Florida's Property Tax Amendment Heads to November Ballot With New Language

Florida voters will decide in November whether to write one of the largest property tax cuts in state history into the state constitution, a measure that would raise the homestead exemption for non school property taxes in two steps and tighten the annual assessment cap on non homestead property. The proposal cleared the Legislature during a special session earlier this year and now requires 60 percent voter approval to take effect.

The amendment grew out of a push by Gov. Ron DeSantis to reduce or eliminate property taxes on primary residences, an idea that dominated Florida political discussion through the spring. What emerged from the Legislature is narrower than full elimination but still substantial, and its fiscal consequences fall almost entirely on county governments, municipalities and special districts rather than on the state budget.

Ballot language for the measure was revised in August, a step that follows the standard process for constitutional amendments in Florida, where the summary voters read must accurately convey the chief purpose of the change. The revision drew renewed attention to how much of the measure's effect is difficult to convey inside the character limits of a ballot summary.

What the amendment would do

The core provision raises the homestead exemption applied to non school property taxes. Florida's current homestead structure exempts a portion of assessed value from taxation, with different tiers applying to school and non school levies. The amendment would increase the non school exemption to $150,000 beginning in 2027 and to $250,000 beginning in 2028.

At a $250,000 exemption, a large majority of Florida homesteaded properties would owe no non school property tax at all. Analyses circulated during the legislative debate put the figure at roughly 60 percent of homesteaded owners once the second step takes effect, though the exact share varies significantly by county because median home values differ enormously between, for example, Miami Dade and Suwannee counties.

The measure also reduces the annual assessment increase cap on non homestead property from 10 percent to 5 percent starting January 1, 2027. Non homestead property includes rental housing, second homes, vacation properties, apartment buildings and commercial real estate. That change is less visible to homeowners but arguably more consequential for the long term structure of local tax bases.

A third component addresses how local governments may spend property tax revenue, adding constraints intended to prevent jurisdictions from simply raising millage rates to offset the exemption increase. The interaction between the exemption, the cap and the spending limits is where most of the analytical dispute sits.

The Florida context

Property taxes in Florida are levied locally. Counties, cities, school districts and special districts set millage rates against assessed values determined by county property appraisers. The state itself levies no property tax, which is why a constitutional amendment reducing property taxes shifts revenue away from local governments while leaving state revenue untouched.

Florida homeowners have seen assessed values climb steeply since 2020 as home prices surged, particularly along the coasts and in Central Florida. The Save Our Homes cap limits annual assessment increases on homesteaded property to 3 percent or the change in the consumer price index, whichever is lower, which has protected long term owners while leaving recent buyers exposed to much higher bills.

That gap between long term and recent owners is part of what drove the political energy behind the proposal. A household that bought in 2015 and a household that bought in 2023 on the same street can face dramatically different tax bills, and the newer buyer is also more likely to be carrying a higher mortgage rate and a higher insurance premium.

Property insurance costs compound the pressure. Even with Citizens Property Insurance rate decreases in 2026, Florida homeowners pay among the highest premiums in the country, and the combination of insurance, taxes and association fees has become the dominant affordability story in the state's housing market.

What local governments say

County and municipal officials have raised consistent concerns about the revenue impact. Property taxes fund a large share of county and city operations in Florida, including sheriff's offices, fire rescue, emergency medical services, parks, libraries and road maintenance. Reducing the base without an alternative revenue source forces either service reductions or higher millage rates on the remaining taxable value.

The effect is not evenly distributed. Counties with high median home values relative to the exemption, including Miami Dade, Broward, Palm Beach, Monroe and Collier, would see a smaller proportional hit because more assessed value remains taxable above the exemption threshold. Rural and small counties with lower median values would see a much larger share of their homesteaded tax base disappear.

Analysts have also flagged the interaction with the non homestead cap. Reducing the cap from 10 percent to 5 percent slows growth in the assessed value of rental and commercial property, which is the portion of the base that local governments have relied on to absorb homestead exemptions. Doing both at once compounds the constraint.

Supporters respond that local governments have benefited from a decade of rapidly rising assessed values and that spending has grown alongside. Their argument is that the amendment forces a discipline that has been absent, and that essential services can be protected through prioritization rather than new revenue.

