The Trump administration is preparing to cancel a large swath of federal funding for California, an effort that could begin as soon as Friday, according to multiple sources.

Agencies are being told to start identifying grants the administration can withhold from California. Sources said the administration is specifically considering a full termination of federal grant funding for the University of California and California State University systems.

Singling out one state for massive cuts would be an unusual move, but Donald Trump has long made Democratic-led California a target.

    • N0t_5ure@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      129
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      That would break the bank. California is 4th largest economy in the world, after the U.S., China, and Germany. It would probably cause Trump to declare martial law and send troops to California.

      • SabinStargem@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        13 hours ago

        Sign me up for Cali’s defense. Better to fight Trump and his kind, than to live with them for the rest of my life.

      • miguel@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        108
        ·
        1 day ago

        I mean, good luck? CA is also obscenely well defended, since most of its modern wealth came from it being considered a battleground vs Japan and Russia, so there’s loads of bases.

        Most likely, this will just yet again be a defeat in court. That dude is just throwing shit against the wall and hoping some of it will stick.

        • gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          15 hours ago

          Why are people still convinced that the courts have any meaningful power anymore? The orangeboi regime has already flagrantly ignored a ton of court rulings; they’ll continue to ignore more court rulings. They don’t care. It’s not “who’s gonna let me”; it’s “who’s gonna stop me”. Orangeboi et al have inserted their own loyalist flunkies into the leadership of all the organizations that can effectively function as the enforcement of court decisions. There are no guardrails anymore. “Checks and balances” is and always was a gentlemen’s agreement, and it’s no longer being honored.

        • conditional_soup@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          15 hours ago

          That and the geography is an absolute mf for logistics. There’s like three good roads that cross the Sierra Nevada.

        • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          11
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          24 hours ago

          so there’s loads of bases

          Staffed with federal employees. Fort Hunter isn’t going to protect Californians from the Pentagon. It is the Pentagon.

          Also, and this is a much bigger deal, Gavin Newsome is a cowardly little parasite. He’s not going to side with Californians on this. He’s going to grovel on his belly and lick Trump’s shoes hoping he can convince The Donald to relent.

          Most likely, this will just yet again be a defeat in court.

          So long as DOGE runs the US Treasury, it hardly matters. If Trump starts cancelling payments and reversing transactions at a California scale, he’ll drag the whole country into recession overnight. Courts can issue orders, but only the Treasury has the power to authorize payments.

        • vaultdweller013@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          30
          ·
          1 day ago

          You’re assuming Trump wouldn’t also fuck over troops stationed here in California. Remember military personnel are reliant on local infrastructure in a lot of areas and if Trump starts fucking with it again the military may be caught in the crossfire.

          • miguel@fedia.io
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            33
            ·
            1 day ago

            I’m assuming the comment “declaring martial law” would require nat guard (natives) and stationed troops (federal) to attempt to impose order. Not sure what that has to do with local infra, but the last time they tried that (LA Riots) it didn’t go great. Doing it for a strictly political reason would likely result in some very hard decisions for a lot of nat guard and some federal career military. The Nat Guard and federales couldn’t even restore order in South Central when most of the state was in their corner, it’d be madness to think they could handle the whole state when it was over a pissing match.

            California gets roughly $162.9 billion from the fed. California pays roughly $692 billion to the fed in taxes.

            It’d be pretty easy to see them choosing to just withhold whatever Trump decided to deny them and say “fine, then we’ll just make up the offset, suck it”, and then things would get interesting indeed.

            • vaultdweller013@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              6
              ·
              1 day ago

              I thought ya meant that because of how militarized the state was it’d be hard for the state to respond. I was just stating you could cut water and electricity as a response to that.

              But yeah you are right on the fact the response would at best be a mess, honestly if they were told to occupy the state they’d probably just sit around getting heat stroke and doing nothing.

    • Ghostalmedia@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      38
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 day ago

      Remember, the state doesn’t pay taxes, individual citizens do by filling out their annual federal income taxes.

      So, if “California” were to stop giving money to the federal government, the governor would basically need to convince individual citizens not to file their 1040.

      And all of those people would have to clinch their assholes and hope Trump didn’t sick the IRS on them.

      • h4x0r@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        9 hours ago

        For private businesses sure, but Newsom can simply set up an escrow account and direct all state government entities to send their federal withholding to the new account instead.

      • Bytemeister@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        11 hours ago

        California imposes a new law that companies operating in Cali cannot automatically collect federal income tax from Californian citizens.

        Cali raises the state tax rate to match the current federal rate (could probably go lower actually, since Cali is subsidizing most of the red states).

