Video clips showing the aftermath of a deadly crush in Seoul will be removed from the latest Call of Duty game after an angry reaction from victims’ families.
Real life news coverage of the 2022 disaster which killed almost 160 people was included in an opening scene of Modern Warfare 4 to illustrate a fictional invasion from North Korea.
Bereaved families said they were “appalled” to see the footage – which included people being removed on stretchers, body bags on the street and resuscitation efforts – repurposed for the game.
Activision, which makes Call of Duty, has since apologised and confirmed it would be removed in the game’s next update on 12 November.
The crush happened in the narrow alleys of Seoul’s Itaewon district when more than 100,000 people went to the area to celebrate Halloween four years ago.
The streets became so tightly packed that people could not move and some were unable to breathe.
In a statement on Thursday, the families of those who died said the disaster “was a tragedy that caused hundreds of casualties, and citizens who took part in the rescue or witnessed it have suffered from trauma until now”.
“We cannot help but be appalled that the chaotic and desperate scene, in which many citizens at the site performed CPR to save one another and victims lay on the freezing street, was used to create a scene in a game.
“Using such an event as material for a game made for entertainment is in itself highly inappropriate and senseless.”
Activision confirmed it had used real news coverage of the disaster “to establish the game’s fictional narrative” but insisted it had “not intended to reference or trivialise the Itaewon disaster or any other real-world tragedy in any way, shape or form”.
Confirming on Friday that the footage would be removed in a statement, the company offered its condolences and apologised to the bereaved families and victims who have been hurt by this incident.
The decision was welcomed by the 10.29 Itaewon Disaster Bereaved Families Association, however the group told the BBC they had not received a direct apology from Activision.
Modern Warfare 4, which was released last week, had already faced criticism for basing the game on North Korea invading South Korea, as the two countries have been technically at war for decades.
Fighting stopped in the Korean War in 1953, but the two countries never signed a peace treaty and conflict is a very real worry in that part of the world.

Where has Bolsonaro been?
By Thomas Copeland and Jake Horton
Flavio Bolsonaro has not taken a straightforward route to the US, and BBC Verify has been tracking how he got there since leaving Brazil yesterday.
According to Argentina’s National Directorate of Migration, Bolsonaro crossed into the country over land late on Tuesday night local time, where he then boarded a plane with four family members.
Tracking data from Flightradar24 shows a Gulfstream G400 departed Puerto Iguazu in Argentina at 03:18 GMT on Wednesday to head to Guayaquil in Ecuador.
This matches the Argentinian authorities’ statement, which said Bolsonaro and his family “boarded a private flight dispatched by the company Baires Fly S.A. with a destination to the city of Guayaquil, Ecuador”.
The same private jet then departed Guayaquil at around 09:00 GMT, landing at Miami-Opa Locka Executive Airport just before 13:30 GMT where Bolsonaro was pictured getting off it.
How did we get here?
Bolsonaro emerged from the first round of voting in Brazil’s presidential election in early October as the frontrunner to be president, racking up 47% of the vote.
But in a run-off last weekend, he lost against the left-wing incumbent, President Lula.
Bolsonaro said he planned to challenge the result.
But when he next uploaded a video statement to social media, he said been ordered to by the Supreme Court to surrender his passports.
The order was made as part of an ongoing investigation into alleged money laundering. Bolsonaro has not been charged and has denied the allegations.
He said at the time that he had no plans to leave the country, but he never handed in his documents, and they were cancelled by authorities. Bolsonaro has not spoken in public since, and questions about his whereabouts have swirled.
Now, as we’ve seen, he has landed near Miami, Florida.
How Bolsonaro’s whereabouts became a hot topic
Vanessa Buschschlüter
Latin America and Caribbean editor
The past 24 hours have been awash with rumours and confusion all centred around one question: where in the world is Flávio Bolsonaro?
Speculation begins
The speculation was first triggered by a report on an Argentine news site which claimed he had crossed the land border between Brazil and Argentina and had boarded a private plane en route to the US.
Brazilian police took the rumours seriously. They checked border crossings but found no evidence the defeated presidential candidate had left the country, and Argentine officials said they had no reports of him crossing.
For a little while, it seemed like the defeated presidential candidate may just be keeping an uncharacteristically low profile after being unexpectedly beaten by his left-wing rival in the presidential run-off on Sunday.
‘No plans to leave Brazil’
In the last video he had uploaded to social media, he revealed that he’d been ordered to surrender his passports by the Supreme Court – an order he described as an “attempt to intimidate him”. He added that he had no plans to leave Brazil.