Who benefits and who does not

The clearest beneficiaries are homesteaded owners of modest to mid value homes, particularly in counties where median values sit near or below the eventual $250,000 exemption. For many of those households, the non school portion of the property tax bill would fall to zero.

Owners of higher value homes benefit too, but proportionally less, because the exemption is a fixed dollar amount rather than a percentage. A $250,000 exemption removes a much larger share of a $350,000 home's taxable value than a $1.5 million home's.

Renters occupy the most contested position in the analysis. The homestead exemption does not apply to rental property, so landlords receive no direct relief from that provision. The 5 percent non homestead assessment cap does apply to rental buildings, and supporters argue slower assessment growth eventually restrains rent increases. Housing advocates counter that the relationship between landlord tax bills and rents is weak in tight markets, where rents track what tenants can pay rather than what owners are charged.

Snowbirds and second home owners, a substantial category in Florida, do not receive homestead exemptions on Florida property that is not their primary residence. They would benefit from the assessment cap change but not the exemption increase.

What it means for Floridians

If the amendment passes with the required 60 percent, the first exemption step takes effect for the 2027 tax year, meaning bills mailed in the fall of 2027. Homeowners would not see any change on bills arriving this fall or next.

Local budget effects would begin appearing earlier than that, because counties and cities build budgets months in advance and would need to plan for the reduction during their 2027 budget cycles. Expect county commission and city council discussions about service levels, reserves and millage rates to intensify well before homeowners see lower bills.

School funding is deliberately excluded from the exemption increase. Florida's school property tax levy, which includes a required local effort set by the state, is unaffected by the non school exemption change. That structure was designed to avoid triggering a state obligation to backfill school budgets.

For prospective homebuyers, passage would improve the arithmetic of buying in Florida at the margin, though the effect is smaller than the swings currently coming from mortgage rates and insurance premiums. A buyer weighing a Florida purchase against another state would find the tax picture meaningfully better than it looks today.

How Save Our Homes shaped the current system

Understanding the amendment requires understanding the mechanism it modifies. Florida voters approved the Save Our Homes amendment in 1992, capping annual increases in the assessed value of homesteaded property at three percent or the change in the consumer price index, whichever is lower.

The cap applies to assessment growth, not to the tax rate. A homeowner who has held a property for 20 years may have an assessed value far below market value, producing a tax bill that bears little relationship to what the home would sell for. The difference between market value and capped assessed value is called the Save Our Homes benefit.

Portability, added by voters in 2008, allows homeowners to transfer accumulated Save Our Homes benefit to a new homestead within Florida, up to a statutory limit. That change was designed to address the lock in effect, in which long term owners avoided moving because doing so would reset their assessment to market value.

The system's effect over three decades has been to shift tax burden from long term homesteaded owners toward recent buyers, non homesteaded property and commercial property. Two neighbors in identical homes can pay dramatically different amounts depending on purchase date.

The November amendment addresses that inequity from a different direction. Rather than changing the assessment cap, it increases the fixed dollar exemption, which benefits all homesteaded owners equally in dollar terms and disproportionately benefits owners of lower valued homes in percentage terms.

It also reduces the assessment cap on non homestead property from ten percent to five percent, which narrows the gap between homesteaded and non homesteaded treatment on the growth side while widening it on the exemption side. The net distributional effect depends heavily on local property value trajectories.

What's next

The amendment appears on the November 3 general election ballot alongside the governor's race, the U.S. Senate special election and Cabinet contests. Constitutional amendments in Florida require 60 percent approval, a threshold that has defeated measures winning clear majorities.

Campaign activity around the measure is likely to be substantial. Business groups, realtor associations and taxpayer organizations are expected to support it. Local government associations, public employee unions and some public safety organizations have raised concerns, though outright opposition campaigns against tax cuts are politically difficult in Florida.

If it passes, the 2027 legislative session becomes the venue for implementing legislation, including how the spending constraint provisions are enforced and whether the state provides any transitional assistance to small counties facing disproportionate revenue loss. That work would fall to a new governor and a Legislature elected in November.

If it fails, the property tax debate does not end. The underlying pressure that produced the proposal, rapidly increased assessments colliding with high insurance costs, remains in place, and legislators from both parties have signaled they would return to the question in some form.