Opposing a Gross Receipts Tax Increase on Financial Services to Fund a Public Bank

In what appears to be another tax increase proposal this election cycle, San Francisco leaders are considering placing a new Gross Receipts Tax increase on financial services firms before voters in November 2026. Before moving forward, we must ask a fundamental question: does City Hall deserve to control even more taxpayer dollars?

According to The San Francisco Standard, the City faces an estimated $877 million budget deficit. At a time when government finances are strained and public trust is fragile, the solution should not default to raising taxes.

District 9 Supervisor Jackie Fielder has proposed increasing the Gross Receipts Tax on Category 6 businesses (Financial Services firms) from 1.69% to 3.85%. The proposal would also shift certain business activities currently classified under Category 5 into Category 6, thereby broadening the tax base.

Under the proposal:

12% of the increased gross receipts tax revenue collected from 2027 through 2035 would fund the creation of a municipal finance corporation or public bank.
If such an entity is not established by December 31, 2031, the Board of Supervisors could redirect those funds toward loans for social housing, renewable energy and electrification projects, and small businesses.
Beginning in tax year 2036, revenues would flow into the City’s General Fund for general governmental purposes.

Name*

First NameLast Name

Email*

example@example.com

Which district do you live in?*

Phone Number

Please enter a valid phone number.Format: (000) 000-0000.

Email Subject

Email to SFPUC, ATTN: Director of Commission Affairs, you may personalize if you wish

Dear Supervisors and Mayor Lurie,&#13;&#10;&#13;&#10;We respectfully urge you to oppose placing the proposed Gross Receipts Tax increase on Financial Services firms on the November 2026 ballot.&#13;&#10;San Francisco’s downtown office vacancy rate remains approximately 33–35%, and our tax base has yet to recover to pre-pandemic levels. Increasing taxes on one of the City’s core economic sectors risks driving more businesses — and jobs — out of San Francisco at a time when economic recovery remains fragile.&#13;&#10;Beyond the economic concerns, the proposal lacks sufficient clarity and specificity. If a public bank or municipal finance corporation were created, how exactly would the funds be allocated? What governance structure would ensure accountability? What measurable outcomes would justify the significant tax increase? The absence of detailed implementation plans raises legitimate concerns about fiscal stewardship.&#13;&#10;Tax increases should be a last resort — not the first response. With a nearly $1 billion budget deficit, the City should prioritize identifying efficiencies, reducing waste, and reassessing spending before asking taxpayers and employers to contribute more. Residents and businesses deserve assurance that existing revenues are being managed responsibly before new burdens are imposed.&#13;&#10;San Francisco’s competitiveness depends on restoring business confidence, stabilizing our tax base, and demonstrating fiscal discipline. This proposal moves us in the opposite direction.&#13;&#10;We respectfully ask you to vote NO on this ordinance and prevent it from advancing to the November 2026 ballot.

Please verify that you are human*