Provides Permanent Funding for Schools and Health Care by Extending Existing Tax on High Incomes. Initiative Constitutional Amendment.

“Proposition 3 is NOT a new tax and does NOT raise taxes on anyone.”

Seen in: Official Voter Information Guide, argument in favor of Proposition 3

The Analyst says Proposition 3 makes the higher income tax rates created by Proposition 30 permanent instead of letting them expire in 2031, and says it would maintain $5 billion to $15 billion a year of state revenue. Rates paid today would not rise, but taxpayers in the top 2 percent would pay the higher rates after 2031, when they would otherwise fall.

“Politicians told voters higher income taxes would be temporary—only for seven years to cover a budget deficit.”

Seen in: Official Voter Information Guide, argument against Proposition 3

In the 2012 Official Voter Information Guide the title of Proposition 30 was "Temporary Taxes to Fund Education", and its summary said it increases personal income tax on annual earnings over $250,000 "for seven years". The Legislative Analyst's 2012 analysis says the rates would be in effect for seven years, ending after the 2018 tax year, and describes a substantial projected state budget deficit as background. Context: the stated purpose in the title was funding education; in 2016 voters approved Proposition 55, which extended the higher rates until 2030, as the Analyst notes for Proposition 3.

“Proposition 3 keeps the existing rates on the top 2% of incomes.”

Seen in: Official Voter Information Guide, argument in favor of Proposition 3

The Analyst says the top 2 percent of California taxpayers pay the higher rates created by Proposition 30 and extended by Proposition 55, and that Proposition 3 makes those rates permanent instead of letting them expire in 2031.

“Since the “temporary” increases were first passed, government spending has increased by $150 billion—a more than 2.5X increase.”

Seen in: Official Voter Information Guide, argument against Proposition 3

General Fund spending was $91.3 billion in the 2012-13 Budget Act, the year the Proposition 30 rates began. The Analyst for Proposition 3 says the state plans to spend about $250 billion from the General Fund this year. That is an increase of about $159 billion, or about 2.7 times. Context: these are unadjusted General Fund figures, not adjusted for inflation or population, and the argument does not say which spending measure it uses.

“Politicians and special interests have imposed more than 2,000 new local tax increases in just the past ten years”

Seen in: Official Voter Information Guide, argument against Proposition 3

The guide does not document the count. Local tax and bond measure results compiled by CaliforniaCityFinance.com cover local tax and bond measures, including school bonds and measures placed on the ballot by local governments, one election at a time: 355 of 430 passed in November 2016, 313 of 386 in November 2018, and 208 of 302 in November 2022. They do not give a ten-year total and do not separate tax increases from bonds. No source for a total of more than 2,000 was found. "Imposed" by "politicians and special interests" is the argument's characterization.