Property taxes are headed into major midterm elections ballot battles

When they head to the polls in November, Americans will have a rare opportunity to use their voting power to directly shape tax policy. Ballooning government spending and growing tax burdens across the U.S. have led to the inclusion of 26 ballot initiatives concerning tax rates across 13 states. For 128 million American voters, particularly working-class and middle-class individuals bearing a significant tax burden, these ballot measures will test voter moods on increased government spending, as well as where that spending should come from. 

While California’s Prop. 40, authorizing a one-time, 5% “wealth tax” on billionaire residents of the Golden State, has garnered the greatest amount of public attention, most ballot initiatives up for a vote this cycle do not expand upon current tax regimes. Rather, they serve as a means for rolling them back. In particular, state lawmakers have looked to scale back taxes on tens of millions of Americans’ most valuable asset – their home. 

Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, Oklahoma, North Carolina, Tennessee, and Wyoming have proposals on the ballot that would significantly curb property tax expenditures. The means for doing so include increasing the property assessment threshold for existing tax exemptions, creating new exemptions for senior citizens, and, in the case of Tennessee, instilling outright prohibitions on state property taxes.  

“The property tax is the most egregious tax there is because you never own your property. You’re only paying rent to the government,” Tennessee State Senator Brent Taylor noted, when speaking in support of the state’s Amendment 2 prior to its first legislative passage in 2025. “And if you don’t think you’re just paying rent to the government, try not paying your property taxes.”

Tennessee does not currently have a state-level property tax and has not had one since 1949. In fact, most states don’t, as property taxes are largely administered by local governments who set tax rates based on market value and municipal budget needs. While Tennessee’s Amendment 2 is largely symbolic, simply eliminating the possibility of a state-imposed property tax, other ballot initiatives across the country carry a significant risk for these governments. As a result, homeowners, when casting their ballots, will be forced to juxtapose lowered personal expenditures against potentially damaging losses in local government revenue. 

Looking to influence the process from both sides, local political leaders have no shortage of disagreement about what should take precedent.

Jacksonville Mayor Donna Deegan, at the helm of Florida’s largest city, voiced her concerns when speaking about the state’s proposed Amendment 3, which would increase the maximum property assessment needed to qualify for the state’s homestead tax exemption from $150,000 to $250,000. That would result in a one-third reduction to the Jacksonville city budget, according to Deegan.

 “A $300 million hit is not a small hit,” the mayor stated. “This proposed reduction will inevitably result in roads deteriorating, libraries, pools, and parks closing, public safety response times going up, housing affordability worsening, and more homeless on our streets.” 

Hallandale Beach mayor Joy Cooper went one step further, asking her constituents directly, “What city services do people want to cut?” in a Nextdoor post following the state legislature’s passage of Amendment 3. Responses flooded in, with most suggesting Cooper and her fellow city officials take lower annual salaries. 

The mayors’ sentiments are supported by economic analysis of the proposes measures. Estimates indicate that the eight property tax ballot initiatives across six states will deprive their respective state and local governments of at least hundreds of millions and potentially as much as tens of billions of dollars in the coming years.

Leading the pack in terms of projected revenue reductions are Florida’s Amendment 3, at around $46 billion by 2032; Florida’s Exempt Tangible Personal Property Used for Agriculture or Agritourism from Property Taxes Amendment, at $96.9 million by 2030; and Wyoming’s Homeowner’s Primary Residence Property Tax Exemption Initiative, estimated at a minimum of $188 million in losses by 2030. Many measures, such as those in Louisiana, have yet to receive cost appraisals but are still projected to curb local government revenue streams. 

A homeowner referendum on public spending

Proponents of the tax reductions argue these costs are a small price to pay for eliminating wasteful spending and directly alleviating crushing cost-of-living expenses. 

“We have seen egregious over-taxing by some of our municipalities here in North Carolina,” North Carolina Treasurer Brad Briner told CNBC, in reference to the state’s proposed constitutional amendment directing state legislators to pass laws limiting property tax levy increases. “That is not fair to homeowners who are already stretching their budgets, and it makes it impossible for some potential new homeowners to consider jumping into the housing market.” 

