Florida’s Historic Property Tax Overhaul — What’s on the Ballot, What It Means for Your Wallet, and How It Could Transform the Central Florida Real Estate Market

Creegan Group | Monitoring Florida’s Property Tax Proposals on Behalf of Our Buyers and Sellers | Updated March 2026

---

Something historic is unfolding in Tallahassee — and every homeowner, buyer, seller, and real estate investor in Central Florida should be paying attention.

For the first time in modern Florida history, the state legislature is seriously advancing a proposal that could fundamentally change what it costs to own a home here. The Florida House of Representatives passed a joint resolution on February 19, 2026, by an 80-30 vote that would put a constitutional amendment before Florida voters in November 2026 — one that could phase out virtually all non-school property taxes on primary residences within ten years.

If it ultimately passes the Senate, clears the ballot with 60% voter approval, and becomes law, it would represent the most significant change to Florida’s residential real estate cost structure in generations. For buyers evaluating a Central Florida purchase, for sellers considering timing, and for investors running cash flow projections, this is a development that deserves a close read.

Creegan Group has been monitoring these proposals from the moment they were introduced. Here is everything you need to know — what the proposals say, what they would save you, what questions remain, and what it all means for the Central Florida real estate market.

---

Background — Florida’s Current Property Tax System

Before diving into the proposals, it helps to understand how Florida’s property tax system currently works.

Florida homeowners who occupy their primary residence as their permanent home qualify for the Homestead Exemption — a foundational feature of Florida property law that provides a $50,000 exemption on the assessed value of the home. The first $25,000 of the exemption applies to all property taxes; the second $25,000 applies to all property taxes except school district levies.

In addition to the homestead exemption, Florida’s Save Our Homes (SOH) cap limits the annual increase in assessed value for homesteaded properties to 3% per year or the rate of inflation — whichever is lower. This cap protects long-term homeowners from rapid assessment increases during periods of strong appreciation.

Property taxes in Florida are calculated by applying the millage rate — set by local governments, counties, school boards, and special districts — to the taxable value of the home after exemptions. In Orange County, the combined millage rate produces an effective property tax rate of approximately 0.75–1.0% of assessed value. On a home assessed at $400,000 (after homestead exemption), a typical Orange County homeowner pays approximately $2,800–$3,200 per year in property taxes. On a $600,000 home, that figure climbs to approximately $4,200–$5,000 per year.

These are not the highest property taxes in the country — but they are a meaningful carrying cost, particularly as home values in Central Florida have appreciated significantly over the past five years.

Now, the Florida legislature is proposing to change everything.

---

The Proposals — What’s Actually on the Table

The Florida House has introduced and advanced a suite of seven joint resolutions targeting property tax relief for homeowners. Each takes a different approach. Here is a breakdown of every proposal currently before the legislature:

---

HJR 203 — The Proposal That Passed the House (10-Year Phased Elimination)

This is the centerpiece proposal — and the one most likely to appear on the November 2026 ballot.

HJR 203 proposes a constitutional amendment that would increase Florida’s homestead exemption by $100,000 per year for ten consecutive years, beginning January 1, 2027. By January 1, 2037, all homesteaded properties would be fully exempt from all non-school property taxes.

Here is how the phase-out would work year by year:

What does this mean in dollars? For an Orange County homeowner with a $450,000 assessed home value, the current combined non-school millage rate generates roughly $2,500–$3,000 per year in non-school property taxes. Under HJR 203, that bill would begin declining meaningfully as early as 2027 — and by 2037, would be reduced to zero.

What’s protected: The proposal prohibits counties and municipalities from cutting law enforcement budgets below the higher of their FY 2025–26 or FY 2026–27 funding levels. Public safety is explicitly protected from the revenue reduction pressure.

What’s not covered: School district levies remain in place regardless of which proposal passes. Your property taxes will not reach zero — the school portion will remain. For most Central Florida homeowners, the school portion represents approximately 35–45% of the total property tax bill.

Legislative status: Passed the Florida House 80–30 on February 19, 2026. As of March 2026, the Florida Senate has not scheduled a hearing. The Senate Appropriations Committee chair has publicly stated the Senate will introduce its own proposal — and that it “won’t be as generous” as HJR 203. The regular legislative session is scheduled to conclude March 13, 2026.

---

HJR 201 — Immediate Full Elimination

The most aggressive proposal in the package, HJR 201 would immediately and fully eliminate all non-school property taxes for homesteaded properties beginning January 1, 2027 — no phase-out, no gradual increase. Full elimination in year one.

