There have been rumors for months that the billionaire class of Silicon Valley was hiring someone to represent Ro Khanna. Early Tuesday morning, that candidate made it official.
Ethan Agarwal (pictured above), a 40-year-old tech entrepreneur with no political background, told TechCrunch Monday evening that he is running for California’s 17th Congressional district. That process is likely to set up what could be one of the main funding challenges of the 2026 cycle.
The race highlights Khanna, a 49-year-old Democrat widely seen as a potential 2028 presidential candidate, who has publicly supported a one-time wealth tax in California. His support has angered some of the nation’s wealthiest founders and investors, but Khanna has doubled down, introducing national legislation with Senator Bernie Sanders that would impose an annual wealth tax of 5% on all Americans worth $1 billion or more — a proposal his office estimates could raise $4.4 trillion over ten years.
There is a certain irony in this situation. Agarwal graduated from Wharton and spent three years at McKinsey before co-founding the audio-enhancement company Aaptiv, which he sold in 2021. He recently founded the financial services Coterie, backed by Andreessen Horowitz.
When Khanna first ran for the same seat in 2014, he was a tech-backed outsider, with tech names like Marc Andreessen, Sheryl Sandberg and Eric Schmidt backing him. He challenged popular Democratic incumbent Mike Honda, was defeated in that effort, but returned in 2016 to win.
Critics at the time called Khanna a possessed man. After ten years, the person trying to remove it will be charged the same.
The following is an edited version of our interview with Agarwal.
Techcrunch event
San Francisco, CA
|
October 13-15, 2026
TechCrunch: Last summer, he announced plans to run for governor of California. Now you are joining the congressional race instead. Why the change?
Agarwal: I decided to run for governor back in July when the field was really thin. I don’t have a political background — I come from a technical background. But then a few strong people came in, including Matt Mahan, who I think is really strong. I’ve been following Ro since his first congressional run in 2012 – I was a big fan. But over the past few years, he’s been drifting to the left, and when he tweeted support for a wealth tax in late December, that was the straw that broke the camel’s back. I realized that I could have more influence running in the 17th district and remove Ro.
TC: Who do you support financially?
Agarwal: We’re filing tomorrow, so we don’t have a bank account and I can’t get the money together until then. That means – [Y Combinator CEO] Garry Tan is behind me, [DoorDash co-founder] Stanley Tang, along with many others from the tech community whose names will come out in the coming days and weeks.
[Editor’s 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.]
TC: Can you give me a little more color on your show? Besides closing loopholes, is there another billionaire tax?
Agarwal: One is to tax the loan that is issued against the property. Very rich people will borrow their money and pay low interest. Because it’s technically a loan, they don’t pay taxes on it. I think it makes a lot of sense to charge off those loans.
The second is the big benefit – California’s rate is currently 13.4% and I think it’s reasonable to think about increasing that. Third, most homes in California are owned by private firms or individuals who hold them as investors. I believe that you should pay higher property tax on a home kept as an investment than a primary residence. That will increase incomes and ease the pressure on families living within their means.
[The loan-tax idea has been circulating in wealthy circles for some time — notably espoused by VC Chamath Palihapitiya, 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’s value without selling, and thus without ever paying capital gains taxes.]
TC: When you get to Washington, what are your top three priorities?
Agarwal: Number one, to prevent stock trading by members of Congress and their families. Second, prohibiting corporate PAC funding. Number three, term limits.
[Earlier in the conversation, Agarwal spoke at length about the 5,000 children in the 17th district — the wealthiest congressional district in the country — living below the poverty line, and described making it “the first congressional district in history to completely eradicate childhood poverty” as one of his proposals. That point did not make the top three.]
TC: You accused Ro Khanna of being a stock trader. Can you explain?
Agarwal: He traded more stocks than any Democratic congressman in the history of the country — in tobacco, oil and gas, Big Pharma, big tech. He publicly introduced a ban on stock trading, and made 4,000 trades last year. Even if the bill fails, there is nothing stopping him from taking it upon himself. In my case, I will dump my entire portfolio on the first day I am elected, so no one should wonder if my votes reflect my personal account or my true beliefs.
