Skip to main content

BallotQuestions.vote is an independent, nonpartisan tracker. It is not a government website and not an election authority. For official ballot information, contact your state election authority.

Proposition 41

Prohibits New State Taxes That Exclude Revenues from State Spending Limit; Requires Audits for New State Special Taxes

On the ballot

California · November 2026 general election · Constitutional amendment · Election day November 3, 2026
Topics: Government structure, Taxes and revenue

In plain language

Proposition 41 would bar any new state tax whose revenues are excluded from the state appropriations limit voters approved in 1979. For statewide special taxes — taxes dedicated to a specific purpose — it would require the California State Auditor to review each program that would receive the money before the election, once supporters gather 25 percent of the signatures needed, and to publish a summary in the Voter Information Guide. It would also require recurring audits, every four years, of programs funded by special taxes enacted after January 1, 2026. If a conflicting measure on the same ballot receives fewer votes, that measure would be void.

Fiscal impact

Legislative Analyst's Office summary of the estimate of net state and local government fiscal impact: "Unknown net fiscal effect. Increased costs for the California State Auditor to implement new one-time and ongoing audit requirements of programs funded by special taxes. These costs would be mostly paid from the new revenues collected from the special taxes. Possible savings associated with implementing recommendations from the audits."

Summarized from the official fiscal analysis listed in the sources below. Figures are the state's, not this site's.

What supporters and opponents say

These are summaries of arguments made by the named organizations, drawn from the sources listed below. They are their claims, not this site's, and this site takes no position on the measure.

What supporters say

  • The ballot argument signed by Denise LeDuc Froemming (California Society of Certified Public Accountants), former State Auditor Tom Hayes, and Robert Gutierrez (California Taxpayers Association) says voters should have independent information about how a program is managed before being asked to approve a tax to fund it.
  • Supporters state in the official argument that the State Auditor's findings would be posted publicly and printed in the Voter Information Guide, so voters would not have to rely on information from campaigns or politicians.
  • Supporters state that the state budget is a record $352 billion and that spending is up 79 percent since 2019, and argue recurring audits would make funded programs more efficient.

Attributed to California Society of Certified Public Accountants, California Taxpayers Association.

What opponents say

  • The ballot argument signed by Suzanne Jimenez (SEIU-United Healthcare Workers West) says Proposition 41 is not really about audits but is a billionaire-funded measure designed to cancel out Proposition 40, the billionaire tax on the same ballot.
  • Opponents state in the official argument that the measure would cost the state time and money, and urge a "no" vote from anyone who supports the Proposition 40 wealth tax.
  • The argument names Google co-founder Sergey Brin as a funder of measures it describes as attempts to cancel the billionaire tax, and cites U.S. Senator Bernie Sanders criticizing that spending.

Attributed to SEIU-United Healthcare Workers West.

Sources

Everything on this page traces to these sources. Follow them to read the original documents.

Last updated . How this page is sourced and corrected is described in the correction policy.