But then the deadline Bolsonaro set by the Supreme Court for him to surrender his documents came and went… without Bolsonaro appearing.
Where in the world is Flávio Bolsonaro?
This prompted the cancellation of his passports and attempts to establish where he was.
His lawyers said they did not know his whereabouts.
Then, several sources told the BBC and other broadcasters he was on his way to the US.
The US State Department confirmed it would issue him and his family with visas to enter the US.
There were even reports he had landed already.
‘I heard he was in Argentina’
But when reporters quizzed US President Trump about the matter, he said he simply said: “I heard he was in Argentina”.
A tweet by Argentine migration officials around the same time said Bolsonaro and his wife had crossed the border late on Tuesday and boarded a plane for Guayaquil, Ecuador.
However, it wasn’t clear at the time if that would be the final destination.
Lots of new questions
That same plane has now landed in the US… and Bolsonaro has been seen leaving it.
While this puts an end to the speculation about his whereabouts, it raises many new questions.
Stay with us as we unpack some of them.

Bolsonaro’s brother told him to move to US if he lost election
While we’ve yet to receive confirmation of Flávio Bolsonaro’s whereabouts, his younger brother, Eduardo, had previously encouraged him to move to the US if he lost the presidential election.
Eduardo Bolsonaro, who currently lives in the US state of Texas, relocated there in 2025.
“If my brother does not win, I’m in ‌favour that he would leave the country,” he told podcaster Steven ‌Crowder this month, according to Reuters news agency.
Their father, former President Jair Bolsonaro, left Brazil for Florida when he lost the election to Lula in 2022. He returned three months later.
Jair Bolsonaro, who Flávio said he visited when we last heard from him, is currently under house arrest as part of his 27-year sentence for attempting a coup after the 2022 election.
Bolsonaro’s running mate sends message of solidarity to Bolsonaro
Alfredo Gaspar, who was Flávio Bolsonaro’s candidate for vice-president, says that he is praying for his running mate, as well as the safety of the senator’s family, including his wife, Fernanda.
“In light of the relentless persecution suffered by President Flávio Bolsonaro, I offer my solidarity to him, Fernanda, and their two daughters, praying to God for the safety and well-being of this beloved family,” Gaspar writes in a post on X.
Minutes before the post went out, the congressman had posted a video in which he thanked the nearly 60 million voters who supported his ticket and added that “some defeats are true victories”.
Reports say that Flávio Bolsonaro has travelled to the US
Flávio Bolsonaro has reportedly travelled to the US. Brazilian authorities earlier cancelled his passports after he failed to comply with an order to surrender them.
Reporting from Reuters, CNN Brasil, NBC News and multiple local outlets in Brazil suggests that Bolsonaro has travelled to the country, citing sources familiar with the senator’s plans.
The BBC has not independently verified this report but has contacted the US State Department, the White House, and the embassies of both the US in Brazil and Brazil in the US for comment.
Bolsonaro’s lawyers tell BBC they are ‘completely in the dark’
Flávio Bolsonaro’s lawyers have told BBC Brasil that they are “completely in the dark” following uncertainty about the presidential candidate’s whereabouts.
“I can’t give you a statement. I’m completely in the dark. We knew nothing about this, and we still have no information about what happened,” one lawyer tells the BBC.
They add that Rogério Marinho, Bolsonaro’s campaign manager, is expected to speak on behalf of the campaign as soon as they know exactly what happened.
Brazil’s high court says Bolsonaro proceedings appear to be confidential
Ione Wells
North America correspondent
Brazil’s Supreme Court tells me it does not have further information about the whereabouts of Flávio Bolsonaro at the time of writing.
“The proceedings appear to be confidential,” it said.
On Monday, the Supreme Court ordered Bolsonaro to hand his passports over to police within 24 hours as part of an investigation into alleged money laundering, which he denies.
At the time, Bolsonaro said he had no plans to leave the country, and insisted that he would stay in Brazil to lead the opposition to his left-wing rival, President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva.
But the deadline has passed without the senator surrendering the passports, prompting speculation he may have left the country.
Why were Bolsonaro’s passports cancelled?
Vanessa Buschschlüter
Latin America and Caribbean editor
Flávio Bolsonaro’s passports were cancelled after he failed to surrender the documents to police in the 24-hour deadline he had been allotted.
The order to hand over the passports was given by a Supreme Court justice: Alexandre de Moraes.
