Florida voters will decide this November whether to approve one of the largest property tax cuts in state history, after lawmakers passed Gov. Ron DeSantis's proposal to dramatically expand the state's homestead exemption. The plan, titled "Save Our Homes From Excessive Property Taxes," cleared the House 75-26 and the Senate 30-9 after a special session. Now it heads to the ballot, where it needs 60% voter support to become constitutional. An April survey found 77% of Florida voters would support the amendment, with 53% saying they definitely would and 24% probably would.

The Big Picture

The appeal is obvious. Property tax bills have become a major frustration in Florida, where rising home values, insurance costs, and local budgets collide with affordability concerns. One couple told Realtor.com® last year that their annual bill skyrocketed from $15,000 to a "life-altering" $91,000 after a major remodel triggered a market-value reassessment. This extreme case illustrates how the current system can penalize homeowners who improve their properties, a problem the amendment aims to mitigate by allowing more value to be exempt.

But the plan carries serious trade-offs—including a potential $8 billion shortfall for local budgets in fiscal year 2027/2028 alone. The constitutional amendment would create a much larger homestead exemption for primary residences, allowing homeowners to shield more of their home's value from taxation. Starting Jan. 1, 2027, homeowners could exempt the first $150,000 of assessed value, rising to $250,000 in 2028 and increasing with inflation thereafter. This means that for a home with an assessed value of $250,000, the property tax would be zeroed out, assuming no other charges. However, local governments, which rely heavily on property taxes to fund schools, roads, and public safety, would face a massive deficit. The Florida House staff analysis estimates losses of over $8 billion in the first year, and over $14 billion in the second fiscal year. That represents roughly 20% of the state's total property tax revenue, according to data from the Florida Department of Revenue.

“The proposal could eliminate property taxes for 28% of homeowners, but leaves an $8 billion hole in local budgets.”

By the Numbers

• Voter support: 77% of Florida voters support the amendment, with 53% definitely and 24% probably, per an April survey.
• Exemption cap: $250,000 of assessed value by 2028, inflation-adjusted annually.
• Revenue loss: Over $8 billion in the first year (FY 2027/2028) and over $14 billion the following year, per a Florida House staff analysis.
• Homeowners affected: About 28% of homestead properties have a market value of $250,000 or less, per the Florida Legislature's Office of Economic and Demographic Research. However, the actual benefit could be larger when considering assessed value, which is often below market value for long-term owners.
• Existing disparity: In Miami, new buyers of median-priced homes pay more than three times as much as average-tenure homeowners for similar homes. This disparity stems from the "Save Our Homes" rule that caps annual assessed value increases at 3% or the inflation rate, whichever is lower.

Why It Matters

The measure exposes a central tension in Florida's tax policy: who picks up the tab? While lower-value homeowners could see their tax bills zeroed out, local governments face a massive hole. The House analysis estimates over $8 billion in lost revenue in the first year alone, including both school and nonschool property tax revenue. That means cuts to services from schools to public safety. Counties and municipalities would have to cut spending, raise tax rates, or find new revenue sources, such as sales taxes or service fees. However, raising tax rates could offset the relief for homeowners, especially those with higher-value homes who benefit less from the exemption.

The clear winners are current homeowners with low-to-mid-value homes, especially those already benefiting from existing Save Our Homes rules that cap assessed value increases. Losers include new buyers, who already face higher bills due to the gap between market and assessed values. The proposal doesn't address that gap—it could widen it by exempting more value for established owners. Additionally, renters could be indirectly affected if landlords of rental properties pass on higher tax costs through increased rents, even though the measure doesn't directly apply to investment properties.

What DeSantis's analysis misses is the complexity of assessed value. The governor claimed a $250,000 cap would eliminate property tax for 60% of homeowners. But PolitiFact, in partnership with WLRN, reported a more measured estimate: about 28% of homestead properties have a market value of $250,000 or less. However, the proposal applies to assessed value, not market value, and many long-term owners have assessed values far below market. This means the actual benefit could be smaller than promised, and relief distribution depends on tenure. For example, a homeowner who bought 20 years ago for $100,000 might have an assessed value of $150,000, while a neighbor who bought recently for $300,000 would have an assessed value close to market. The long-term owner would benefit more from the exemption, despite having a higher market-value home.

What This Means For You

1. 1For current homeowners: If you have a homestead exemption, you could see a significant tax cut, especially if your assessed value is below $250,000. But the exact benefit depends on your current assessment and local tax rates. If your assessed value is $200,000, with the $250,000 exemption you'd pay no property tax on that home. But if your assessed value is $300,000, you'd only pay tax on $50,000. To maximize the benefit, consider avoiding improvements that significantly increase assessed value unless necessary.
2. 2For potential buyers: Don't expect this to level the playing field. New buyers will still pay more than established owners due to the assessed-value gap. The proposal doesn't close that gap—it could worsen it by exempting more value for incumbents. If you're considering buying in Florida, factor in that your tax bill could be higher than a neighbor's for a similar home with longer tenure. Look for properties in areas with lower local tax rates or where assessed values are already close to market to minimize disparity.
3. 3For real estate investors: The measure applies only to primary residences, not investment properties. If you own rentals, you won't see direct relief, but you could benefit indirectly if demand for for-sale homes rises due to lower carrying costs. This could boost single-family home prices, benefiting investors who own such properties. However, you might also face increased competition from buyers seeking primary residences, potentially raising acquisition costs. Monitor local tax rates: if governments raise rates to offset the deficit, your rental properties could see higher taxes, squeezing margins.

What To Watch Next

The first milestone is November 2026, when voters decide whether to approve the amendment with 60% support. Current polls show 77% support, but opposition could grow as local governments detail service cuts needed to offset the deficit. Watch for campaigns by counties and cities, which could mobilize voters against it. For instance, the Florida Association of Counties has already voiced concerns about the impact on services. If opposition organizes, support could dip below 60%.

Another factor is the housing market response. If the measure passes, lower taxes could boost demand for single-family homes, especially among middle-income buyers. But if local governments raise tax rates to compensate for lost revenue, the net benefit could shrink. Inflation also matters: the inflation-adjusted exemption could erode relief over time if home values grow faster than CPI. Additionally, the measure could incentivize more homeowners to claim the homestead exemption, increasing pressure on local budgets. Currently, about 70% of owner-occupied homes have the exemption, per census data.

The Bottom Line

Florida is about to run a massive experiment in tax policy: cutting property taxes by $8 billion a year with no clear plan to replace that revenue. Lower-value homeowners may win, but taxpayers overall could lose if public services deteriorate or tax rates rise. The measure has overwhelming popular support, but implementation will be the real challenge. The key question isn't whether voters will approve it—it's how they'll pay the consequences. For investors and housing market operators, the lesson is clear: local tax policy can dramatically shift cost and demand landscapes. Stay tuned to local government decisions post-vote, as their responses will determine the real market impact.