Proposition 41: Prohibits New State Taxes That Exclude Revenues from State Spending Limit. Requires Audits for New State Special Taxes. Initiative Constitutional Amendment.

Argument for

By Denise LeDuc Froemming, CPA, President, California Society of Certified Public Accountants (CalCPAs); Tom Hayes, Fmr. California State Auditor; Robert Gutierrez, President, California Taxpayers Association (CalTax)

Glittering GeneralitiesBandwagon Appeal

CALIFORNIANS DESERVE BETTER RESULTS FOR OUR TAX DOLLARS

Glittering Generalities · “CALIFORNIANS DESERVE BETTER RESULTS FOR OUR TAX DOLLARS” — Vague, emotionally positive slogan about what people 'deserve' with no specific content.

Prop. 41 requires the State Auditor to conduct independent public audits of programs funded by proposed new taxes in order to increase transparency and accountability and drive better outcomes.

Californians pay some of the highest taxes in the country—on top of our high cost of living. This year alone, California’s state government will spend more than $350 billion—a 79% increase in spending since 2019. Billions of our tax dollars have flowed into state programs like homelessness efforts, with too little to show for it.

We deserve better education, health care, infrastructure and other services in return for the hard-earned money we pay to the state.

Prop. 41 requires more accountability, transparency and trackable progress of programs funded by our taxes, so that we stop funding failure and start funding successful outcomes.

Here’s how Prop. 41 works.

PUBLIC AUDITS TO PROVIDE ACCOUNTABILITY, TRANSPARENCY AND OVERSIGHT

Prop. 41 requires the independent State Auditor to conduct performance and financial audits of the programs funded by new tax measures, with the results posted publicly. The audits must:

• Track all program spending and assess whether it’s achieving its intended outcomes; • Determine whether programs have sufficient oversight and accountability; • Identify areas of waste, fraud and abuse; • Recommend how future waste and fraud can be avoided and programs made more effective.

Prop. 41 requires audits both before taxes are voted on to provide transparency to voters, and ongoing audits of programs funded by approved taxes to ensure accountability. PROP. 41: INDEPENDENT, PUBLIC INFORMATION FOR VOTERS ON PROPOSED TAXES

Before we vote on new taxes to fund programs, voters should have access to independent information about how those programs are being managed and whether they actually need more funding. Under Prop. 41, the Auditor’s findings must be posted publicly and in the Voter Information Guide—so voters can make informed decisions about new taxes without having to rely on information from special interests or politicians.

“This commonsense, long overdue reform will finally instill some transparency and accountability in state spending— ensuring Californians get better government services for the taxes we pay. It provides an independent, public report card for government spending, so government programs work better for everyone.”—Pat Fong Kushida, President/CEO of the CalAsian Chamber of Commerce

PROP. 41: A BETTER DEAL FOR TAXPAYERS

Prop. 41 doesn’t raise taxes—it protects taxpayers’ interests:

• Reduces the waste and fraud that have cost California taxpayers billions of dollars in recent years; • Requires all taxes to comply with the state’s voter-approved spending limit—including its requirement that excess revenues get refunded to taxpayers.

Prop. 41 ensures taxpayers get better results—not just a bigger tax bill.

“Every tax dollar we waste is a dollar that could actually help someone. Californians already pay the highest state income and sales taxes in the country—we need better transparency and accountability to make sure our tax dollars produce results. Prop. 41 delivers.”—Steve Westly, former Controller of California.

Please join good government groups, small business owners, accountants, taxpayers and public transparency advocates in voting Yes on 41.

Bandwagon Appeal · “Please join good government groups, small business owners, accountants, taxpayers and public transparency advocates in voting Yes on 41” — Urges the reader to vote Yes by pointing to the many groups already supporting the measure, which pressures conformity through the size of the coalition.

For more information, visit: www.ResultsCA.org

From voterguide.sos.ca.gov, the official voter guide.