Moraes is investigating allegations that Bolsonaro was involved in a money laundering scheme and the decision that he should surrender the passports is part of that probe.
Such a measure is sometimes taken to prevent the person under investigation from leaving the country.
Investigators want to ensure that they have access to the person so that they can question them. It does not necessarily mean that they plan to arrest them – it means they do not want them to leave the jurisdiction where the investigation is being held.
We have little information because Moraes did not make the order public.
In fact, the order to surrender the passports only became public when Bolsonaro himself revealed it to the press on Monday.
At the time, he said he had no plans to leave, and that he would hand over the documents.
However, the deadline passed without doing so, and speculation that he had left the country has become feverish.
Trump previously described Brazilian election as ‘rigged’
As we’ve reported, the Bolsonaro family has close ties to US President Donald Trump.
Brazil’s election result was announced on Sunday night, with Brazil’s President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva winning a fourth term in office. The result came as a surprise after the younger Bolsonaro won the first round on 4 October
On Monday, Trump told reporters that it “looked like another rigged election”.
Asked about the result, Trump told reporters it looked “so corrupt” and “so terrible”, adding: “I didn’t take sides, but it was a terrible look for the world”.
“Elections have to be indisputable, and it looked very bad to me,” he added. Lula won 51.79% of the vote, compared to Bolsonaro’s 48.21%.
But the US president added that he “likes” Brazil’s left-wing president, Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, adding that the pair get along “very well”.
Trump had not explicitly endorsed Lula’s rival Flávio Bolsonaro during the election campaign, but was a close ally of Bolsonaro’s father, the former president Jair Bolsonaro.
Bolsonaro family has close ties with Trump administration
The Bolsonaro family has close ties with the Trump administration.
Flávio Bolsonaro’s father, ex-president Jair Bolsonaro, also travelled to the US shortly after he lost the 2022 election to Lula, the very same man who defeated his son on Sunday.
While Jair Bolsonaro was in the US, his supporters stormed government buildings in the capital Brasília on 8 January 2023.
After he returned to Brazil in March 2023, the older Bolsonaro was charged with attempting to overthrow Lula.
He was sentenced to 27 years in jail and is currently under house arrest after being moved from his cell due to recurrent health issues.
No public statements from Bolsonaro in 21 hours
Flávio Bolsonaro, who is normally very active on social media, has not made any public statements in the past 21 hours.
The last time the senator made any kind of public announcement was in the form of a video uploaded to social media on Monday afternoon local time.
In that video, he insisted that he had never considered leaving Brazil.
However, on Tuesday, he failed to comply with an order to surrender his passports and missed the deadline to hand them over to police.
The man who had ordered Bolsonaro to surrender his passports was Supreme Court Justice Alexandre de Moraes, the same judge who presided over the trial of his father, Jair Bolsonaro.
The older Bolsonaro was convicted of plotting a coup after he was beaten in the 2022 election by Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, the very man who on Sunday defeated Flávio Bolsonaro in the run-off.
What we know about Bolsonaro’s whereabouts – so far
Ione Wells
North America correspondent
Police in Brazil have cancelled the passports of Flávio Bolsonaro, after he failed to comply with an order to surrender the documents within 24 hours.
He hasn’t made public statements for 21 hours. The last time he spoke publicly was through a video published yesterday afternoon on his social networks, where he said he never thought about leaving the country.
The order to surrender his passports was made on Monday. He confirmed this in a statement and said he was summoned by police when visiting his father.
Yesterday, in the video released on his Instagram and also sent by his press office, Bolsonaro said that he would deliver the passports, comply, and would continue working as political opposition to Lula.
There has been speculation he tried to leave the country after Argentine media said there was a plan for him to cross into Argentina and take a flight on a private plane to the United States – but that the plane didn’t take off.
Argentine migration authorities said they had not registered his entry into the country.
They said: “Due to the media escalation due to the presence of a private plane at Iguazú International Airport, the authorities proceeded to initiate controls corresponding to the aircraft and crew. Finally, it was found that the company’s documentation is in order and no flight plan including the Bolsonaro family was presented.”
His brother Eduardo lives in Texas and had earlier said that if Bolsonaro lost the election he should leave Brazil. The candidate suggested that this was what prompted what he’s alleged is a politically motivated request to take his passport.
Bolsonaro has yet to concede defeat after election
Brazil’s election result was announced on Sunday night, seeing Brazil’s President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva winning a fourth term in office.
He beat his right-wing challenger, Flávio Bolsonaro, who is the son of former president Jair Bolsonaro.
