\n<\/p>\n
For months, there has been talk that Silicon Valley\u2019s billionaire class was recruiting a candidate to take on Representative Ro Khanna. Early Tuesday morning, that candidate made it official.<\/p>\n
Ethan Agarwal (pictured above), a 40-year-old tech entrepreneur with no political background, told TechCrunch on Monday evening that he is running for California\u2019s 17th congressional district. That process is likely to set up what may become one of the most lavishly funded primary challenges of the 2026 cycle.<\/p>\n
The race puts a spotlight on Khanna, a 49-year-old Democrat widely seen as a possible 2028 presidential candidate, who has publicly backed<\/a> a one-time wealth tax in California. His endorsement has infuriated<\/a> some of the state\u2019s richest founders and investors, but Khanna has doubled down, introducing national legislation<\/a> with Senator Bernie Sanders that would impose a 5% annual wealth tax on all Americans worth $1 billion or more \u2014 a proposal their offices estimate would raise $4.4 trillion over a decade.<\/p>\n There\u2019s a certain irony to the situation. Agarwal is a graduate of Wharton and spent three years at McKinsey before founding audio fitness company Aaptiv, which he sold in 2021. He most recently co-founded financial services startup Coterie, backed by Andreessen Horowitz. <\/p>\n When Khanna first ran for this same seat in 2014, he was the tech-backed outsider, with tech names like Marc Andreessen, Sheryl Sandberg and Eric Schmidt supporting him. He challenged popular Democratic incumbent Mike Honda, lost that attempt, but came back in 2016 to win.<\/p>\n Critics at the time called Khanna an owned man. A decade later, the same charge will surely be leveled at the person trying to unseat him.<\/p>\n What follows is an edited version of our conversation with Agarwal.<\/p>\n Techcrunch event<\/p>\n \n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tSan Francisco, CA<\/span> TechCrunch:<\/strong> Last summer, you announced plans to run for governor of California. Now you\u2019re joining a congressional race instead. Why the switch?<\/strong><\/p>\n Agarwal: <\/strong>I decided to run for governor back in July when the field was really thin. I don\u2019t have a political background \u2014 I come from tech. But then a few strong candidates got in, including Matt Mahan<\/a>, who I think is really strong. I\u2019ve been tracking Ro since his first congressional race in 2012 \u2014 I was a big supporter. But in the last couple of years, he\u2019s been incrementally pivoting left, and when he tweeted support for the wealth tax at the end of December, that was the straw that broke the camel\u2019s back. I realized I could have more impact running in the 17th district<\/a> and unseating Ro.<\/p>\n TC: Who is backing you financially?<\/strong><\/p>\n Agarwal: <\/strong>We\u2019re pulling papers tomorrow, so we don\u2019t have a bank account yet and I can\u2019t raise money until then. That said \u2014 [Y Combinator CEO] Garry Tan is behind me, [DoorDash co-founder] Stanley Tang, and a lot of others from the tech community whose names will come out in the coming days and weeks.<\/p>\n [Editor\u2019s note: The involvement of Tan, Tang, and others will likely fuel a familiar line of attack: that Agarwal is less an independent candidate than a vehicle for billionaire grievances. It is worth noting that Khanna faced nearly identical criticism when he first ran, and was backed by much of the same tech-donor class that is now organizing against him.]<\/em><\/p>\n TC: Can you give me a little more color on your plan? Beyond closing loopholes, is there an alternative to the billionaire tax?<\/strong><\/p>\n Agarwal:<\/strong> One is taxing loans taken out against assets. Very wealthy people will take a loan out against their holdings and pay low interest. Because it\u2019s technically a loan, they don\u2019t pay taxes on it. I think it\u2019s very reasonable to tax those loans. <\/p>\n Second is capital gains \u2014 California\u2019s rate is currently 13.4% and I think it\u2019s reasonable to consider increasing that. Third, a lot of houses in California are owned by private equity firms or people holding them as investments. I believe you should pay significantly higher property taxes on a home held as an investment than as a primary residence. That would both raise revenue and ease pressure on families who actually live in what they own.<\/p>\n [The loan-tax idea has been circulating in wealthy circles for some time \u2014 notably espoused by VC <\/em>Chamath Palihapitiya<\/em>, though it may trace back further to hedge fund giant Bill Ackman. The proposal would treat loans backed by stock holdings as taxable events, eliminating a longstanding strategy by which investors access their portfolio\u2019s value without selling, and thus without ever paying capital gains taxes.]<\/p>\n TC: If you make it to Washington, what will your top three priorities be?<\/strong><\/p>\n Agarwal: <\/strong>Number one, banning stock trading for members of Congress and their families. Number two, banning corporate PAC money. Number three, term limits.