Increased Homestead Exemption; Lower Cap on Increases in Non-Homestead Property Assessments

Larger homestead exemptions and other property-tax changes

Changes the homestead exemption, caps annual assessment increases for non-homestead property and changes constitutional rules for local property-tax spending. This is the 2026 property-tax amendment, not the 2024 marijuana initiative.

If YES wins: homesteads

For qualifying Florida residents, raises the non-school homestead exemption to $150,000 in 2027 and $250,000 in 2028, with positive inflation adjustments beginning in 2029. These are exemptions of assessed value, not reductions of that many dollars from the tax bill. School-district levies keep the $25,000 exemption.

New residents face a waiting period

People who had not maintained Florida permanent residency by December 31, 2026 receive the baseline exemption for four exemption years; the larger amount begins with their fifth year, subject to federal constitutional limits. Existing Florida renters who later buy a homestead are not treated as new residents solely because they did not own a home in 2026.

The official ballot summary expressly says “to the extent permitted by the U.S. Constitution.” Do not characterize the waiting period as legally settled.

If YES wins: rentals and commercial property

Lowers the annual non-school assessment-increase cap for non-homestead property from 10% to 5%, starting January 1, 2027. This limits assessed-value growth, not the tax rate or final tax bill.

Further exemptions require local action

Requires a uniform statutory procedure through which counties and municipalities may increase the exemption up to full assessed value. Special districts may increase their exemption by voter referendum. Passage does not automatically eliminate every non-school property tax.

Property-tax spending provisions

Lists public safety, schools, infrastructure, natural resources, bond debt, employee retirement and government operations as permitted county/municipal property-tax uses. Also permits other spending approved by local officers or governing bodies unless state general law prohibits it.

The catch-all for locally approved spending matters: do not say the text categorically bans parks, libraries or nonprofit funding. Fiscal cuts predicted by opponents are not automatic legal mandates.

If NO wins

Keeps the current property-tax structure, the inflation-adjusted existing non-school homestead exemption and the 10% non-homestead assessment cap. Does not enact the new waiting period or spending provisions.

Projected local revenue reduction

Florida Revenue Estimating Conference, July 10, 2026; five-affected-year total calculated from its table and sixth-year convention.

At existing millage rates, the state Revenue Estimating Conference’s July 10, 2026 conditional estimate projects $4.9295 billion less non-school local property-tax revenue in FY2027–28 than under current law. The first five affected fiscal years, FY2027–28 through FY2031–32, total about $45.8368 billion, calculated using its sixth-year cash impact of $11.8347 billion as recurring.

Conditional modeled differences from current law, paired with property-owner tax reductions; not guaranteed year-over-year budget cuts. Actual bills and budgets depend on rates, values and future policy. The five-year total is our arithmetic: 4.9295 + 8.7145 + 9.6479 + 10.7102 + 11.8347 billion. TaxWatch’s published first-year $4.939 billion differs from this primary estimate by $9.5 million; the reason is unconfirmed.

Statewide non-school levies grew 56.3%

Florida non-school property taxes levied increased from about $21.4939 billion in FY2019–20 to $33.5930 billion in FY2024–25, a 56.3% increase. These values subtract school-district levies from the Tax Handbook’s statewide totals.

Levies are imposed taxes, not collected revenue or actual spending. The table includes operating and debt-service taxes and is rounded to $0.1 million. Growth alone does not identify waste, cash surplus, or service-neutral spending cuts.

How population and inflation compare

From calendar 2019 to 2024, Florida’s Census population estimate rose about 8.3% and the national annual-average CPI-U rose about 22.7%. Multiplying those changes gives a 32.8% population-and-price benchmark. Statewide non-school levy growth of 56.3% was about 17.7% above that benchmark after adjustment.

This compares calendar-year economic measures with FY2019–20 to FY2024–25 levies. CPI measures household prices, not government-specific costs. The 17.7% uses a ratio, not subtraction of percentage points: (33.5930/21.4939) ÷ [(23,265.838/21,492.056) × (313.689/255.657)] − 1. The benchmark does not establish waste, surplus, or how much spending can be cut without affecting services.

Jacksonville: one fund’s actual revenue and spending

Jacksonville fund 00111 actual property-tax revenue rose from $699,217,985 in FY2019–20 to $1,040,676,809 in FY2023–24, up 48.8%. Total fund expenditures rose from $1,336,182,833 to $1,756,542,386, up 31.5%, over the same four-year period.