The result came as a surprise after the younger Bolsonaro won the first round on 4 October and polls had put him ahead of Lula going into the run-off on Sunday.
But Lula’s camp gained momentum ahead of election day, and ending up winning 51.79% of the vote, compared to Flávio Bolsonaro’s 48.21%.
Bolsonaro has not conceded, arguing that he had been put at a disadvantage by polling being extended by two hours on election day – even though the extension had been requested by both his party and that of his rival.
The Liberal Party, whose candidate he was, however, has accepted the result.

When we landed by helicopter at Rosebank, this oil field was at the centre of a political storm – and set to be in the path of a real one.
We arrived on Wednesday morning, just a few hours after the UK government had granted consent for the production of gas from the Jackdaw field in the North Sea.
But already attention was shifting to this wild and windy patch of the North Atlantic – the next big decision for Energy Secretary Miatta Fahnbulleh.
Rosebank is bigger than Jackdaw, it would generate higher greenhouse gas emissions, and it could be far more lucrative for its owners, Adura and Ithaca.
This summer, along with a camera crew, I travelled to Jackdaw, 150 miles east of Aberdeen.
Now we were the first journalists to visit Rosebank.
We came here – days before Storm Boelo arrived with strong winds and heavy rain – to scrutinise a controversial project which is at the heart of a national debate about climate change, energy policy and the economy.
But we also hoped for a rare glimpse into life offshore.
“It’s good fun, it’s interesting, every day can change,” said Nicola Boyd, who runs the helideck, and greeted us as we struggled out of our lifejackets and survival suits.
Boyd has worked offshore for nearly a decade, including a year on Rosebank – where she spends two weeks at a time followed by three weeks’ leave.
“It’s a job I love,” she added.
It’s also a job that calls for steady legs and a strong stomach.
Unlike the fixed Jackdaw platform, this installation – 80 miles north west of Shetland – is a large ship, a floating production, storage and offloading vessel (FPSO) named the Petrojarl Rosebank.
It’s been chartered by the field’s owners from Aberdeen-based Altera and, during my 48 hours on board, it was constantly but gently rolling on the North Atlantic swell.
Those conditions may be misleading.
With the understatement typical of an Orkney islander, lead mechanical technician Ewan Leonard told me the winter weather could be “a bit of a challenge.”
“Last week we had a 30m heave coming through,” he said, referring to the swell, “so we’ll probably suffer more of that as the winter goes on.”
Altera CEO Chris Brett told me that in the industry the environment west of Shetland is considered “as harsh as you get anywhere in the world.”
Whatever your view on that industry, the sheer scale of what humans have achieved in such conditions is impressive.
The deep reserves of skill, ingenuity and engineering prowess among the 122 people on board are obvious.
The jobs are well-paid and, according to Ewan Leonard, the facilities are excellent.
“We have single-man cabins, there’s good gym facilities, there’s a lot of rec rooms here.”
Douglas Hogge, a production supervisor in charge of a team responsible for the safe extraction of oil and gas, agrees.
“There’s the gym, the sauna,” he said, adding “you can obviously go and get some fresh air. There’s plenty of fresh air out there.”
There’s even a cinema.
“As you’ve seen yourself, the food is fantastic on board, so no complaints.” added Leonard.
Everyone we spoke to agreed with that, praising the talented chefs who sent out all sorts of delicious dishes, from braised ox cheek to mackerel to pork loin, day and night.
As dusk gathers and the nightshift get ready for work with a strange breakfast of fillet steak and chocolate brownie pudding, the vessel begins to glow in the gloom.
It is a strange sight, the decks criss-crossed by a bewilderingly complex array of pipes, valves and bright yellow steelwork.
The ship doesn’t move far, rotating around a fixed central point called the turret to face into the weather, making life a little easier for those on board.
If production is approved, oil and gas will be pumped up through the turret from wells in the field below, which contains an estimated 300m to 500m barrels, enough for perhaps 25 years.
“For myself and a lot of the guys, that would see us out to retirement,” said Douglas Hogge.
“We need to see this approved,” he added.
Environmental campaigners strongly disagree. They’ve been trying to stop Rosebank for years, with some success.
“The future of the energy sector in the UK is renewable energy,” said Tessa Khan, executive director of the campaigning group Uplift.
Consent for production at Rosebank was first granted under the Conservative government in 2023.