Argument against

By Suzanne Jimenez, Chief of Staff, SEIU-United Healthcare Workers West

ScapegoatingExaggeration/HyperboleLoaded LanguageBlack-and-White FallacyAppeal to FearGlittering Generalities

VOTE NO ON PROP. 41. This is a billionaire-funded initiative designed specifically to undo the California Billionaire Tax, Prop. 40.

PROP. 41 WOULD CANCEL OUT THE BILLIONAIRE TAX

Prop. 41 was put on the ballot for one reason—because billionaires don’t want to pay their fair share. This initiative was created to trick voters like you into making a billionaire tax impossible to enforce. That’s why you must vote NO.

Scapegoating · “because billionaires don’t want to pay their fair share” — Blames billionaires as a group for the existence of the ballot measure based on their membership in that class rather than on specific actions.

Exaggeration/Hyperbole · “for one reason” — Claims there was only a single reason for the measure, overstating beyond what evidence supports.

Loaded Language · “created to trick voters like you” — Uses the charged word 'trick' to imply deceit and manipulate voters' emotions.

Black-and-White Fallacy · “you must vote NO” — Frames the choice as a forced directive to vote NO, with no acknowledgement of other considerations.

Don’t fall for the billionaires’ lies. Prop. 41 isn’t about auditing new taxes. It’s about defeating one specific tax that billionaires want to avoid, because they’d rather millions of working people lose healthcare than pay a modest, one-time tax on their extreme wealth.

Loaded Language · “billionaires' lies”, “they'd rather millions of working people lose healthcare”, “extreme wealth” — Calls opponents' claims 'lies' to provoke distrust rather than address arguments.

Scapegoating · “billionaires want to avoid, because they'd rather millions of working people lose healthcare” — Blames billionaires as a group for working people losing healthcare, based on group membership rather than specific actions.

PROP. 41 WAS FUNDED BY BILLIONAIRES WHO WANT YOU TO PAY MORE FOR HEALTHCARE

Scapegoating · “BILLIONAIRES WHO WANT YOU TO PAY MORE FOR HEALTHCARE” — Blames a class of people, billionaires, as a group for a complex problem like healthcare costs based on membership rather than specific actions.

One of Prop. 41’s main funders is Google founder and Trump donor Sergey Brin, whose wealth has DOUBLED to nearly $300 billion since Trump’s election. Now he’s spent over $57 million to fund sham measures like Prop. 41 that attempt to cancel out a billionaire tax. U.S. Senator Bernie Sanders called this arrogant move by Brin “unacceptable.”

Loaded Language · “DOUBLED”, “sham measures”, “arrogant move”, “unacceptable” — Capitalised 'DOUBLED' is used for emotional emphasis and to imply the wealth gain is tied to Trump.

Donald Trump took money out of working peoples’ pockets and gave it to billionaires like Brin through massive tax breaks. Now, the billionaires backing Prop. 41 want YOU to pay more for your healthcare.

Loaded Language · “took money out of working peoples’ pockets and gave it to billionaires” — Emotive framing of tax policy as taking money from pockets and handing it to billionaires.

Scapegoating · “41 want YOU to pay more for your healthcare.” — Blames a group defined by wealth (billionaires) for higher healthcare costs, framed as their collective intent.

Appeal to Fear · “want YOU to pay more for your healthcare” — Directly addresses the reader with a threat of higher personal costs to provoke anxiety.

VOTE NO ON PROP. 41 IF YOU SUPPORT THE BILLIONAIRE TAX

We have a chance to make billionaires pay their fair share to keep hospitals open and healthcare affordable for California’s working families. Vote NO on Prop. 41.

Glittering Generalities · “pay their fair share”, “California’s working families” — Vague, positive-sounding phrases like 'fair share' and 'working families' carry emotional appeal without specifics.

From voterguide.sos.ca.gov, the official voter guide.

