CEO Tax Doesn't Tax CEOs
PLUS: Opposition to Billionaire Tax Grows
What You Need To Know
Week:
Here’s what happened around the city for the week of May 3, 2026:
- Prop D Raises Taxes
- Opposition to Billionaire Tax Grows
- Muni Pushes Visible Payment
- Board Bans Redevelopment of Warehouses
- Michael Moritz’s Crankstart Awards 223 College Scholarships
- Faster Paid Parental Leave
Election Countdown
24 days until the June 2 SF Primary Election — the one that decides whether our commonsense Board majority survives. Read the GrowSF Voter Guide for the June election
Prop D Raises Taxes
Published May 8, 2026
The Facts
Prop D would sharply raise an existing San Francisco gross receipts tax starting in 2027. That means it taxes sales attributed to San Francisco, not profits, and for most affected companies the rate would jump by about 800%. These higher costs will mostly be passed on to consumers and reflected in higher grocery, pharmacy, food, and retail prices.
This so-called “CEO tax” doesn’t actually tax CEOs - it taxes your groceries.
The Context
Businesses with low margins, like grocery stores, pharmacies, and retailers, will be impacted the hardest. The food retail industry’s average net profit margin was just 1.6% in 2023, according to FMI, so a tax on total sales hits especially hard. This will be the fifth time since 2018 a ballot measure altered the gross receipts tax. 2018’s effort caused Stripe and other employers to leave the city. 2024’s Proposition M fixed a number of problems with 2018’s version, but 2026’s Prop D will bring the problems back and make the rates even more punitive.
The GrowSF Take
GrowSF recommends voting no on Prop D. San Francisco should not make groceries, household basics, and other everyday purchases more expensive with a large new tax on sales.
And we MUST stop screwing around with taxes at the ballot box so much. Tax policy is complicated and both businesses and individuals need stable and predictable tax policy in order to plan their own lives and investments. Thrashing rates up by 800% doesn’t serve anyone’s interests, it just makes San Francisco harder to exist in.
Got feedback on the voter guide? We want to hear from you!
We’re looking for feedback on how we can make the GrowSF Voter Guide more useful. If you’re open to sharing your input, we’d love to have a 30-minute conversation with you — sign up here.
Opposition to Billionaire Tax Grows
Published May 8, 2026
The Facts
More California Democrats are lining up against the proposed billionaire tax. State Sen. Scott Wiener said he doesn’t support the measure, telling Joe Fitzgerald Rodriguez, Gabe Greschler, and Han Li at The Standard that a one-time wealth tax is not “the best approach.”
Gov. Gavin Newsom and San Jose Mayor Matt Mahan have also come out against it.
The initiative would impose a one-time seizure of up to 5% on covered assets over $1 billion, including businesses, securities, art, collectibles, and intellectual property, while exempting that revenue from the state’s normal rules on school funding, reserves, and the spending limit.
The Context
California already depends on a volatile tax base. The Legislative Analyst’s Office says capital gains are extremely volatile and are a major reason state revenues swing so sharply from boom to bust.
Critics argue this measure could make that problem worse by encouraging capital flight. The Jan. 1, 2026 residency cutoff has already become part of the political war: Sergey Brin moved to Nevada and later gave $45 million to a PAC opposing the measure, according to Dara Kerr at The Guardian. The anti-tax campaign now includes multiple billionaire-backed committees and a separate ballot measure aimed at blocking retroactive taxes.
The GrowSF Take
GrowSF supports broad-based taxes where everyone pays their fair share. We do not support punitive, populist asset seizures aimed at a tiny number of people and marketed as an easy fix for ongoing spending.
Even if this tax is defeated, it’s already done damage: recurring tax revenue has been lost by wealthy people leaving the state and steering their investments elsewhere.
Muni Pushes Visible Payment
Published May 8, 2026
The Facts
Fare enforcement is rising on Muni. The agency is hiring 17 more fare inspectors, boosting the team from 59 to 76, and pushing what officials call a culture of visible payment.
That means more riders physically tapping when they board. Muni’s monthly passes are only available on Clipper, and SFMTA’s proof-of-payment rules require riders using Clipper to tap every time they board. Rachel Swan at The Chronicle reports SFMTA is also looking at tap-based fare media for some youth, low-income, and employee riders who now may board without a visible tap.
The Context
This is about money, but it is also about norms. Riders without valid proof can be removed and fined more than $100, and SFMTA says fare inspections per hour are up 86% since July 2024. The agency is making that push while facing a projected $307 million deficit beginning in fiscal year 2026-27.
The GrowSF Take
Visible payment matters. On a system with all-door boarding, social norms do real work: when everyone taps, everyone sees that paying is expected. Free and discount programs should remain, but SFMTA is right to move toward a system where riders visibly show eligibility too. We all need to chip in for a vital city service, and people who do not pay should face real consequences.
Board Bans Redevelopment of Warehouses
Published May 8, 2026
The Facts
The Board of Supervisors blocked housing again. This time, they permanently cordoned off industrial land (think warehouses and auto body shops) near transit. This permanent exemption to the state’s SB79 law slipped in at the last minute via an “alternative plan“ and Land Use Committee chair Myrna Melgar refused to consider letter it ever expire.
The Context
San Francisco pursued the SB 79 alternative-plan process because Family Zoning had already added substantial transit-area capacity. That’s not the controversial part, though. Rather, it’s the permanent carve-out for warehouse-heavy industrial areas that was never part of any prior negotiation and which sailed through without any serious policy engagement.
The GrowSF Take
This goes to show that even when we get great people elected, they’ll still let us down once in a while. The Board of Supervisors should have pushed back firmly on the SF Planning Department which pitched this permanent exemption without being asked.
This is a foolish and backwards choice.
Michael Moritz’s Crankstart Awards 223 College Scholarships
Published May 8, 2026
The Facts
Michael Moritz’s Crankstart Foundation awarded 223 San Francisco high school seniors college scholarships worth up to $15,000 a year. The Crankstart Scholarship can last up to six years and includes college advising, workshops, and emergency aid. In the first cohort, the program backed 200 students, with 83% first-generation and 91% at the highest level of financial need, according to Jill Tucker at The Chronicle.
The Context
The program launched in San Francisco with a 2025 uAspire grant focused on Balboa, Burton, Galileo, and Mission high schools. Crankstart was founded by Michael Moritz and Harriet Heyman and has become one of the city’s biggest philanthropic players. For students who get into college but still face housing, food, or tuition gaps, flexible aid and hands-on advising can matter as much as the scholarship check itself.
The GrowSF Take
Bravo to Moritz!
Faster Paid Parental Leave
Published May 7, 2026
The Facts
San Francisco could make newer workers eligible for fully paid parental leave sooner. Supervisor Danny Sauter’s April 28 bill, would make workers eligible after 90 days on the job instead of 180. It is partly aimed at workers in high-turnover industries.
The Context
San Francisco’s paid parental leave law, applies to employers with 20 or more employees worldwide and currently requires 180 days on the job before leave starts. A 2020 Health Affairs study found the policy increased leave-taking among fathers.
The GrowSF Take
We’re glad to see more pro-family policy getting enacted in San Francisco. Our only worry is the negative incentive for companies to hire people starting a family, which points to a more robust social program as a better alternative. But hey, baby steps.
Paid for by GrowSF Voter Guide. Not authorized by a candidate, candidate’s committee, or a committee controlled by a candidate. Financial disclosures are available at sfethics.org.