Key Takeaways
- • Eric Schmidt and Sergey Brin have jointly contributed millions to Building a Better California, a political organization opposing California's Proposition 40 (a wealth tax on billionaires), but a fundamental disagreement has emerged over fund allocation strategy.
- • Schmidt's frustration centers on the coalition's decision to deploy contributed capital toward opposing other ballot measures, including Proposition 45 (environmental policy), rather than concentrating exclusively on defeating the billionaire tax as he intended.
- • The ultra-rich coalition opposing Proposition 40 has collectively spent more than $100 million on the campaign, yet failed to prevent California Democrats from endorsing the wealth-tax measure at a 61.7% threshold in August 2026.
- • Proposition 40 is backed by SEIU United Healthcare Workers West and championed by Democratic figures including Bernie Sanders and Ro Khanna, signaling strong institutional support for the billionaire tax despite heavy financial opposition.
- • The disagreement reveals tensions within the billionaire donor class regarding political strategy alignment and capital deployment efficiency in high-stakes state-level tax policy battles.
Summary
Eric Schmidt and Sergey Brin, the former Google CEO and company co-founder respectively, have become embroiled in a dispute over the use of their combined political contributions to oppose California's Proposition 40, a proposed wealth tax on billionaires. The two technology executives jointly contributed millions to Building a Better California, a political organization leading an ultra-wealthy coalition that has collectively spent more than $100 million attempting to defeat the measure.
According to reporting by the New York Post, Schmidt has grown increasingly dissatisfied with how the coalition has deployed his contributions. While both men share the objective of defeating Proposition 40, Schmidt's frustration stems from the organization's decision to allocate funds toward opposing other ballot measures beyond the wealth tax. Specifically, contributions intended to focus on Proposition 40 have been directed toward campaigns against Proposition 45, an environmental policy measure, creating a strategic divergence between the two former partners.
An advisor to Schmidt clarified that the former CEO is not angry about the Democratic Party's endorsement of Proposition 40—which passed the party's endorsement threshold at 61.7%—but rather objected to mission creep in how his political contributions have been utilized. According to the advisor, Schmidt's "only current involvement in politics is his contributions to defeating the billionaires tax," underscoring his singular focus on this specific policy objective rather than a broader anti-tax or anti-regulation platform.
The campaign backdrop reveals the scale of opposition to the wealth-tax proposal: despite the coalition's expenditure of over $100 million, California Democrats endorsed Proposition 40 with backing from major unions and prominent political figures including Bernie Sanders and Ro Khanna. Additionally, two counter-measures backed by billionaire interests—Propositions 41 and 42—were rejected by the Democratic Party before proceeding to the November ballot, further indicating the political headwinds facing the anti-tax coalition.
The disagreement underscores a broader tension within the billionaire donor class regarding political capital allocation and strategic alignment in high-stakes state-level tax policy battles, with Schmidt's insistence on focused, single-issue deployment contrasting with the coalition's broader legislative agenda approach.
According to reporting by the New York Post, Schmidt has grown increasingly dissatisfied with how the coalition has deployed his contributions. While both men share the objective of defeating Proposition 40, Schmidt's frustration stems from the organization's decision to allocate funds toward opposing other ballot measures beyond the wealth tax. Specifically, contributions intended to focus on Proposition 40 have been directed toward campaigns against Proposition 45, an environmental policy measure, creating a strategic divergence between the two former partners.
An advisor to Schmidt clarified that the former CEO is not angry about the Democratic Party's endorsement of Proposition 40—which passed the party's endorsement threshold at 61.7%—but rather objected to mission creep in how his political contributions have been utilized. According to the advisor, Schmidt's "only current involvement in politics is his contributions to defeating the billionaires tax," underscoring his singular focus on this specific policy objective rather than a broader anti-tax or anti-regulation platform.
The campaign backdrop reveals the scale of opposition to the wealth-tax proposal: despite the coalition's expenditure of over $100 million, California Democrats endorsed Proposition 40 with backing from major unions and prominent political figures including Bernie Sanders and Ro Khanna. Additionally, two counter-measures backed by billionaire interests—Propositions 41 and 42—were rejected by the Democratic Party before proceeding to the November ballot, further indicating the political headwinds facing the anti-tax coalition.
The disagreement underscores a broader tension within the billionaire donor class regarding political capital allocation and strategic alignment in high-stakes state-level tax policy battles, with Schmidt's insistence on focused, single-issue deployment contrasting with the coalition's broader legislative agenda approach.
Go deeper than the headline
Research every firm in this story, track the ones that matter and get the daily briefing — free for 7 days.