will be very happy.
Re: (Score:3)
> The problem is Fraud, Grift and run away Government spending can not co exist so they will need to do something different at some point.
Are you suggesting California is particularly bad for those things? It's easy to look up data, you know.
Here is data on [1]government corruption [worldpopul...review.com]. Louisiana is the worst with 1.05 convictions per year per 10k government employees. California is better than average with 0.25. The very best state is New Hampshire with only 0.07 convictions per year per 10k government employees.
Runaway government spending is a bit harder to measure objectively, but is [2]government debt [us-debt-clock.com] a reasonable measure? California is right
[1] https://worldpopulationreview.com/state-rankings/most-corrupt-states
[2] https://www.us-debt-clock.com/states
Re: (Score:2)
The nice thing about CA is for most things it takes voter approval to raise taxes due to proposition 13. This means they would have to another ballot proposition all over again.
I think this is totally fine as long as (Score:1)
They can take their robotaxis, scooters, ebikes and everything else with them.
In Silicon Valley's effort to try to force us all to pay more money for things that we don't want... good riddance. For the increasing cost of living... good riddance. Silicon valley has been measurably making the life of normal people worse this last 10 years. I don't want to need to own a smart phone that will track me everywhere just so I can unlock the doors at my apartment complex.
Just go somewhere and die.
The rich are usually extractive cunts (Score:1)
That's how they get rich, taking advantage of options and fucking the rest of us over. Eat them.
Yogi said it best (Score:2)
"The place is too crowded, nobody goes there any more."
Re: (Score:2)
You idiot you have it backwards
it's
"Nobody goes there anymore. It's too crowded."
The billionares can leave, but they're (Score:2)
going have a hard time attracting the best employees who want to live in California for numerous reasons:
1. Weather
2. No non compete agreements
3. Better healthcare
4. Cleaner air and water
5. More things to do in your spare time in the state.
6. Initiative and Referendum unlike half of other states
So the Billionaire can leave, but he'll end up controlling his company remotely from out of state unless he can do everything with AI or make do with mediocre employees or use AI and have a few less-than-stellar empl
Re: (Score:2)
> So the Billionaire can leave, but he'll end up controlling his company remotely from out of state unless he can do everything with AI or make do with mediocre employees or use AI and have a few less-than-stellar employees for grunt tasks.
And then wait for California to introduce a law that if the CEO works remotely from the company, then workers are allowed to work remotely as well. And by remotely, I mean the CEO lives in a place where no substantial office of the company exists. So if they live in Florida
Re: The billionares can leave, but they're (Score:2)
AI doesnt care about weather, clean air, healthcare, recreational opportunities, etc.
Good luck!
Two companies carried the whole state⦠(Score:2)
OpenAI and Anthropic pulled the numbers higher, without them it wouldnâ(TM)t look that good.
Re: (Score:2)
These two carried the whole of the trumpistan. Without the "AI" bubble, the economic growth in that territory is firmly in the negative.
No relation (Score:2)
This might be a shock to the LA Times, but people don't have to live in the same state as the companies they invest in are headquartered.
Re: (Score:2)
Are you saying California is a permanent, high-volume billionaire generator?
How come these don't spring up in Texas and Florida in the first place?
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Please explain ...
You're posting a ridiculous strawman argument, and also assigning individual motives (doesn't like) to an entire, vague group (California).
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
You have no idea what the article is saying or what is real. here is an unbiased summary of reality.
No state 'dislikes' billionaires, they all want them.
All states have various taxes.
A bunch of conservatives claim California hates billionaries, because they tax them more than certain red states do.
Some conservatives think a proposed one time tax law in California will drive away billionaires.
The actual facts are that billionaires do MORE business in California than they do in ANY other state. After it is N
Re: Wait...? (Score:2)
As someone who lives in Los Angeles, no, no there is not.
Re: (Score:1, Funny)
> Excuse me. There's a mass exodus to Texas and Florida.
Thereby raising the average IQ of all three states.
Re: Wait...? (Score:1)
Horseshit.
The article claimed an increase in venture capital investments in CA was proof that billionaires weren't fleeing CA to avoid a wealth tax.
The two things are untelated.
A wealth tax radically changes taxation (Score:2)
California is not simply charging a little more taxes on income compared to red states. That is tolerable. What California is doing, instituting a wealth tax, is a radical departure. One that can make a very large difference. You misrepresent things. California is trying something very new and very different and is very likely to see it backfire.
Re: Wait...? (Score:2)
almost $1 trillion has left CA since that tax proposal was floated.
[1]https://www.scry.llc/2026/01/1... [scry.llc]
and most of the VC capital is AI bubble investment?
yeah, let's see how that works out. :)
[1] https://www.scry.llc/2026/01/12/ca-billionaire-tax/
Re: (Score:2)
> I thought California doesn't like Billionaires? Now they want to keep them?
The billionaires can go. The money can stay.
This is not complicated.
Re: Wait...? (Score:1)
The amount of Venture Capital flowing into a state is not proof that billionaires aren't leaving the state. One has nothing to do with the other.
> Although a campaign for a new tax on billionaires has convinced some ultra-rich residents to shift to other states and businesses often complain that high property and energy costs and an anti-business regulatory regime make it too tough to make money in the state, the inability of the top talent, companies and investors in AI to set up elsewhere shows California's enduring attraction.
You really think AI companies can't setup elsewhere? Somehow we are building AI datacenters all across the country, do you really think the professionals in the field HAVE TO STAY in SF to access their datacenter in Ohio or Virginia? Really?
Re: Wait...? (Score:1)
Besides the weather (I mean your coast have cold water so that does suck) and liberal shit why does anyone want to advocate for California?? Most of yall fucker make little to no money and love sucking on the tit of government. Why not try making it on your own in a more equal part of USA if you can, likely you canâ(TM)t! Better yet move to a non-USA city and see how well you can do! Haha, nobody outside of CA gives a fuck about CA, you are an island and most of us that can earn on our own hopes fl
Wealth tax irrelevant at VC funding time (Score:2)
> I thought California doesn't like Billionaires? Now they want to keep them? Please explain...
You are falsely conflating getting VC funding and getting rich. While VCs are funding your venture they are simultaneously making you put all your personal savings, and possibly take on some personal debt too, in order to help fund your venture. They want you to be personally at risk, painfully so, so that your motivations and theirs are in alignment. A founder is not at risk of these special wealth taxes until years later when the exit strategy is executed. Sold to some large corporation, becoming publicly