[Both claims deserve scrutiny. Khanna has co-sponsored the TRUST in Congress Act and introduced reform resolutions calling for a ban, but hasn’t 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 — 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.]
TC: Should social media be held responsible for harming young people? Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act now protects them from liability for what users post. Where do you stand on changing that?
Agarwal: I think Section 230, when it was first drafted [in 1996]it makes a lot of sense. The goal was for the stadiums to act as hosts. But as they have developed, they now decide what we see because of the algorithms they push. I don’t think it makes sense to make social media companies completely responsible for what people post – the volume is too high, and having a third party make subjective decisions about what’s dangerous is getting into really dangerous territory.
That said, I think it’s worth looking again when it comes to the long-term effects on young people’s mental health. If you talk to Meta, or X, or anyone, they will all say that they don’t benefit from hurting the youth. We all agree in not wanting that as an outcome.
TC: What about managing AI companies, many of which are in your backyard?
Agarwal: I think about it from a national security perspective. I am sure that having strong models is important for America, and if we don’t build them, China will beat us.
Some limitations are reasonable – the AI should not help you harm yourself or anyone else. But I don’t think we should limit the ability of companies to build and strengthen these brands. It is very important that we allow them to succeed, for national security purposes, if nothing else.
TC: Do you think we need something like an FDA for AI?
Agarwal: I have heard that idea. The FDA has done a great job of keeping the American people healthy and safe – I trust the people who work there, which I can’t say for most government agencies. If there is a way to create an independent, political authority with changing names, that makes sense to me. But I want to make sure it’s designed to strengthen America’s national security, not for political purposes.
TC: What about prediction markets – Polymarket, Kalshi? Do they need more regulation?
Agarwal: 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 a lot of regulatory confusion about what is allowed when say Polymarket and Kalshi have emerged as alternatives. But the regulation they have today is really good.
TC: How do you plan to run this campaign? Are you doing this fully?
Agarwal: This is 110% of my life. I went to [the private San Jose, Ca., school] Harker, who is in the district. I grew up nearby. I know hundreds, maybe thousands of people who live there. My campaign is a basic game — I go to Chinese and Hindi education schools, to cultural events. Holi is rising; Chinese New Year, Purim, is on Tuesday. I will be there for everything, meet people, go to small businesses.
I think this is actually the main difference between me and Ro: he’s building a national profile, and I’m fine with that if that’s what he wants to do. But he does this by abandoning the people of his village. I’m not from California. I don’t use this as a stepping stone. He belongs to the tribe; I’m local. And I think people at 17 know they need someone to focus on.
TC: What motivated you to get involved in politics in the first place?
Agarwal: Maybe this is corny, but – my dad came here with nothing, he made $14,000 a year when he first came. He opened a company, took it public, and sold it. I was born in the third place because of that. I have started two companies and sold both.
Then I see the people around me are no longer benefiting from the same system that made all that happen. People here work hard, have great energy – but the environment no longer supports it. I’ve been complaining about it for a long time, and I felt like it was time to stand up and do something.
TC: Is this the beginning of a political career?
Agarwal: This is not a career pivot. I see a specific problem in the 17th district that I want to solve. I will impose term limits – I will not serve more than five terms – and I will probably go back to the private sector. Ministry should be a calling, not a job. And to be honest, I don’t think it helps your voters if it becomes a job. Even if the time limits bill does not pass, I will commit to myself. That’s what I really believe.
[That also echoes something from Khanna’s early campaigns — the outsider who arrives with no interest in becoming a career politician except a mandate from the tech industry to shake things up. Whether Agarwal gets further than Khanna’s first attempt did in 2014 may depend on whether Khanna develops any vulnerabilities of his own. Right now, introducing sweeping national legislation with Bernie Sanders and sitting on $15 million in campaign cash, he appears to be doing everything he can to ensure he doesn’t.]