This is one fund, labeled General Fund–General Services District in the earlier summary and General Fund Operating in the later one. It is not all Jacksonville or statewide spending. Total expenditures include transfers, debt service and other uses. The comparison is historical and does not quantify waste or predict Amendment 3 service effects.

Local choices and balanced budgets

Florida’s county and municipal budget laws require estimated available resources, including balances brought forward, to balance appropriations for expenditures and reserves. Local governments could respond to lower modeled revenue by changing spending or lawful revenues, deferring projects, or using legally available reserves temporarily; the amendment does not select a specific response.

These are possible future choices, not documented local plans. Balanced-budget law is not a zero-growth cap or proof of efficiency. No sufficient unrestricted reserve balance or particular service cut or tax shift is established here. A finite reserve cannot sustain unreplenished recurring withdrawals indefinitely.

A local exception starting in 2030

Starting in 2030, a county or municipality may shorten the new-resident waiting requirement for its own levy by a two-thirds vote of its governing body when warranted for a critical local need.

This is an optional local exception. The default larger exemption begins in the fifth exemption year, subject to federal constitutional limits.

The exemption amounts replace the basic schedule

The $150,000 and $250,000 amounts are the total basic non-school exemption, replacing the existing basic schedule; they are not added on top of it. The separate $25,000 school-levy exemption remains.

This describes the basic schedule; it does not generally erase other special exemptions elsewhere in Article VII §6.

Florida Realtors

Florida Realtors

Launched Vote Yes on 3; says lower property-tax bills would help residents afford to remain in their homes.

This source establishes sponsorship and advocacy, not a verified contribution amount.

Republican Party of Florida

Republican Party of Florida

Endorses YES on Amendment 3.

Florida TaxWatch

Florida TaxWatch

Recommends NO on Amendment 3, citing potential shifts onto other taxpayers and the need for more comprehensive reform.

JAX Chamber

JAX Chamber

Opposes Amendment 3, arguing that renters and businesses could face costs shifted to them when local governments respond to lost revenue.

League of Women Voters of Florida

League of Women Voters of Florida

Formally opposes Amendment 3 and warns about effects on local services.

Duval County Democratic Executive Committee

Duval County Democratic Executive Committee

Recommends NO on Amendment 3.

Save Our Services – No on 3

Save Our Services – No on 3

A coalition campaign sponsored by Floridians for Shared Prosperity opposes Amendment 3.

Sponsorship is distinct from identifying contributors; donors require finance records.

Main backers: real-estate trade associations

Jacksonville Today reported on October 16 that real-estate interests had contributed about $21.51 million to Vote Yes on 3, with the vast majority from Florida Realtors. It also reported a $2,016,500 National Association of Realtors donation on October 9.

Dated reporting citing state finance data; the original itemized filings were not independently retrieved. These are receipts, not mailing costs or a current cash balance.

Reported financial supporters of opposition

Jacksonville Today, October 16, 2026

Jacksonville Today reported on October 16 that financial supporters of anti-Amendment 3 efforts include the Florida Association of Special Districts, Palm Beach County League of Cities, and Our Democracy, the political committee for Miami-Dade Mayor Daniella Levine Cava.

Dated reporting citing campaign-finance records. This passage gives no donor amounts or precise allocation among opposition committees. Original itemized filings were not independently retrieved; these names do not establish the full donor list or the largest backers.

What the industry stands to gain

Florida Realtors explicitly favors reducing property taxes and removing barriers that discourage owners from moving or buyers from purchasing. Lower carrying costs can support property demand and transactions, which can benefit the industry’s members. The separate lower assessment-growth cap also reaches rental and commercial property.

The transaction benefit is an economic inference from the association’s stated policy interests, not proof of a secret agreement or unlawful motive. Lower taxes for a landlord do not require a lower rent.

The committee named on the mailing

A mailing bearing the payer name Vote Yes on 3 and the address 7025 Augusta National Drive, Orlando matches Florida political committee account 93318 and its campaign website. Its registered ZIP is 32822.

This identifies the disclosed committee from a reader-provided disclaimer transcription. No mail-piece image, printing invoice, postage charge or vendor payment has been matched. Committee contributors fund pooled campaign activity; no specific donor’s dollars are traced to this piece.