News
“Elon Musk provision:” CA ponders wealth tax–even for those who moved out of state
California legislators are advocating for legislation that would introduce a new tax on the state’s wealthiest residents, even if they have already relocated to another area of the country. The bill was introduced by Assemblyman Alex Lee, a progressive Democrat in the California State Legislature.
Lee’s bill would impose an additional annual 1.5% tax on individuals with a “worldwide net worth” over $1 billion, beginning as early as January 2024. As early as 2026, the bill’s threshold would drop, as individuals with a worldwide net worth over $50 million would also be hit with a 1% annual tax on wealth. Lee estimates that the proposal could raise about $22 billion in new revenue for the state.
In a post on Twitter, Lee noted that the bill is a way for the ultra-rich to pay their fair share. “The working class has shouldered the tax burden for too long. In CA, we’ve introduced #ACA3 + #AB259 to tax the ultra rich & invest in all Californians. The ultra rich are paying little to nothing by hoarding their wealth through assets. Time to end that,” Lee wrote in a post.
While exit taxes are not new in California, the bill includes provisions to create contractual claims tied to the assets of wealthy taxpayers who are unable to pay their annual wealth tax bill because the majority of their assets are not easily converted to cash. The bill would then require annual filings with the California Franchise Tax Board so the individuals can pay the wealth taxes they owe, even if they have already relocated to another state.
Steve Boultbee, a tax partner at Marcum LLP in San Francisco, told the San Francisco Business Times that the proposed tax appears to be a way to discourage residents of California from relocating to another state, especially before an initial public offering or other liquidity events. Boultbee noted that individuals such as Tesla CEO Elon Musk could be affected by the bill.
“You’re gonna have to have left four years before, or they’re going to conceivably get you for something. My first thought is that this could be an ‘Elon Musk provision’ since he moved to Texas,” the tax partner said.
Supporters of the legislation have argued that the funds it could collect from the state’s wealthiest could provide funding for key programs, such as schools, housing, and other social initiatives. Experts, however, have argued against the bill. Jared Walczak, vice president of state projects at Tax Foundation, noted in a statement to Fox News Digital that the bill would actually damage the state’s economy.
“The proposed California wealth tax would be economically destructive, challenging to administer, and would drive many wealthy residents — and all their current tax payments — out of state. The bill sets aside as much as $660 million per year just for administrative costs, more than $40,000 per prospective taxpayer, giving an idea of how difficult such a tax would be to administer.
“A wealth tax could be particularly destructive in California, home to so many tech startups, because the owners of promising businesses could be taxed on hundreds of millions of dollars’ worth of estimated business value that never actually materializes. Very few taxpayers would remit wealth taxes, but many taxpayers would pay the price,” Walczak added.
Patrick Gleason, vice president of state affairs at Americans for Tax Reform, also told the publication that the bill’s system to “get around” the problem of the wealthy leaving California by trying to “tax people even after they leave the state” is questionable at best, or unconstitutional at worst. It should be noted that previous studies have demonstrated that the top 1% of taxpayers in states such as New York and California actually contribute approximately 50% of state income taxes, just as highlighted by individuals such as Elon Musk in the past.
According to Forbes’ 2022 World’s Billionaires list, California remains home to the most billionaires in the country, with 186 living in the state. This is a decrease from the previous year’s count of 189. Despite this, several companies, such as McKesson, Oracle, Tesla, and Charles Schwab, have relocated their headquarters to Texas in recent years.
Don’t hesitate to contact us with news tips. Just send a message to simon@teslarati.com to give us a heads up.
News
Tesla FSD (Supervised) fleet passes 8.4 billion cumulative miles
The figure appears on Tesla’s official safety page, which tracks performance data for FSD (Supervised) and other safety technologies.
Tesla’s Full Self-Driving (Supervised) system has now surpassed 8.4 billion cumulative miles.
The figure appears on Tesla’s official safety page, which tracks performance data for FSD (Supervised) and other safety technologies.
Tesla has long emphasized that large-scale real-world data is central to improving its neural network-based approach to autonomy. Each mile driven with FSD (Supervised) engaged contributes additional edge cases and scenario training for the system.
The milestone also brings Tesla closer to a benchmark previously outlined by CEO Elon Musk. Musk has stated that roughly 10 billion miles of training data may be needed to achieve safe unsupervised self-driving at scale, citing the “long tail” of rare but complex driving situations that must be learned through experience.
The growth curve of FSD Supervised’s cumulative miles over the past five years has been notable.
As noted in data shared by Tesla watcher Sawyer Merritt, annual FSD (Supervised) miles have increased from roughly 6 million in 2021 to 80 million in 2022, 670 million in 2023, 2.25 billion in 2024, and 4.25 billion in 2025. In just the first 50 days of 2026, Tesla owners logged another 1 billion miles.
At the current pace, the fleet is trending towards hitting about 10 billion FSD Supervised miles this year. The increase has been driven by Tesla’s growing vehicle fleet, periodic free trials, and expanding Robotaxi operations, among others.
