Some of California’s wealthiest residents have thrown a massive and expensive fit over a proposed tax on billionaires. Yet despite the threats and political spending, at least one of the state’s most prominent billionaires appears to be staying exactly where he is.

Meta founder Mark Zuckerberg reached an agreement with his own board that will keep him in California for at least eight years. The arrangement applies regardless of how voters decide the fate of Proposition 40.

Proposition 40 would impose a one time 5% tax on California’s billionaire class. During the fight over the proposal, Zuckerberg threatened to sell his multimillion dollar home in Palo Alto, California, if voters approved the measure.

Leaving the state rather than helping pay for healthcare for less fortunate people, however, was presented as an unappealing public relations spectacle for Meta. The billionaire escape plan apparently became less attractive once the optics entered the picture.

SEC filings instead show that Zuckerberg negotiated terms involving the sale of stock. That would help him cover the approximately $12.5 billion that The New York Times estimated he would owe under the proposal.

In other words, Zuckerberg appears set to remain in California. The threatened departure that helped dramatize opposition to Proposition 40 has given way to preparations for handling the potential tax bill.

Zuckerberg is hardly alone among California billionaires objecting to the measure. Google figures Sergey Brin and Eric Schmidt were among those who contributed to a staggering $304 million spent on advertisements opposing the wealth tax and promoting Proposition 42.

Proposition 42 offers voters a sharply different course. If approved, it would prevent future wealth tax proposals from reaching the ballot, effectively trying to shut the door before another such campaign can begin.

Gavin Newsom, described as a possible presidential candidate, has backed Proposition 42. His support for the measure has rubbed some members of his voter base the wrong way, adding another political complication to the billionaire tax fight.

Not every billionaire mentioned in the debate is complaining about the possibility of paying more. Nvidia’s Jensen Huang has expressed support for paying the bill and described that responsibility as a privilege.

In a conversation with CBS News, Huang said that “it’s a privilege, it’s a responsibility.” His response offered a striking contrast with the expensive campaign against Proposition 40.

“The fact that I can afford to pay $8 billion in taxes over five years is a privilege,” he explained.

Huang also put his position in blunt terms: “The more you make, the more taxes you pay. So, I’m okay with that.”

United CEO Scott Kirby has likewise voiced support for taxing wealth. He went further than the California proposal by arguing that the country should adopt a national wealth tax.

“Wealth inequality has become a danger to our society, and we need to address that,” Kirby told The New York Times. His argument focused on addressing wealth inequality at the national level rather than relying on individual states.

Kirby added, “We should have a national wealth tax—it won’t work by state because people will just move. And I think we should have inheritance taxes that get close to 100% at some level. I would pay them.”

The warnings about wealthy residents fleeing are also familiar beyond California. Wealthy New York City residents are still occupying their high rises after threatening to cut ties when Mayor Zohran Mamdani won.

California voters now face the competing choices represented by Proposition 40 and Proposition 42. One would levy a 5% tax on billionaires, while the other would block future wealth tax measures from appearing on the ballot.

For all the warnings, political spending, and billionaire outrage, Zuckerberg’s agreement indicates that he is not preparing to bolt. California’s billionaire class may once again be crying wolf while remaining comfortably planted in the state it threatened to abandon.