Florida Amendments 1 and 2 explained: A bigger rainy day fund and a tax break on farm equipment

Amendment 3's homestead tax cut has drawn most of the attention, but it is one of three constitutional amendments on Florida's ballot Tuesday, Nov. 3. Amendment 1 would more than double the ceiling on the state's rainy day fund and require the Legislature to pay into it every year. Amendment 2 would end property taxes on tractors, combines and other equipment kept on farmland. Each needs 60% of the vote to pass, and each has split allies in unusual ways: Gov. Ron DeSantis is urging a no vote on Amendment 1 even though the Republican Party of Florida endorsed it.

All three measures were placed on the ballot by the Legislature, not by citizen petition, according to the Florida Division of Elections.

The three amendments at a glance

The Division of Elections lists the measures this way:

Amendment 1: a bigger rainy day fund

Florida's Budget Stabilization Fund, created in 1992, is the reserve the state can tap during revenue shortfalls or emergencies. The constitution now caps it at 10% of the previous year's general revenue collections and requires that it not fall below 5%. News4JAX put the current maximum at about $5 billion. The fund was last used in 2008, during the Great Recession.

The official ballot summary says the amendment would "increase the amount of funds that may be retained in the budget stabilization fund from 10% to 25% of general revenue collections, require the legislature to transfer the lesser of $750 million or the amount required to reach 25% of the general revenue collections each year unless certain conditions are met, and allow the legislature to withdraw funds for critical state needs."

The details matter. Transfers could be skipped in years when the state has drawn on the fund to recover from a hurricane or other disaster or to cover a projected shortfall. With a two-thirds vote of each chamber, lawmakers could also suspend a transfer for a critical state need, no more than once every five years. Once the fund reaches 15% of revenue, the Legislature could spend some of it on a critical state need as long as the balance stays at or above 10%. As News4JAX noted, the amendment does not define "critical state need." If approved, it would take effect Jan. 5, 2027.

Lawmakers passed the resolution in 2025 by votes of 100-1 in the House and 29-4 in the Senate. Then-House Speaker Daniel Perez framed it as insurance. "This is just a preparation of being prepared for the unexpected, and none of us know what the unexpected is," he said in June 2025, adding, "The state of Florida was not prepared for that recession."

DeSantis broke with his party in September. "This is a foolish constitutional amendment proposal," he posted on X. "We already have a maxed out rainy day fund and have run the largest surpluses in state history." He said extra revenue should go to lower taxes, including grants to local governments "so that homestead properties can be exempt from local property tax," and ended with, "I recommend a NO vote."

The split does not follow party lines. The Republican Party of Florida endorsed the measure, while Republican gubernatorial nominee Byron Donalds opposes it. Democratic nominee David Jolly supports it, even as some local Democratic groups recommend a no vote. Florida TaxWatch, the budget watchdog, called it a close call: it agrees the 10% cap should rise but worries about locking in $750 million payments for years. In the end it recommended a yes vote.

Supporters say a larger cushion protects Florida from having to raise taxes or cut services in a downturn. Critics, as WPTV summarized, argue the money is better spent on current needs.

Amendment 2: no property tax on farm equipment

Florida businesses pay tangible personal property tax on equipment, after an exemption on the first $25,000 of assessed value. Amendment 2 would wipe out that tax for agriculture. The ballot summary says it would exempt from ad valorem taxation tangible personal property "habitually located or typically present on land classified as agricultural, used in the production of agricultural products or for agritourism activities, and owned by the landowner or leaseholder of the agricultural land." It would first apply to the tax year beginning Jan. 1, 2027.

That covers tractors, harvesters, feeding lines and other machinery, plus some equipment used by agritourism operations such as U-pick farms and corn mazes. Land and buildings are not included.

The Legislature voted in 2025 to put the measure on the ballot after years of lobbying by the Florida Farm Bureau. The House passed it 110-1, with Orlando Democratic Rep. Anna Eskamani casting the only no vote in the Legislature, and WLRN reported it passed the Senate unanimously.

"This is a great opportunity to help farmers reach their goals and their needs," said Sen. Keith Truenow, a Tavares Republican and longtime farm owner who carried the Senate version, in an interview with Florida Politics. Backers include the Florida Farm Bureau Federation, the Florida Fruit & Vegetable Association, the Florida Chamber of Commerce, the National Federation of Independent Business and the Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, according to WLRN.

The cost, and who bears it

A Senate staff analysis estimates Amendment 2 would reduce local property tax revenue by $31 million in fiscal year 2027-28, rising to $33.6 million by 2029-30, Florida Politics reported. That is small statewide but not spread evenly. Many of the counties with the smallest budgets have the largest agricultural tax bases, and WLRN reported there is no statewide database showing exactly where the losses would land.

Eskamani argues the benefit would flow mostly to large operations. "Honestly it just comes down to need-based tax relief versus flat tax relief," she told Florida Politics. "This idea is going to largely benefit the biggest corporate agriculture entities that have multiple parcels under Property Appraiser's Offices." She also noted that farms already avoid sales tax on many equipment purchases.

Several county Democratic parties are urging a no vote even though most Democratic legislators supported placing it on the ballot. The Hillsborough County Democratic Party's voter guide calls it "another constitutional carve-out for a policy problem the Legislature could solve by statute."

Florida TaxWatch acknowledged the hit to rural counties but said the Legislature could reimburse fiscally constrained counties, as it did after voters expanded the tangible property exemption in 2008. It recommended a yes vote. "It could help," said Kurt Wenner, a senior analyst with the group. "It could hurt rural counties more than big counties, and we always have problems with doing property tax relief for a small portion of taxpayers. But it's going to voters and it's a relatively small amount."

Amendment 3 in brief

Amendment 3, covered in detail in earlier reporting by The Florida Press, would raise the homestead exemption for non-school property taxes to $150,000 in 2027 and $250,000 in 2028, adjust it for inflation after that, cut the annual assessment cap on non-homestead property from 10% to 5% and limit what local governments may spend property tax money on. A state economic analysis projects a recurring cost to local governments approaching $12 billion a year. The Tampa Bay Times reported that most recent polls do not show it reaching 60%, though a sizable share of respondents were undecided.

The amendments interact. Critics of Amendment 2, including the Hillsborough Democrats, argue that all three measures narrow the property tax base that local governments rely on, and TaxWatch said Amendment 2's impact on small rural counties would be felt more sharply if Amendment 3 also passes. TaxWatch, notably, supports Amendments 1 and 2 but opposes Amendment 3.

What's next

Voters decide all three Tuesday, Nov. 3, with polls open from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. local time. Each amendment needs at least 60% of the votes cast on that question. If Amendment 1 passes, its changes to the rainy day fund would take effect Jan. 5, 2027, and the yearly deposits of up to $750 million would be required until the fund reaches 25%, except in the years the amendment exempts. If Amendment 2 passes, property appraisers would apply the farm equipment exemption to 2027 tax rolls, and the Legislature would set details and limits by law, including whether to reimburse hard-hit rural counties, as TaxWatch has suggested.