Property tax enters key midterm election voting battle

Americans heading to the polls in November will have a unique opportunity to use their voting power to directly shape tax policy. Expanding government spending and increasing tax burdens across the United States have led to the inclusion of 26 tax rate ballot initiatives in 13 states. For 128 million American voters, especially those in the working and middle classes who pay the highest tax burdens, these ballot measures will test how voters feel about increased government spending and where that money will come from.

California’s Proposition 40, which would authorize a one-time 5% “wealth tax” on the Golden State’s billionaires, has garnered the most public attention, but most of the ballot proposals scheduled for a vote this cycle do not expand on the current tax system. Rather, they serve as a means to rollback. In particular, state legislatures are considering cutting taxes on tens of millions of Americans’ most valuable assets: their homes.

Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, Oklahoma, North Carolina, Tennessee and Wyoming have proposals on the ballot that would significantly reduce property tax spending. Steps to do this include raising the asset assessment threshold for existing tax exemptions, creating new tax exemptions for seniors, and, in the case of Tennessee, introducing a complete ban on state property taxes.

“Property tax is the worst tax, because people never own their property. They just pay rent to the government,” said Tennessee Sen. Brent Taylor, speaking in support of the state’s Second Amendment ahead of its first legislative passage in 2025. “And if you don’t think you’re just paying rent to the government, then don’t pay property taxes.”

Tennessee currently has no state-level property tax and has not had a state-level property tax since 1949. In fact, most states have no property tax. This is because property taxes are primarily controlled by local governments, which set tax rates based on market values ​​and local government budget needs. While Tennessee’s Second Amendment is largely symbolic and simply eliminates the possibility of state-imposed property taxes, other voting efforts across the country carry significant risks for these governments. As a result, homeowners will be forced to weigh cuts in personal spending alongside potential losses to local government revenues when voting.

Local political leaders from both sides are trying to influence the process, but they continue to disagree about what should be prioritized.

Jacksonville Mayor Donna Deegan, who takes the helm of Florida’s largest city, expressed concern when speaking about the state’s proposed Amendment 3, which would increase the maximum value of property appraisal required to qualify for the state’s homestead tax exemption from $150,000 to $250,000. Deegan said this would cut Jacksonville’s budget by one-third.

“A $300 million hit is no small hit,” the mayor said. “These proposed cuts will inevitably lead to dilapidated roads, closures of libraries, pools, and parks, increased public safety response times, worsening housing affordability, and increased street homelessness.”

Hallandale Beach Mayor Joy Cooper went a step further and directly asked voters, “What city services do people want to see cut?” After the state Legislature passed Amendment 3, the Nextdoor post was flooded with responses, most of which suggested that Cooper and his fellow city employees are underpaid.

The mayors’ sentiments are supported by an economic analysis of the proposed measures. Estimates suggest that eight property tax ballot initiatives across six states could extract at least hundreds of millions of dollars, and possibly tens of billions, from their respective state and local governments over the next few years.

Florida’s Third Amendment leads the way in projected revenue cuts, amounting to about $46 billion by 2032. Tangible personal property used for agriculture or agritourism in Florida is exempt from property tax amendments to $96.9 million by 2030. Many of the measures, such as Louisiana’s, have not yet undergone a cost evaluation but are still expected to curb local government revenue streams.

Homeowner referendum on public spending

Proponents of tax cuts argue that these costs are a small price to pay to eliminate wasteful spending and directly reduce the devastating cost of living.

“We’ve seen egregious overtaxation by some municipalities here in North Carolina,” North Carolina Finance Secretary Brad Briner told CNBC, referring to the state’s proposed constitutional amendment that would direct the state Legislature to pass legislation limiting property tax increases. “This is unfair to homeowners who already have stretched budgets and makes it impossible for some potential new homeowners to consider entering the housing market.”

Briner, citing his role on the North Carolina Local Government Commission, said that while most municipalities are financially well-managed, those that don’t look at supplemental revenue increases see it as a way to “make up for mistakes.”

“My administration’s top priority is financial literacy. A fundamental principle of that is living within your means,” he said. “We recognize that local governments are also under strain, but they need to find other ways to balance their budgets without relying too heavily on property taxes.”

