During the Wednesday press conference, California Governor Gavin Newsom said that he was going to render President Donald Trump’s $1.776 Billion Anti-Weaponization Fund completely useless for anyone in the state of California. Newsom said they were planning to tax all payouts received by any California resident by 100%.
The outcome would leave residents with nothing. The declaration has already spurred arguments over whether this is a smart, bold legal maneuver or merely political theater.
Speaking directly to reporters at his Sacramento office, Newsom left no ambiguity. “One thing that I think we’re going to try to do with your support is tax 100 percent,” he said. “Anyone from California that receives any of those funds, we want to tax 100 percent of those proceeds. And that’s an action the state of California can take. It’s an action we look forward to taking.”
The fund was a settlement to Trump’s $10 billion lawsuit against the IRS, after his tax returns were leaked. It is intended to provide compensation to those who assert they were victimized by the weaponization or lawfare of the state.
Five people, appointed by the U.S. Attorney General, will administer the fund.
Critics have claimed the settlement will allow Trump allies, including Jan 6 insurrectionists, to receive compensation. Even within his own party, the announcement blindsided Republican senators and threatened to derail the GOP’s immigration enforcement package ahead of Memorial Day recess.
Newsom did not indicate a specific timeline for when California’s tax would go into effect.
Internet Reacts To California Gov.’s 100% Tax Plan on Trump’s Anti-Weaponization Fund
Reddit responses split between those who saw Newsom’s move as genuinely clever and those who questioned whether there would be anything left to tax in the first place.
Several commenters praised the strategy on its merits, including for reasons beyond the obvious. “This is actually a better idea than it first seems,” one person wrote. “The optics are great. And it will force DOJ to litigate against the tax, which will get the issue in front of courts without standing issues.” Another was more straightforward in their enthusiasm: “Go get it, Gavin. He is by far the most creative Democrat when it comes to taking on MAGA and their corruption. We could use a lot more of that creative thinking, particularly in Congress.”
Skeptics questioned whether the fund would actually pay out anything at all, making the whole exercise moot. “Sadly, 100 percent of nothing is nothing,” one commenter wrote plainly, while another added: “Hold up, people really think he’s gonna give money away.” One more user added: “He will just say I gave it and his supporters will believe they received it.”
Others raised a practical obstacle that could undermine any state-level enforcement. “Part of this Trump/Blanche embezzlement scheme is to keep the recipients secret,” one person noted. “So how would California or any other state be able to take action?”
The news that the California Gov. is making shifts the debate from being purely a political one to being an actual legal one. According to legal observers, a hundred percent state tax against the federal payout may trigger an actual confrontation of state versus federal law in court.
It is something some Democrats actually hope happens because it would leave the DOJ fighting for the fund’s legality in front of a judge as opposed to just behind a microphone.
For a fund already dealing with its second week of a bipartisan controversy, this could be an even greater hurdle.
