San Francisco and California Ballot Backstory · Why is this on my ballot?
Prop 3: summary
Provides Permanent Funding for Schools and Health Care by Extending Existing Tax on High Incomes
Mark your own choices here. You may bring this sheet into the voting booth.
A YES vote means
Top rates of 10.3% to 12.3% on income over about $371,000 single ($742,000 joint; 2025 levels, inflation-adjusted) stay, instead of dropping to 9.3% after 2030.
A NO vote means
After 2030, the rate on income over about $371,000 single ($742,000 joint; 2025 levels, inflation-adjusted) drops to 9.3%, from 10.3% to 12.3% today.
Both ovals are empty on purpose. The choice is yours.
If it fails
Timing: from 2031
If Prop 3 fails, the higher tax rates on high incomes end. The Attorney General’s summary says they expire in 2031. The Legislative Analyst shows 9.3% on those incomes after 2030, not 10.3%, 11.3% or 12.3%.
Why it’s on the ballot now
In 2012, voters approved Prop 30, which raised income tax rates on high earners for a limited time.
In 2016, voters approved Prop 55, which extended those higher rates through 2030. Under current law they expire in 2031.
The LAO says the top 2% of taxpayers who pay these rates pay about half of all state income taxes.
The measure's findings, which argue for it, say the tax raised over $104 billion since 2012. Ending it, they say, would cut state revenue by over $10 billion at once.
The money
The LAO estimates it keeps $5 billion–$15 billion a year. It goes into an Education Protection Account. The Attorney General's summary says 89% goes to K–12 schools and 11% to community colleges. The legal text applies that split to the money used for education. It also sends half of any amount beyond the school funding guarantee and workload budget, up to $2 billion a year, to health care for children and families through Medi-Cal; lawmakers may suspend that in a declared budget emergency. Across the budget, the LAO estimates roughly 40% would reach schools and community colleges, the rest other programs and reserves. See the money chart for the latest filed totals.
Needs a simple majority (50% + 1) to pass Some measures need 55% or two-thirds of votes to pass. This one needs only a simple majority.Who bears the cost
High-income taxpayers (the top 2% of California taxpayers)
The Attorney General’s summary says Prop 3 makes the 2012 rates permanent. They apply to income over about $371,000 for single filers, $742,000 for joint filers and $505,000 for heads of household (2025 levels, adjusted yearly for inflation).
The strongest case for and against
Strongest case for
Supporters include the California Teachers Association, the California School Nurses Organization and Planned Parenthood Affiliates of California. They say Prop 3 “does not raise your taxes.” It keeps the rates the top 2% have paid for 15 years, they say. They say letting the rates end would give the wealthiest a large tax cut. Others, they say, would face teacher layoffs, crowded classrooms and cuts to Medi-Cal, the state's health plan for people with low incomes. They say the money goes straight to local schools and community colleges. They add that it cannot pay for administration and is audited every year. By covering schools, they say, it frees state money for health care and fire protection.
Strongest case against
Opponents include the California Taxpayers Association, the Family Business Association of California and the California Hispanic Chambers of Commerce. They say voters were told these higher rates would be temporary, for seven years. Then, they say, the rates were extended 12 more. They say making the rates permanent is a tax increase: “the largest permanent state income tax increase in California history.” They say it would cost taxpayers “up to $15 billion every year.” They argue California has a spending problem, not a revenue problem. They say a $100 billion surplus became a $30 billion deficit in three years. They say high income taxes add to the nation's highest cost of living. And they say waste and overspending are no excuse to “raise our taxes even higher.”