        Boom, no more taxes paid to the Fed.

        Or… Cali’s creates a law where their own tax department collects the federal tax and pays it for their citizens.

        • Ghostalmedia@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          23 hours ago

          But then each of those people get walloped with a big ass 1040 payment from the feds at the end of the year. And they feds can chose to make an “example” of random people who don’t pay up.

      • kautau@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 day ago

        Also employers would need to all simultaneously stop withholding taxes from employee paychecks for federal taxes, since you can’t just update your W-2 to a $0 withholding without claiming dependents, multiple other jobs, etc. You don’t “choose” your withholding, you just check the boxes that calculates the minimum withholding.

    • Skyrmir@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      1 day ago

      That’s the problem California doesn’t send taxes to the Federal government. People and businesses pay directly to the government. There’s no mechanism to even stop it on a state level if a governor wanted to.

        • Skyrmir@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 day ago

          They don’t do that now. The IRS contacts the bank, that’s licensed as a bank by the federal government, and tells them to close your account. Usually the first step is to freeze your assets, then they start taking things. The banks aren’t going to argue, they’re not going to give up their entire business just to protect you, or a single state. Even if it is California.

          • auraithx@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            21 hours ago

            That is an oversimplification. While the IRS can issue levies to federally regulated banks, it usually requires a formal legal process such as a tax lien or a court order. Banks do not comply automatically without proper documentation. State laws can influence how quickly or effectively the IRS operates, especially if the state limits data sharing, delays cooperation, or questions jurisdiction. Not all banks are federally chartered. Some are licensed at the state level and may face different legal pressures. California cannot stop the IRS entirely, but it can slow down enforcement, create legal friction, and raise the political stakes.

      • vaultdweller013@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        Start cutting power, water, and gas to federal offices and facilities, let’s see if they can do jack shit when it’s 90 degrees outside and 110 inside. Mind you that is just me thinking reconciliation is stupid and shouldn’t be considered as a possibility.

            • BarqsHasBite@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              10 hours ago

              That’s not the point. By cutting off water electricity etc you are helping Trump dismantle the federal government. You know that Trump guy that said “we want federal employees to hate going into work” well congratulations you just helped him big time.

              • RubberElectrons@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                7 hours ago

                Those very workers might be happy working for the state should CA make that offer to workers helping manage dams etc, particularly if compensation is the same or better. Organizationally, there would be some disarray, but…

                It’d be interesting to directly head-hunt the federal offices until they were empty, even if it were just temporary.

                • BarqsHasBite@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  7 hours ago

                  Sigh. Federal and state cover different things. If you think you can dismantle the fed and everyone can just go to the state and everything will be the same, then you really are no different than the Trumpers that want to burn everything down. I’m out of this conversation.

    • Dozzi92@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 day ago

      I was wondering about this. The new BBB or whatever increases SALT to 40k. I live in Jersey. I would have no problem with NJ just taxing me 40k outright. You just pay 40k to live in NJ. And then I just deduct that 40k from my federal tax burden, bringing it down below 0. What’s stopping states from doing this?

      • Skyrmir@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        1 day ago

        The irs wouldn’t recognize the deduction and you would still owe the entire amount to the federal government.

        • Dozzi92@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 day ago

          I’m curious why you say this, and I’m not trying to be argumentative. I pay 11k for property taxes, and so with this I get to deduct that 11k from my federal taxes. And if you mean to say that the IRS and the Feds would be like hey, you can’t do that, yeah, you’re probably right, and I agree. I’m just curious if you had some other rationale for the suggestion. I am no tax expert.

          • Skyrmir@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 day ago

            It would be considered tax evasion. Deductions not authorized by federal statute, have no affect on federal tax laws. Start following your own rules, and they will come knocking on your door. Of course with staffing cuts, it could be years from now when they show up.

            • Dozzi92@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              1 day ago

              Yeah, I guess I’m still a little confused. You’re allowed to deduct State and Local taxes on your federal return. Now it’s 10k, the BBB raises it to 40k. I’m just saying states should levy a tax to maximize the SALT deduction for everyone, because you’re allowed to do it. But it’s not going to happen, just me being silly.

              • Skyrmir@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                1 day ago

                I was misunderstanding a bit myself. I was thinking you meant by yourself. As a state, California could possibly increase property taxes to maximize everyone’s salt deduction. As more of a long term solution it might even be an idea depending on California constitutional law. More likely though, they would just have to fight the illegal impoundment in the court. While it would likely take months to get done, changing tax law the the affects of that would take years.