But in 2025, after a challenge by Greenpeace and Uplift, the Court of Session in Edinburgh ruled the approvals of the UK’s largest known untapped oil field and Jackdaw were unlawful because they had failed to take into account the climate impact of actually burning the fossil fuels in cars, homes and factories.
The judge, Lord Ericht, said the fields’ developers could carry on with work short of producing oil and gas while they provided more detailed environmental assessments for the government and regulators to consider.
“We think Rosebank would be a disastrous decision and a terrible deal for ordinary people across this country,” said Khan, urging prime minister Andy Burnham to prioritise renewables in his quest to re-industrialise the nation.
“If the government’s interested in building investor confidence, giving the green light to a major new oil field is going to do the opposite,” she argued.
Whatever happens with Rosebank and Jackdaw, the long-term trend for the industry is clear and it is one of decline.
It’s a quarter of a century since oil production peaked and in recent years jobs in oil and gas have been disappearing much faster than they’re being created in renewable energy such as wind and solar power.
The timeline of Jackdaw and Rosebank
The oil from Rosebank would be loaded onto tankers via a gigantic hose and nozzle, which looks like the super-sized pump of an enormous floating filling station.
From there it would be sold on the international market and, most likely, taken to continental Europe for refining.
Opponents say that proves the project is of little benefit to the UK and should be rejected.
Supporters argue that’s not the case because UK and European energy markets are co-dependent, adding that Rosebank will generate millions in tax for the Treasury.
Neil McCulloch, chief executive of Adura – which owns 80% of Rosebank and is a joint venture between Shell and the Norwegian state energy firm, Equinor – is optimistic.
He points out that Rosebank contains not just oil but gas which would be piped to Shetland and on to the St Fergus terminal in Aberdeenshire, with the potential to heat 500,000 British homes at peak production.
Approval of this project, argues McCulloch, could pave the way for four more Jackdaw-sized gas developments in the waters west of Shetland – Tornado, Tornado East, Tobermory and Suilven.
“We would like to proceed with them,” he said.
A surge in fossil fuel production if Rosebank is approved is exactly what campaigners fear.
It would, argues Tessa Khan, exacerbate the deadly and damaging impact of climate change for British teachers, nurses, firefighters and families worried about their children while making “huge profits for companies that are already incredibly profitable”.
When it comes to the impending UK government decision – which sources have told BBC News should come before Christmas – there is a strange mood at Rosebank.
And for some on board, very particular cravings.
For steward Liam Davidson, it is a desire to see his French bulldog, Bailey, at the end of his fortnight on board.
“My wee dog’s at the heliport when I arrive,” he said, “I do miss her.”
For Nicola Boyd, it’s her double bed and a pizza delivery.
“I love seeing the family, but for me, it’s the pizza,” she told me.
But this time there might be a delay in delivering Boyd herself.
She is coming to the end of her fortnight but, as she helped us into our survival suits, the Met Office issued an amber weather warning for much of Scotland.
For Rosebank, it seems, there are stormy seas ahead, one way or the another.

Few places on the planet have as many ultra-wealthy residents as California, a US state known for glamour, coastal mega-mansions, and being home to the rich and famous.
Now voters are about to decide whether the mega-rich among them – including media mogul Oprah Winfrey, Meta head Mark Zuckerberg, Skims cofounder and reality television star Kim Kardashian, and filmmaker George Lucas – should hand over billions of dollars to pay for improvements to healthcare.
Proposition 40 is aimed at levying a one-time 5% tax on the net worth of all of California’s billionaires.
There are a little more than 200 such individuals in the state – but that hasn’t stopped the measure from dividing leaders and causing some of its ultra-wealthy residents to flee. One billionaire businessman says he’s brought jobs to California, but the proposition made him feel “a little bit like I wasn’t wanted”.
But the vote is also offering regular residents a voice on an issue that has roiled politics for decades.
“I believe this is the first billionaire tax – meaning a wealth tax that is targeting a very extreme percentile of the wealth distribution,” says Francesco Trebbi, a public policy professor at the University of California, Berkeley. He noted the measure’s historic nature and how it could help even out California’s wealth gap.
The state has the largest economy in the country and boasts the fourth largest global economy, bigger than India and the UK. And it is home to one of the highest concentrations of billionaires in the world. But it also has the largest share of homeless people in the nation and one of the highest wealth gaps.
Those who back the measure have argued it helps ensure that the ultra-wealthy are contributing their fair share and will help backfill gaps in the state’s budget. The move aims to raise $100bn (£75bn) to make up for federal funding cuts to the state’s health-care system.