<\/p>\n [Earlier in the conversation, Agarwal spoke at length about the 5,000 children in the 17th district \u2014 the wealthiest congressional district in the country \u2014 living below the poverty line, and described making it \u201cthe first congressional district in history to completely eradicate childhood poverty\u201d as one of his proposals. That point did not make the top three.]<\/em><\/p>\n TC: You\u2019ve accused Ro Khanna of being a prolific stock trader. Can you explain?<\/strong><\/p>\n Agarwal: <\/strong>He\u2019s been trading more stocks than any Democratic congressman in the history of the country \u2014 in tobacco, oil and gas, Big Pharma, big tech. He publicly introduced a congressional stock trading ban, and then made 4,000 trades last year. Even if the bill didn\u2019t pass, nothing is stopping him from imposing it on himself. In my case, I\u2019m going to divest my entire portfolio the first day I\u2019m elected, so no one has to wonder whether my votes reflect my personal account or my actual beliefs.<\/p>\n [Both claims deserve scrutiny. Khanna has co-sponsored the TRUST in Congress Act and introduced reform resolutions calling for a ban, but hasn\u2019t authored standalone legislation. On the trading figures, Khanna has repeatedly said that he does not personally own or trade any individual stocks, and that the trades in question belong to his wife, whose pre-marital assets are held in an independently managed trust \u2014 which, he noted, eliminates any conflict under Office of Government Ethics rules. Whether that distinction satisfies voters is a question the campaign will have to answer.]<\/em><\/p>\n TC: Should social media platforms be held responsible for harming teens? Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act currently shields them from liability for what users post. Where do you stand on changing that?<\/strong><\/p>\n Agarwal: <\/strong>I think Section 230, when it was first drafted [in 1996], made a lot of sense. The goal was for platforms to serve basically as hosting. But as they\u2019ve evolved, they\u2019re now determining what we see because of the algorithms they push. I don\u2019t think it makes sense to make social media companies entirely liable for what people post \u2014 the volume is too high, and having a third party make subjective determinations about what\u2019s harmful gets into really dangerous territory. <\/p>\n That said, I do think it\u2019s worth revisiting when it comes to long-term impacts on teenagers\u2019 mental health. If you talk to Meta, or X, or anyone, they\u2019ll all say they don\u2019t benefit from hurting teenagers. We\u2019re all aligned in not wanting that as an outcome.<\/p>\n TC: What about regulating AI companies, many of which are literally in your backyard?<\/strong><\/p>\n Agarwal: <\/strong>I think about it from a national security perspective. I\u2019m confident that having the most powerful models is critical for America, and if we don\u2019t build them, China will beat us. <\/p>\n Some restrictions make sense \u2014 AI shouldn\u2019t help you hurt yourself or someone else. But I do not think we should be limiting companies\u2019 ability to build and strengthen these models. It\u2019s really critical that we allow them to thrive, for national security purposes, if nothing else.<\/p>\n TC: Do you think we need something like an FDA for AI?<\/strong><\/p>\n Agarwal: <\/strong>I\u2019ve heard that idea. The FDA has largely done a good job of keeping Americans healthy and safe \u2014 I trust the people who work there, which I cannot say for most government organizations. If there\u2019s a way to build an independent, apolitical authority with rotating terms, that makes sense to me. But I want to make sure it\u2019s designed to strengthen America\u2019s national security, not for political purposes.<\/p>\n TC: What about prediction markets \u2014 Polymarket, Kalshi? Do they need more regulation?<\/strong><\/p>\n Agarwal: <\/strong>To be clear, Kalshi and Polymarket are both regulated by the CFTC. I think part of the problem is that sports betting apps have created so much regulatory confusion about what\u2019s allowed in which states that Polymarket and Kalshi have emerged as alternatives. But the regulation they have today is actually pretty good.<\/p>\n TC: How are you planning to run this campaign? Are you doing this full time?<\/strong><\/p>\n Agarwal: <\/strong>This is 110% of my life. I went to [the private San Jose, Ca., school] Harker, which is in the district. I\u2019ve grown up nearby. I know hundreds, maybe thousands of people who live there. My campaign is essentially a ground game \u2014 I\u2019m going to Chinese and Hindi educational schools, to cultural events. Holi is coming up; Chinese New Year, Purim, is on Tuesday. I\u2019m going to be at all of it, meeting people, going to small businesses. <\/p>\n I think this is actually the core contrast between Ro and me: he is building a national profile, and I\u2019m perfectly fine with that if that\u2019s what he wants to do. But he\u2019s doing it while abandoning the people of his own district. I\u2019m not leaving California. I\u2019m not using this as a stepping stone. He\u2019s national; I\u2019m local. And I think people in the 17th know they need someone focused on them alone.<\/p>\n
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t|<\/span>
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tOctober 13-15, 2026<\/span>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<\/div>\n