A sweeping tax cut for homestead property owners pushed by Gov. Ron DeSantis now waits for voters to act in November.
Florida’s Republican-dominated House and Senate passed the measure (HJR 1F) that would increase the existing $50,000 exemption for homestead properties to $150,000 starting in 2027, rising to $250,000 in 2028.
Recommended Videos
The exemption, though, doesn’t apply to school taxes, after lawmakers changed DeSantis’ plan to protect districts from drastic cuts.
Local governments are sounding an alarm for voters about the amendment, pointing out that it will cut local government revenue across the state by more than $8.4 billion a year.
Those cuts are drawing concern from some residents and local leaders who say the money still has to come from somewhere, and could leave counties, cities, and schools with fewer resources for services.
The constitutional amendment needs 60% support from voters to take effect.
But what exactly will be on your ballot?
Ballot language
According to the amendment, this is the language voters will consider:
CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT
ARTICLE VII, SECTIONS 4, 6, AND 9
ARTICLE XII
SAVE OUR HOMES FROM EXCESSIVE PROPERTY TAXES.
This amendment benefits Florida taxpayers by:
Exempting homestead properties from taxation. Exempts the first $250,000 of a homestead’s value from taxation for all levies other than school district levies and requires, through general law, a schedule for full elimination.
Ensuring funding for core services. Requires local governments to use remaining property taxes solely for core public needs including public safety, education and schools, infrastructure, and natural resources.
Protecting small businesses. Limits future property tax assessments on businesses.
Ensuring fairness for Florida residents. Requires any person who establishes Florida residency after January 1, 2027, to maintain Florida residency for five years prior to receiving the increased homestead exemption.
If approved, the amendment would take effect on January 1, 2027.
Voters will be asked to say YES or NO to adopting the amendment.
What the ballot doesn’t say
During the debates on the issue, local government representatives, even those from Republican-controlled municipalities, pleaded with lawmakers not to impose such a large cut to their revenues.
Most Democrats and local government officials argue that the monumental changes to the state’s tax structure will bankrupt some cities and counties.
“When the bill comes due, it won’t be paid by Tallahassee,” said Sen. Lavon Bracy Davis, D-Ocoee. “It will be paid by your city, your county, your neighborhood school, your library, your community. This proposal does not eliminate costs, it simply moves them. It is not tax relief, it is a tax shift.”
Sanibel City Councilmember Holly Smith, president of the Florida League of Cities, agreed that the overall proposal is a tax shift.
“When homesteaded properties come off the tax roll, the cost of services they don’t disappear; it shifts to businesses and non-homesteaded properties,” Smith said.
Opponents say the changes will cripple water management districts and other special districts, shift tax burdens to renters and businesses, and regressively hit Floridians with fees for basic services.
But supporters of the measure pointed to skyrocketing tax bills for homeowners in recent years and noted voters still get a say.
“What are we afraid of? That we pass this and the voters actually get a choice?” said Sen. Jonathan Martin, R-Fort Myers. “If they want lower taxes, they can vote yes; if they don’t want lower taxes, they can vote no.”
The issue, according to some lawmakers, is whether voters think their local governments have been overspending.
“Over the past several years, local governments have been the beneficiary of the days of milk and honey,” Crestview Republican Sen. Don Gaetz argued in support of the proposal. “They have gotten extraordinary increases in the amount of money they have available to spend, and they spent it.”
Under the measure, cities and counties would be restricted to spending property tax revenues on “core services,” including schools, police, firefighters, infrastructure, the environment, along with constitutional offices, such as property appraiser, elections and sheriffs.
The measure would also lower the cap on annual assessment increases for non-homestead properties, which include vacation and investment homes and commercial properties, from 10 percent to 5 percent.
Starting Jan. 1, 2027, first-time homeowners would have to display five years of residency to qualify for the new super exemption. Until they qualify, they would receive the current exemption that lifts local government and school district taxes on the first $25,000 of the appraised values of their primary properties and from non-school taxes on the value between $50,000 and $75,000.