Florida officials laid out the next steps in a long-debated push to eliminate property taxes on primary residences, aiming to place a constitutional amendment before voters in 2026. Gov. Ron DeSantis said the initiative would likely be phased in and must clear the state’s 60 percent approval threshold for constitutional changes, a requirement explained by the Division of Elections under Article XI of the Florida Constitution.
The governor described the effort during a national interview as relief for homeowners facing rising bills while local governments have expanded spending.
The proposal centers on homesteaded properties, meaning a taxpayer’s primary residence. Under the leading framework, non-homestead parcels such as rentals, second homes and commercial property would continue paying ad valorem taxes, with school-district levies remaining in place for homesteads unless changed by a separate measure.
Legislative sponsors have filed multiple versions to reach the ballot, and House leaders have said voters could see more than one option if negotiations do not converge on a single text.
What lawmakers are advancing
The Florida House is vetting several constitutional amendments that would either eliminate or sharply reduce non-school property taxes for homesteads. One measure, HJR 201, would exempt homestead property from all non-school ad valorem taxes and contains language that prevents counties and cities from cutting law-enforcement funding below a set baseline.
Another version contemplates a gradual phaseout by increasing the homestead exemption in steps each year until non-school taxes on homesteads are fully eliminated. House leadership summarized these ideas in an October memorandum to members outlining the path to the 2026 ballot.
A separate concept targets seniors by exempting homesteads owned by residents 65 and older from non-school property taxes, subject to the same voter-approval standard. Staff analyses for these bills estimate multibillion-dollar revenue effects for local governments if voters approve them, which would trigger policy choices about alternative funding or service reductions.
The House State Affairs Committee has moved several of the proposals forward to keep them eligible for placement on the general-election ballot in November 2026.
Why the change is being pursued
Backers argue that property taxes have outpaced incomes during the pandemic-era migration and housing surge.
They also point to Florida’s Save Our Homes assessment cap, which limits yearly increases in assessed value for homesteads to 3 percent or CPI, whichever is lower, as evidence that voters have historically favored tax restraint. Supporters say eliminating non-school property taxes on primary homes would give long-term relief to full-time residents and stabilize budgets for families on fixed incomes.
DeSantis has framed the effort as correcting what he calls overspending by local governments and responding to rapid increases in assessed values that can follow hot housing markets. He has also indicated that any repeal would be implemented in stages to minimize disruption, and he reaffirmed that the measure will require statewide approval on the 2026 ballot.
What the numbers show
Independent analysts warn the stakes are large. The Florida Policy Institute estimates that statewide property taxes total roughly $55 billion a year, funding county and municipal services and, in many communities, a majority share of school budgets.
The group’s modeling suggests that eliminating non-school property taxes for homesteads alone would remove on the order of tens of billions of dollars from local revenues, with a frequently cited estimate near $18.5 billion for that subset. Other analyses note that a full repeal across all property classes would require replacing about $43 billion to maintain current service levels.
Because school districts rely heavily on ad valorem revenue, several proposals explicitly leave school taxes intact for homesteads. That distinction is central to fiscal impact estimates and to political feasibility. Economists and local officials say the state would need to identify replacement revenues or reduce services if a broad exemption for primary residences takes effect.
