After lawmakers approved HJR 1-F during a special session on June 2, a proposed constitutional amendment aimed at expanding property tax relief for homeowners is headed to the November ballot, setting up one of the most closely watched tax debates in recent Florida history.
For homeowners, the proposal could mean significant savings. Under the measure, Florida’s existing $50,000 homestead exemption would increase to $150,000 in 2027 and $250,000 in 2028, reducing the portion of a home’s value subject to tax.
A homeowner with a $400,000 primary residence could save thousands of dollars annually, depending on local tax rates. And for supporters, that potential savings is exactly the point.
Sign up for Kiplinger’s Free Newsletters
Profit and prosper with the best of expert advice on investing, taxes, retirement, personal finance and more – straight to your e-mail.
Profit and prosper with the best of expert advice – straight to your e-mail.
Critics, however, have raised questions about how local governments would replace the revenue currently generated by property taxes, which a legislative analysis projects could drain local municipalities of up to $8.4 billion annually by 2028.
And…a nonprofit group, naming two former South Florida mayors as plaintiffs, has filed a lawsuit against the measure, arguing that the ballot summary is “unconstitutionally biased, misleading, and inaccurate.”
These tensions have emerged as central questions surrounding the proposal as it heads toward a statewide vote. Here’s more of what you need to know.
The HJR 1-F property tax exemption for Florida homeowners
The passage of HJR 1-F moves the long-debated property tax relief conversation in Florida from Tallahassee to the ballot box.
- If approved by at least 60% of Florida voters this November, the amendment would significantly expand the state’s homestead exemption for qualifying homeowners.
- The proposal applies to owner-occupied primary residences that qualify for Florida’s homestead exemption and would not extend to second homes or investment properties.
- The measure also introduces a tiered structure based on residency duration.
Current Floridians and those who establish permanent residency by December 31, 2026, would be eligible for the full tax break immediately, while anyone moving to the state after that date would have to wait five years before becoming eligible for the full $250,000 exemption.
Gov. Ron DeSantis has framed the measure as a way to provide relief for homeowners facing rising housing costs, insurance premiums, and other housing-related expenses.
“I think a lot of people need relief,” DeSantis told reporters in a recent presser, adding, “I think a lot of people have been wondering, where can we get it? We’re showing a pathway to be able to get that done that I think is going to be transformational for people.”
To justify that relief, the administration points to an aggressive surge in local property tax collections.
According to data released by the governor’s office, property tax revenue collected by Florida local governments has nearly doubled over the past seven years, climbing from $32 billion to $60 billion. It is currently projected to reach $83 billion by 2032.
Why property taxes matter
For retirees, fixed-income residents, and longtime homeowners, the appeal of lower property tax bills is easy to understand. Many are already balancing rising insurance premiums, HOA fees, utility costs, and other housing-related expenses.
Supporters argue homeowners should not continue paying higher taxes simply because their property values have increased. They view the amendment as long-overdue relief that would allow residents to keep more of their own money while strengthening Florida’s reputation as a low-tax state.
For many households, even modest savings could have a meaningful impact on annual budgets.
Tradeoffs for Florida voters
The debate surrounding the amendment extends beyond annual tax bills and potential savings.
Former State Sen. Jeff Brandes has described the proposal as “a tax shift, not a tax cut,” arguing that while homeowners may pay less directly, the costs associated with funding local government services do not simply disappear.
Property taxes currently help support many of the services and infrastructure residents rely on every day, including public safety, road maintenance, infrastructure improvements, and emergency preparedness.
Notably, HJR 1-F legally requires local governments to prioritize remaining property tax revenues strictly on designated “core services,” such as law enforcement, fire protection, and flood control.
However, the lawsuit filed by Save Our Voters From Misleading Ballot Language argues that the ballot summary’s promise of “ensuring funding for core services” is misleading when the policy itself cuts the revenue available to pay for them.
In a state that regularly faces hurricanes and severe weather events, how local governments would replace billions of dollars in projected revenue reductions remains one of the proposal’s biggest unanswered questions.
Cragin Mosteller, spokesperson for the Florida Association of Counties, told the Miami Herald that “one of the things that is easy to overlook sometimes is that we move to a community not only because it’s safe but because it’s wonderful, because it has a great quality of life.”
For opponents, the question isn’t whether homeowners deserve lower taxes. It’s whether communities can continue delivering that quality of life if one of their largest sources of funding is significantly reduced.
Ultimately, the decision comes down to how homeowners view property taxes: as a recurring cost of homeownership or an investment in the neighborhood surrounding that home.
Infrastructure and public safety are easy to take for granted when they work seamlessly, but their true value becomes clear the moment those services are stretched thin.
What happens next
The amendment must receive at least 60% voter approval to become part of the Florida Constitution — assuming the text first survives its current legal challenge. So between now and Election Day in November, debate over the measure will continue as those on both sides try to win over voters.
Floridians will ultimately have to weigh historic tax savings for their household budgets against long-term funding concerns and the certainty of local services they rely on every day.