Briner referenced his role on North Carolina’s Local Government Commission and mentioned that, while most municipalities are well-managed financially, he’s seen those that aren’t turn to supplemental revenue-raising as a means for “cover[ing] their mistakes.”

“A top priority for my administration is financial literacy. A basic principle of that is to live within your means,” he said. “We recognize municipalities are also being stretched, but we need to find other avenues to balance their budgets, without relying too heavily on property taxes.”

But, as is the case in Florida, state and local officials are sharply divided over how to interpret rising municipal budget costs.

“The property tax is Wake County’s largest and most stable source of revenue,” said Don Mial, Chair of the Wake County Board of Commissioners. “It funds about 75% of the county’s annual budget and makes financing new schools, libraries, fire stations and other infrastructure possible. If we lose the ability to set our own tax rate, it could result in significant service reductions and force us to scale back much-needed capital improvement plans.”

One of the loudest voices against property taxes has been Florida Governor Ron DeSantis, whose state has two amendments dedicated to property tax reductions set for voters to weigh in on. 

“You’ll have a 12-or-13-year period where you went from $32 billion being taken [in] to $83 billion being taken,” he said, highlighting the projected increase in local government revenue at a May roundtable event. “I think everybody understands that [basic services could be provided] at a lower level than $83 billion,” he added. “That money … would be put to use if people could keep [it] in their pockets. Imagine what they would be able to do with the economy if people who owe $2,000 a year [in property taxes] all of a sudden had that money at their disposal.” 

What recent state votes and Florida polling indicate

DeSantis, drawing stark contrast with Deegan’s view of the initiative, doesn’t think that Amendment 3 goes far enough with its property tax exemption structure. The governor’s initial plan contained a far more ambitious rollback, one that would have eventually eliminated all property taxes on primary homes and contained no carveout for school budget property taxes.  

“What the Legislature did wasn’t my proposal,” the governor said during a bill signing event in Tampa. “I think it’ll likely pass … But I don’t know that. I know ours would have passed, because we did a lot of research on exactly how to structure it and how to do that, and so we’ll just see what happens.”

In Florida, amendments to the state constitution require 60% voter support to pass, meaning that Amendment 3 will need to decisively sway Floridian taxpayers. The same cannot be said for the other states with property tax initiatives set for a vote, where state Republicans hope for a simple 50%-plus-one majority willing to see their legislative proposals through. This, of course, begs the question, how likely are the measures to pass? 

The outlook isn’t a simple one. On paper, with the exceptions of North Carolina and Georgia, each state boasting a property tax initiative skews heavily conservative in its political leanings. This means that, even in a national political climate expected to favor turnout among Democratic voters, the electorates in states like Wyoming and Oklahoma will be overwhelmingly favorable to tax rollbacks. They will also likely share the opinions expressed by Republican legislative leaders placing these initiatives on the ballot more often than not. 

Two ballot initiatives concerning taxation have already been voted on this year, and both failed. Oregon’s Measure 120, which would have increased the state’s fuel tax and public transportation payroll tax, was rejected overwhelmingly by voters in May. Louisiana’s Amendment 4, which would have allowed local governments to exempt business inventory from property taxes, was also rejected by a 2:1 margin. On their own, these results would indicate a climate in which voters seem largely hesitant to change the tax status quo in one way or another.

However, neither of these amendments would have decreased the tax burden attached to a home in the same way many of those being voted on later in the year will. Recent election precedent that more closely resembles the upcoming measures presents a far more favorable picture for large-scale property tax reductions. 

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

Yet, even in highly conservative states, voters have been cautious about property tax rollbacks they see as a step too far. North Dakota’s 2024 Initiated Measure 4, which would have effectively banned local governments from imposing property taxes, was defeated soundly amidst concerns surrounding its impact on local government budgets. 

A recent poll released by the University of North Florida Public Opinion Research Lab echoes this fear. Initially, when told that Amendment 3 would “phase out taxes on homestead property, other than those directed to schools,” 61% of respondents indicated that they would support the measure, with only 32% saying that they would oppose it. However, when informed of the projected budget shortfalls in city/county governments across the state, support plummeted to 45%, and opposition rose to 47%.

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