Supporting

YES ON 41 - CALIFORNIANS FOR TRANSPARENCY AND ACCOUNTABILITY, A COALITION OF SMALL BUSINESSES, TAXPAYERS, GOOD GOVERNMENT ADVOCATES, ACCOUNTANTS AND AUDITING EXPERTS

Ballot measure committee, sponsored by Building a Better California; California Taxpayers Association

Raised $58,376,446 · spent $59,396,486 · as reported through Sep 19, 2026

Largest contributors as filed:

• BUILDING A BETTER CALIFORNIA · $58,350,000
  Political action committee
• REFORM CALIFORNIA WITH CARL DE MAIO - BALLOT MEASURE COMMITTEE · $21,808
  Ballot measure committee, sponsored by Carl DeMaio (Cal-Access classes the committee as controlled; Form 410 lists him as Chair)
• REFORM LOCAL GOVERNMENT PAC · $4,500
  Political action committee
• MARY STRONG · $100 · individual

Opposing

Yes on 40 - Billionaire Tax Now ? No on 41 & 42, Sponsored by Service Employees International Union - United Healthcare Workers West

Ballot measure committee, sponsored by SEIU United Healthcare Workers West (as stated in the registered committee name) · California payments to party committees since Jan 1, 2025: $3,500 to Democratic and $0 to Republican (Cal-Access)

Raised $31,862,431 · spent $37,160,374 · as reported through Sep 19, 2026

Largest contributors as filed:

• Service Employees International Union, United Healthcare Workers West Nonprofit 501(c)(5) · $22,067,899
  Labor union
• SEIU United Health Care Workers West Political Issues Committee · $7,508,431
  Political action committee, sponsored by SEIU United Healthcare Workers West · California state contributions since Jan 1, 2025: $301,000 to Democratic and $0 to Republican candidates and party committees (Cal-Access)
• SEIU United Healthcare Workers West PAC · $2,000,000
  Political action committee, sponsored by SEIU United Healthcare Workers West · California state contributions since Jan 1, 2025: $1,998,720 to Democratic and $0 to Republican candidates and party committees; $221,050 to candidates for nonpartisan offices (Cal-Access)
• Hillary Perkins · $100,000 · individual
  own contributions since Jan 1, 2020, federal (FEC): $31,116 to Democratic and $0 to Republican candidates and party committees; California state (Cal-Access): $5,000 to Democratic and $0 to Republican candidates and party committees
• Ross Boucher · $50,000 · individual
  own contributions since Jan 1, 2020, federal (FEC): $174,600 to Democratic and $0 to Republican candidates and party committees, $12,800 to others; California state (Cal-Access): $5,900 to Democratic and $0 to Republican candidates and party committees

Since then, $631,633 more reported in contributions of $1,000 or more, through Oct 16, 2026.

This committee is registered for more than one measure; these are its whole totals, which its filings don’t divide by measure.

Tax the Ultra-Rich Now, YES on 3 & 40, NO on 41 & 42

Ballot measure committee

Raised $340,225 · spent $57,231 · as reported through Sep 19, 2026

Largest contributors as filed:

• Alan Davis · $250,000 · individual
  own contributions since Jan 1, 2020, federal (FEC): $265,114 to Democratic and $0 to Republican candidates and party committees, $6,711 to others
• Excessive Wealth · $40,000
  Other
• William Connell · $25,000 · individual
  own contributions since Jan 1, 2020, federal (FEC): $897,975 to Democratic and $0 to Republican candidates and party committees
• John Esler · $25,000 · individual
  own contributions since Jan 1, 2020, federal (FEC): $24,800 to Democratic and $500 to Republican candidates and party committees
• Lawrence Ottinger · $225 · individual

Since then, $84,073 more reported in contributions of $1,000 or more, through Oct 12, 2026.

This committee is registered for more than one measure; these are its whole totals, which its filings don’t divide by measure.

Working Families say No to Propositions 41 and 42 sponsored by labor unions

Ballot measure committee, sponsored by California Federation of Teachers; California School Employees Association; United Domestic Workers of America

Registered; no financial report filed yet.

Reported $951,000 in contributions of $1,000 or more from Oct 1, 2026 to Oct 16, 2026.