VOTE YES ON PROP 40
Vote Yes on Prop 40. Protect care, invest in public needs, and make the spending purpose explicit from the start.
The facts at a glance
After administrative expenses, 90% of Prop 40 revenue is directed to healthcare. [1]
Education and food assistance share 10% of Prop 40 revenue after administration. [1]
Prop 40 money cannot replace existing state funding for the designated purposes. [1]
Most of the money goes to healthcare
The Billionaire Tax Health Account receives 90% of the amount remaining after administrative expenses. Authorized uses include protecting Medi-Cal and other coverage for low- and moderate-income people, supporting safety-net providers, and preventing or reducing facility closures and cuts in services. [1]
These are practical priorities: coverage, places to receive care, and services people can actually use. The statute does not require voters to assume all of those purposes are interchangeable, but it makes each an eligible use of the account. [1]
The other account supports education and food assistance
The remaining 10% goes to the Education and Food Assistance Account. The text names kindergarten through grade 14 (community college) public education and food programs including CalFresh, the California Food Assistance Program, CalFood, and universal school meals. [1]
This is a shared account. The measure does not promise 10% to schools plus another 10% to food, or guarantee a fixed portion to each named program. Legislators must allocate within the designated purposes. [1]
A simple illustration of the split
For every $100 left after administrative expenses, $90 would be allocated to the healthcare account and $10 to the education-and-food account. This illustration explains the allocation rule; it is not a revenue forecast or a promise of a particular payment to an individual provider. [1]
The difference matters when reading a headline number. A projection of total gross receipts is not the same as the amount ultimately available to a particular hospital, school district, or food program.
New money cannot be used to replace existing support
Section 16355(d) bars using reserve-fund appropriations as a justification for reducing, eliminating, or failing to increase other state appropriations for healthcare, education, or food assistance. It also expressly prohibits supplanting existing state funds for those purposes. [1]
In everyday language: the measure is intended to add resources to the response, not give the state a reason to take an existing funding stream away. That safeguard is part of the text, not merely a campaign promise. [1]
The fund can operate across years
The Legislature may appropriate up to $22.5 billion annually from the healthcare account and up to $2.5 billion from the education-and-food account, while retaining money in reserve when needed to further the measure’s purposes. Those are spending limits, not guaranteed amounts collected in every year. [1]
The annual reporting provisions require information about revenues, balances, proposed allocations, and past expenditures. A fund can therefore retain resources for later needs while remaining subject to the specified reporting duties. [1]
The school-funding question needs the right comparison
The official summary states that these new receipts are exempt from the constitutional school-funding requirement known as Proposition 98. That is a feature of this measure’s allocation, not something to hide. It is also not a provision directing an equivalent amount to be cut from today’s school budgets. [1][2]
The linked school page explains the difference between the allocation in this proposal and what a hypothetical differently designed tax might send to education. Voters deserve the actual comparison—not a number stripped of what it measures.
A few more answers
Does the whole 10% automatically go to schools?
No. It is an education and food-assistance account. The statute does not set a guaranteed split in funding between those purposes. [1]
Is all administration free?
No. Administrative expenses are accounted for before the 90/10 allocation, and the measure provides for actual and necessary administration. [1]
People and organizations backing a Yes vote
California Nurses Association
California Nurses Association supports California Proposition 40 (2026).
Support appears in CNA’s California ballot-measure list. [3]
Campaign-reported endorsement
AFSCME California PEOPLE Committee
AFSCME California supports California Proposition 40 (2026).
The March 12 release reports its California PEOPLE endorsement vote. [4]
Keep reading
THE PAIRED PAGE
Does Prop 40 Cut Today’s School Budgets?
Read the detailed page →
WHY VOTE YES
Help Keep Hospitals, Clinics and Emergency Rooms Open
Read the detailed page →
WHY VOTE YES
The Rules That Protect How Prop 40 Money Is Spent
Read the detailed page →
CHECK THE EVIDENCE
Sources behind this page
Each reference identifies what it establishes. A cited agency or researcher is not automatically a campaign endorser.
01Proposition 40: text of proposed laws
California Secretary of State · 2026 voter guide · Proposed law
The actual proposed rules on taxpayer eligibility, valuation, payments, spending, and reporting. Tax payments begin in 2027; audit authority and special trust rules remain. Section 50310 governs possible amendments.
Where to look: Gov. Code §16355, PDF pp. 4–5; Rev. & Tax. Code §§50301, 50303–50304, 50308–50312, PDF pp. 5–13.
https://vig.cdn.sos.ca.gov/2026/general/pdf/prop40-text-proposed-laws.pdf
02Proposition 40: official title and summary
California Attorney General; hosted by the Secretary of State · 2026 voter guide · Official summary
The official summary of who pays, asset exclusions, spending allocations, and the Proposition 98 exemption.
Where to look:
https://voterguide.sos.ca.gov/propositions/40/title-summary.htm
03California endorsements
California Nurses Association; hosted by National Nurses United · Undated live roster; checked September 10, 2026 · First-party endorsement
The California Nurses Association’s statewide ballot-measure roster lists support for Prop 40.
Where to look: California Statewide Ballot Measures
https://www.nationalnursesunited.org/california-endorsements
04California Billionaire Tax Wins Backing from 125,000 AFSCME Members
Yes on 40 · March 12, 2026 · Campaign-reported endorsement
The campaign’s report of the AFSCME California PEOPLE endorsement vote.
Where to look:
https://yeson40.com/california-billionaire-tax-afscme-endorsement/
About this page. Published as a review draft by the Yes on 40 campaign, which advocates passage of the measure. Sources were checked on September 10, 2026. Research estimates, proposed legal provisions and endorsements are identified separately. This page is not individual tax or legal advice. Send corrections with the relevant source to the campaign’s press contact.
Vote Yes on Prop 40.
Vote Yes on Prop 40. Put new resources toward healthcare, classrooms and food—with the purposes written into law.