But, as in Florida, state and local officials are sharply divided on how to interpret the rising cost of cities’ budgets.

“Property taxes are Wake County’s largest and most stable revenue source,” said Wake County Commission Chairman Don Mial. “It covers about 75 percent of the county’s annual budget, allowing us to fund new schools, libraries, fire stations, and other infrastructure. If we were to lose the ability to set our own tax rates, it could lead to significant cuts to services and force us to scale back much-needed capital improvement programs.”

One of the loudest voices against property taxes is Florida Governor Ron DeSantis, who has two amendments before voters specifically aimed at reducing property taxes.

“It’s going to take 12 to 13 years to go from $32 billion (inflows) to $83 billion (inflows),” he said at a roundtable event in May, highlighting the projected increase in local government revenue. “I think everyone understands that (basic services) can be provided for less than $83 billion,” he added. “That money… could be put to use if it was in people’s pockets. Imagine what it could do to the economy if people who owe $2,000 a year[in property taxes]suddenly had that money at their disposal.”

What recent state votes and Florida polls show

In stark contrast to Deegan’s view of the initiative, DeSantis does not believe the Third Amendment goes far enough to structure property tax exemptions. The governor’s original plan included a much more ambitious rollback that would eventually eliminate all property taxes on primary residences and include no property tax carve-outs in school budgets.

“What the Legislature did was not my proposal,” the governor said at a bill-signing event in Tampa. “I think it’ll probably pass…but we don’t know. We know ours will pass. We’ve done a lot of research on exactly how to configure it and how to do it, so we’ll just see what happens.”

In Florida, passing an amendment to the state constitution requires support from 60% of voters, meaning that Amendment 3 must decisively sway Florida taxpayers. The same can’t be said for other states where property tax initiatives are on the ballot, where Republicans simply hope to pass the measure with a 50%-plus-1 majority. This, of course, begs the question of how likely the measure is to pass.

The outlook is not simple. In theory, with the exception of North Carolina and Georgia, each state boasting a property tax initiative is fairly conservative politically. This means that even in a national political climate that is expected to favor turnout among Democratic voters, voters in states like Wyoming and Oklahoma overwhelmingly favor tax cuts. They are also likely to share the views expressed by Republican legislative leaders, who frequently put these initiatives on the ballot.

Two tax-related ballot initiatives have already been voted on this year, but both have failed. Oregon’s Measure 120, which would have increased the state’s fuel tax and public transportation payroll tax, was overwhelmingly rejected by voters in May. Louisiana’s Amendment 4, which would have allowed local governments to exempt business inventory from property taxes, failed by a narrow 2-1 margin. These results in themselves would indicate a climate in which voters seem largely reluctant to change the tax status quo in any way.

But neither of these amendments would reduce the tax burden on housing in the same way that many of the amendments that will be voted on later this year. Recent election precedent more closely resembles future measures and presents a much more favorable landscape for large-scale property tax cuts.

In 2025, Texas’ Proposition 13 increased the state’s homestead property tax exemption from $100,000 to $140,000 of a homestead’s market value and was overwhelmingly approved with support from nearly 80% of voters. In 2024, Georgia’s Proposition A increases the state’s personal property tax exemption from $7,500 to $20,000 and passed with support from more than 64% of voters. That same year, voters in Arizona passed an initiative that would allow homeowners to apply for property tax refunds in municipalities that do not enforce public nuisance laws.

But even in deeply conservative states, voters are wary of lowering property taxes, believing they go too far. Measure 4, which North Dakota launched in 2024, would have effectively prohibited local governments from imposing property taxes, but was soundly defeated amid concerns about the impact on local government budgets.

A recent poll released by the University of North Florida Public Opinion Research Institute echoes this concern. When initially told that Amendment 3 would “phase out taxes on residential property other than those directed to schools,” 61% of respondents said they supported the measure, while only 32% said they opposed it. However, after being informed that city and county governments across the state were expected to face budget shortfalls, support plummeted to 45% and opposition rose to 47%.

Florida Senate Minority Leader Laurie Berman told Tampa NPR station WUSF 89.7, “We have to spend the summer and early fall educating voters about what will happen as a result of this bill.” “I’m really concerned about the impact on our local counties and cities,” she said. “I think some people will go bankrupt.”