With the fleet now past 8.4 billion cumulative miles, Tesla’s supervised system is approaching that threshold, even as regulatory approval for fully unsupervised deployment remains subject to further validation and oversight.
Elon Musk
Elon Musk fires back after Wikipedia co-founder claims neutrality and dubs Grokipedia “ridiculous”
Musk’s response to Wales’ comments, which were posted on social media platform X, was short and direct: “Famous last words.”
Elon Musk fired back at Wikipedia co-founder Jimmy Wales after the longtime online encyclopedia leader dismissed xAI’s new AI-powered alternative, Grokipedia, as a “ridiculous” idea that is bound to fail.
Musk’s response to Wales’ comments, which were posted on social media platform X, was short and direct: “Famous last words.”
Wales made the comments while answering questions about Wikipedia’s neutrality. According to Wales, Wikipedia prides itself on neutrality.
“One of our core values at Wikipedia is neutrality. A neutral point of view is non-negotiable. It’s in the community, unquestioned… The idea that we’ve become somehow ‘Wokepidea’ is just not true,” Wales said.
When asked about potential competition from Grokipedia, Wales downplayed the situation. “There is no competition. I don’t know if anyone uses Grokipedia. I think it is a ridiculous idea that will never work,” Wales wrote.
After Grokipedia went live, Larry Sanger, also a co-founder of Wikipedia, wrote on X that his initial impression of the AI-powered Wikipedia alternative was “very OK.”
“My initial impression, looking at my own article and poking around here and there, is that Grokipedia is very OK. The jury’s still out as to whether it’s actually better than Wikipedia. But at this point I would have to say ‘maybe!’” Sanger stated.
Musk responded to Sanger’s assessment by saying it was “accurate.” In a separate post, he added that even in its V0.1 form, Grokipedia was already better than Wikipedia.
During a past appearance on the Tucker Carlson Show, Sanger argued that Wikipedia has drifted from its original vision, citing concerns about how its “Reliable sources/Perennial sources” framework categorizes publications by perceived credibility. As per Sanger, Wikipedia’s “Reliable sources/Perennial sources” list leans heavily left, with conservative publications getting effectively blacklisted in favor of their more liberal counterparts.
As of writing, Grokipedia has reportedly surpassed 80% of English Wikipedia’s article count.
News
Tesla Sweden appeals after grid company refuses to restore existing Supercharger due to union strike
The charging site was previously functioning before it was temporarily disconnected in April last year for electrical safety reasons.
Tesla Sweden is seeking regulatory intervention after a Swedish power grid company refused to reconnect an already operational Supercharger station in Åre due to ongoing union sympathy actions.
The charging site was previously functioning before it was temporarily disconnected in April last year for electrical safety reasons. A temporary construction power cabinet supplying the station had fallen over, described by Tesla as occurring “under unclear circumstances.” The power was then cut at the request of Tesla’s installation contractor to allow safe repair work.
While the safety issue was resolved, the station has not been brought back online. Stefan Sedin, CEO of Jämtkraft elnät, told Dagens Arbete (DA) that power will not be restored to the existing Supercharger station as long as the electric vehicle maker’s union issues are ongoing.
“One of our installers noticed that the construction power had been backed up and was on the ground. We asked Tesla to fix the system, and their installation company in turn asked us to cut the power so that they could do the work safely.
“When everything was restored, the question arose: ‘Wait a minute, can we reconnect the station to the electricity grid? Or what does the notice actually say?’ We consulted with our employer organization, who were clear that as long as sympathy measures are in place, we cannot reconnect this facility,” Sedin said.
The union’s sympathy actions, which began in March 2024, apply to work involving “planning, preparation, new connections, grid expansion, service, maintenance and repairs” of Tesla’s charging infrastructure in Sweden.
Tesla Sweden has argued that reconnecting an existing facility is not equivalent to establishing a new grid connection. In a filing to the Swedish Energy Market Inspectorate, the company stated that reconnecting the installation “is therefore not covered by the sympathy measures and cannot therefore constitute a reason for not reconnecting the facility to the electricity grid.”
Sedin, for his part, noted that Tesla’s issue with the Supercharger is quite unique. And while Jämtkraft elnät itself has no issue with Tesla, its actions are based on the unions’ sympathy measures against the electric vehicle maker.
“This is absolutely the first time that I have been involved in matters relating to union conflicts or sympathy measures. That is why we have relied entirely on the assessment of our employer organization. This is not something that we have made any decisions about ourselves at all.
“It is not that Jämtkraft elnät has a conflict with Tesla, but our actions are based on these sympathy measures. Should it turn out that we have made an incorrect assessment, we will correct ourselves. It is no more difficult than that for us,” the executive said.
Tesla FSD (Supervised) fleet passes 8.4 billion cumulative miles
Elon Musk fires back after Wikipedia co-founder claims neutrality and dubs Grokipedia “ridiculous”
