Opinion: Tax Silicon Valley Big Tech to rescue BART and other Bay Area transit

With annual deficits for Bay Area transit agencies approaching $800 million, the scramble is on to find the revenue needed to keep BART and the region’s other bus and rail systems operational.

Senate Bill 63, sponsored by two Bay Area lawmakers, is a well-meaning but poorly formed attempt to fill the financial gaps by raising as much as $550 million a year through a sales tax that would be put before voters in 2026. Taxing sales would be regressive, putting the burden of transit recovery squarely on the backs of the people who could least afford it.

There’s a better solution sitting in our backyards: Tax some of the most profitable, influential businesses ever created.

Silicon Valley, synonymous with technological innovation worldwide, is home to Apple, Alphabet, Nvidia, Intel, Cisco, HP and Meta, which combined generated about $340 billion in profits in 2024. Yet the companies gave back little to Bay Area communities that need it the most. As a result, the region is marred by failing infrastructure and clogged roadways, and many of our service workers can’t afford to live within 50 miles.

While publicly traded companies pay some form of business taxes, there are no corporate funds dedicated to support the mass transportation needed for the bulk of the region’s workforce.

So, rather than burden workers and small businesses who can ill-afford it with yet another sales tax, we should help fund BART and the other transit agencies via a designated tax on the corporations that like to brag about their Silicon Valley roots but give little back in return.

Granted, BART is not blameless in this financial crisis. The recent $2.3 billion BART budget ignores the agency’s financial realties by failing to address a $376 million annual structural deficit beginning July 2026. Taxpayers deserve better.

BART should explore reducing overtime by a third and strategically lowering its workforce target of 4,600 employees — nearly 1,000 more than a decade ago.  But that will require confronting labor unions, something BART management is reluctant to do. These ongoing management issues are significant and should be addressed immediately.

Unfortunately, the current crisis can’t be ignored. New funding sources are desperately needed if BART is to maintain even bare-minimum service levels. With work commutes still down, hourly service cuts and station closures could occur as early as next summer without additional sustainable revenue.

Despite Trump’s tariffs and looming inflation threats, California remains an economic powerhouse, the fourth largest economy in the world. Cities and regions nationwide that are far less financially healthy face similar post-pandemic transit threats and are addressing deficits through corporate taxes. New Jersey, for example, expects to generate $800 million annually with a five-year transit fee on corporation profits exceeding $10 million.

We should do what’s right in the Bay Area and include businesses in the equation when solving transit’s problems. The authors of SB 63 should amend the bill and include an option for a modest, fair transit tax on large businesses to prevent cuts in service while transit agencies reduce costs and provide incentives to regain ridership.

Liz Ames is a BART board member.