Florida’s Biggest Tax Cut Proposal Loses Its Biggest Political Champion

A luxurious mansion surrounded by palm trees and a waterfront view

Florida voters will decide this November whether to slash property taxes for millions of homeowners — but the governor who pushed hardest for the cut is refusing to campaign for it, calling the final version a betrayal of his own plan.

Story Snapshot

  • Florida’s Amendment 3 would raise the homestead exemption to $150,000 in 2027 and $250,000 in 2028, potentially eliminating property taxes for 60% of homeowners.
  • Governor DeSantis called the final bill a “watered-down version” of his original proposal and said he will not campaign for it.
  • Local governments warn they could lose billions in revenue, with Broward County alone facing a projected $330 million annual shortfall.
  • No organized group is actively promoting the amendment, leaving homeowners — the only direct winners — without a campaign voice.

What Florida Voters Will Be Asked to Approve

The Florida Legislature passed House Joint Resolution 1F (HJR 1F) in June 2026, sending it to voters as Amendment 3 on the November ballot. The measure passed the House 75–26 and the Senate 30–9. If approved, it raises the homestead exemption — the portion of a primary home’s value shielded from most property taxes — from $50,000 today to $150,000 in 2027 and $250,000 in 2028. After that, the exemption rises with inflation each year.

The amendment also cuts the annual cap on assessed value increases for non-homestead properties — things like rental units, second homes, and commercial buildings — from 10% to 5% starting in 2027. Supporters say that limits tax growth on businesses. Critics say it shrinks another revenue stream that cities depend on. The ballot language also requires local governments to spend whatever property tax revenue remains only on core needs: public safety, schools, infrastructure, and natural resources.

Big Savings for Homeowners, Big Holes for Cities

Governor Ron DeSantis says the $250,000 exemption would wipe out property taxes entirely for about 60% of Florida homeowners. He has floated a future goal of a $500,000 exemption that he claims would cover 92% of homesteads. Homeowners in Broward and Miami-Dade counties could save between $1,500 and $1,800 per year under the new exemption. New residents, however, must live in Florida for five full years before they qualify for the higher exemption amount.

The savings for homeowners come at a steep cost to local budgets. Florida’s Revenue Estimating Conference found the $250,000 exemption scenario would cost local governments — not counting school districts — about $13.3 billion per year. Broward County’s property appraiser estimated that county alone would lose more than $330 million annually by 2028. A study commissioned by the Florida League of Cities, conducted by Wichita State University, found that exemptions in the $250,000–$500,000 range could force local governments to nearly double their tax rates just to keep services at current levels.

A Tax Cut Without a Champion

Perhaps the strangest part of this story is who is not fighting for the amendment. DeSantis, who made property tax elimination a centerpiece of his agenda, publicly refused to lead the campaign for Amendment 3. He called it a “watered-down version” of his original plan and said his proposal was “betrayed by his party.” Earlier versions of his plan included a state trust fund to help local governments replace lost revenue. That fund was stripped from the final bill, leaving cities with no statutory safety net.

With DeSantis on the sidelines, no major political group or nonprofit has stepped up to promote the amendment. The Florida League of Cities and the Florida Association of Counties are actively working to defeat it. Two political committees — “Vote No on Three,” led by former Leon County Commissioner Brian Desloges, and “3 Degrees Florida,” led by Derek Strickland — are running campaigns against the measure. Local leaders like Orange County Mayor Jerry Demings have raised alarms about what the revenue loss would mean for fire departments and public safety. The result is a lopsided public debate: well-funded opposition, almost no organized support. The people who would benefit most — ordinary homeowners — have no one making the case for them at scale. That imbalance alone should give every voter pause about how this process unfolded.

Sources:

feedpress.me, propertyexemption.com, natlawreview.com, gray-robinson.com, instagram.com, youtube.com, floridapolitics.com, flsenate.gov

© patriotwise.com 2026. All rights reserved.