Erin Fraser, a former student, has created an annotated version of California’s proposed 2026 Billionaire Tax Act, one of two major “tax-the-rich” measures that are on the ballot for 14% of Americans this November. Fraser’s accessible website—with cross-references, drafters’ comments, and clearly identified AI summaries, among other features—is a marked upgrade over the State of California’s 34-page scan of the bill’s text.
But will this elegant presentation entice more voters to read the ballot measure’s text, either before or after they’ve formed opinions on it? Links and some commentary, below the fold.
Fraser’s web version of the BTA is here: https://calbta.com. The website really should spark a broader debate about formatting and presentation for ballot measures—it’s navigable in ways that show the bill’s structure and set a standard for legibility. The State’s pdf is better than ALL CAPS, but not by much. If we expect voters to read what they’re deciding—and we should—then more attention must be paid to making ballot measures’ legal text tractable.
In the context of the BTA, Fraser’s project is particularly valuable. Much of the public debate about the bill has focused on the flight of mega-wealth from the state, whether promised revenue will materialize from the measure, and the politics surrounding hard facts about inequality. The operative text sharpens these debates—and showcases the bill’s highly complex rules addressing valuation, liquidity, and ownership. In this way, Fraser’s approach complements conventional nonpartisan summary services and fills an important gap in public discourse.
But will efforts like Fraser’s ultimately advance democracy? I get Fraser’s website in second when I google “annotated california billionaire tax act,” but that string’s less organic than what many voters may use. And the bill’s text remains difficult and time-consuming to engage and digest, even with annotations. The Billionaire Tax Act is a complicated legal idea, and presentation alone won’t solve that issue. But that’s not really the point. If lay readers can glean something more from clearly presented text than from clunky state-agency versions, then they’re in a better position to make informed decisions when they vote. Those incremental gains are important and worth reflecting on.
Related TaxProf Blog coverage:
- Rauh & Jaros: It Failed in France. It Would Be a Disaster in California (July 8, 2026)
- Newsom Floats Federal Wealth Tax After California Deal Fails (June 29, 2026)
- Clouse et al.: California’s Billionaire Tax Act Threatens Growth and Fails to Address Structural Deficits (June 24, 2026)
- California Billionaire Tax Qualifies for November Ballot (June 23, 2026)
- WSJ: Rich Californians Are Finding Creative Ways to Get Ahead of the Billionaire Tax (June 22, 2026)
- Saez & Zucman: The Case for California’s Billionaire Wealth Tax (May 27, 2026)
- Boll, Saez & Zucman on California Billionaires (May 26, 2026)
- California’s Wealth Tax and Billionaire Psychology (Feb. 3, 2026)
- Galle, Gamage & Shanske: Correcting the Record—Responding to Some Legal Arguments About the 2026 Billionaire Tax Act (Jan. 9, 2026)