Suzanne Jimenez, chief of staff for Service Employees International Union-United Healthcare Workers West, which helped lead the charge for the initiative, says the measure is a “short-term solution” for massive federal funding cuts coming to California as a result of US President Donald Trump’s sweeping tax and spending bill.
“If we do nothing, we’re going to see a collapse of our healthcare system, while we figure out a longer-term solution to fund our healthcare,” she tells the BBC.
While the ballot measure has many supporters – including some billionaires like Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang – it has faced fierce opposition from a variety of figures, from billionaires to the state’s liberal governor.
Google co-founder Sergey Brin has given more than $100m to a political organisation funding ballot measures that could block the wealth tax, the Los Angeles Times reports.
California Governor Gavin Newsom, whose tenure is coming to an end, is perhaps the most notable political leader opposing it. He has voiced concerns that the measure could cause the wealthy to leave the state and drive out their crucial income tax revenue.
A September poll from the Berkeley Institute of Governmental Studies and the Los Angeles Times found the proposition has not clearly won over a majority of voters, with 45% of likely voters in favour of the tax, 42% opposed and 13% undecided.
The statewide ballot measure would need to be approved by a majority of residents.
California is not the first place to toy with the idea of taxing the rich. Also on the West Coast, voters in US state of Washington are considering whether to accept or reject a “millionaires tax” – a 9.9% tax on income over $1m a year.
While wealth taxes were once a fairly common form of taxation in Europe, they have rapidly fallen out of favour and now only exist in three European countries – Spain, Norway and Switzerland, says Dr Kristian Niemietz, head of political economy at the Institute of Economic Affairs.
Niemietz believes wealth taxes are “more trouble than they are worth” because they cause administrative issues, suppress investment, lead to capital flight and, in the end, do not raise much revenue.
In the case of Norway, a local news organisation found that an increase in the wealth tax led to more super wealthy people leaving the country in 2022 than in the preceding 13 years combined. A study on Switzerland found that a 0.1 percentage point increase in a wealth tax reduced taxable wealth by 3.5%.
The California measure, if approved, would apply retroactively to those with a net worth of at least $1bn who resided in California as of 1 January 2026. At least six of the state’s 200 plus billionaires have reportedly left California ahead of that deadline to avoid the tax.
They include Google co-founders Larry Page and Sergey Brin, venture capitalist Peter Thiel, former Uber CEO Travis Kalanick and Hankey Group founder Don Hankey.
Hankey, a Los Angeles billionaire who has lived in California all his life, told Forbes he left for the state of Nevada as a result of the proposed wealth tax.
“I think we’ve created a lot of jobs in California. We have a few thousand people working for us and we have a profit sharing plan. And I have to leave the state,” he said, adding that the measure made him feel like he wasn’t “wanted” in the state.
Meta chief executive Mark Zuckerberg told the company’s board last month that he was thinking of moving his primary residence out of California over the proposed tax.
To prevent him from leaving the state – where the company is headquartered – Meta agreed to a new stock deal that gives Zuckerberg, whose wealth is estimated to exceed $200bn, even more shares in the company to make up for the billions he would lose if the measure passes in November. Estimates say he could owe as much as $12.5bn.
DoorDash cofounder Andy Fang, who has an estimated net worth of $1.6bn, has called the measure “stupid” and wrote on X that “proposals like this make it irresponsible for me not to plan leaving the state”.
Meanwhile, businessman Tom Steyer, who ran an unsuccessful bid for California governor earlier this year, is one of the few billionaires who has said he would vote in favour of the tax. Steyer said that although he believed the way the measure was written was “problematic”, it was necessary to protect vulnerable Californians.
Huang, too, has expressed support of paying the levy.
“I don’t mind paying taxes. The more you make, the more taxes you pay. I’m okay with that,” the Nvidia chief said in an interview with the BBC’s US partner CBS. “I am the ultimate American Dream.”
Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont, a vocal champion against income inequality, has campaigned in support of Prop 40.
While at a Los Angeles rally, Sanders said billionaires “believe, like the monarchs of the 19th Century, that they have a God-given right to rule”.
“They have all the wealth, they got all the power, and who the hell do you think you are challenging them? Well, I think on November 3 they’re going to learn a very powerful lesson.”
Income inequality in the US is at some of its highest levels in over three decades, with the top 1% of households owning nearly 32% of all US wealth in the third quarter of 2025. It is also near historic highs in California.
“This is really not about Prop 40,” he says, but rather about trying to “re-balance the scale a little bit”.