The Florida Revenue Estimating Conference projects this would cost local governments approximately $18.3 billion per year — a figure that raises serious questions about how local services would be funded in the absence of this revenue. HJR 201 has not advanced out of committee and is generally considered the least likely of the major proposals to reach the ballot.

---

HJR 205 — Senior Exemption (65 and Older)

HJR 205 would exempt Florida residents age 65 and older from paying any non-school homestead property taxes. The Revenue Estimating Conference projects this would cost local governments approximately $6.7 billion annually — the most financially conservative of the major proposals.

For Central Florida’s significant and growing retirement-age population — including the communities of Heritage Hills in Clermont, The Villages-adjacent markets, and the established senior communities in Lake and Sumter counties — this proposal would have immediate and substantial impact.

---

HJR 207 — 25% Assessed Value Exemption

HJR 207 would create a new homestead exemption equal to 25% of the home’s assessed value for non-school property taxes. Unlike the flat-dollar exemptions in HJR 203, this is a percentage-based structure — meaning higher-value homes would receive proportionally larger exemptions in dollar terms.

For a home assessed at $600,000, this would represent an additional $150,000 exemption on top of existing exemptions — a meaningful reduction in taxable value and annual tax liability.

---

HJR 209 — Insurance-Linked Exemption

In an acknowledgment of Florida’s ongoing property insurance crisis, HJR 209 would create an additional $100,000 homestead exemption for homeowners who maintain property insurance on their homesteaded property. This proposal attempts to incentivize homeowners to maintain coverage during a period when insurance costs have risen dramatically across Florida.

---

HJR 211 and HJR 213 — Additional Relief Measures

HJR 211 and HJR 213 address additional exemption categories and assessment limitation adjustments that would provide supplemental relief in coordination with the primary proposals. These are considered companion measures rather than standalone alternatives.

---

The Path to the Ballot — What Has to Happen Next

Understanding the legislative process for constitutional amendments is critical to understanding how likely these changes are to actually take effect.

Step 1 — Legislative approval. For a constitutional amendment to appear on the Florida ballot, it must be approved by three-fifths (60%) supermajority in both the Florida House and the Florida Senate. The House passed HJR 203 on February 19, 2026 with an 80-30 vote — exceeding the required threshold. The Senate has yet to act.

Step 2 — Senate action. The Senate Appropriations Committee chair has indicated the Senate will introduce its own property tax proposal — potentially a less sweeping version that reaches a middle ground between full elimination and the status quo. If the Senate passes a different version, the two chambers would need to reconcile the differences before a unified resolution could be placed on the ballot.

Step 3 — Ballot placement. If both chambers approve a joint resolution by the required supermajority before the session ends, the measure appears on the November 2026 general election ballot.

Step 4 — Voter approval. Florida’s constitution requires that any constitutional amendment receive at least 60% voter approval to take effect. This is a meaningful threshold — not a simple majority, but a supermajority of Florida voters.

Step 5 — Implementation. If approved by voters, implementation would begin January 1, 2027 — with the exemption increasing by $100,000 that first year under HJR 203’s structure.

Bottom line on timing: The most optimistic scenario is that a property tax relief amendment appears on the November 2026 ballot, is approved by 60%+ of voters, and begins providing tangible relief to homeowners in January 2027. A more conservative scenario is that the Senate passes a scaled-back version, and Florida homeowners see meaningful but partial relief beginning in 2027 — with the full phase-out extending over a longer period.

---

What the Revenue Loss Means — The Unanswered Question

Every analysis of Florida’s property tax proposals must grapple with the same central challenge: local governments currently depend on property tax revenue to fund services that residents depend on. HJR 203 alone would create an estimated $13.3 billion annual revenue gap for Florida’s counties, municipalities, and special districts.

The proposals require local governments to protect law enforcement budgets — but are largely silent on how the remaining revenue shortfall would be addressed. Several scenarios are being discussed:

Sales tax increases — Florida currently charges a 6% state sales tax, with counties adding local option surtaxes. If local governments shift from property taxes to sales taxes to replace lost revenue, residents would pay more every time they buy goods and services — with the burden falling proportionally more heavily on lower-income households who spend a higher share of their income on consumption.

Fee increases and special assessments — Local governments may respond with increased fees for services, new special assessments for infrastructure and utilities, and other non-property-tax revenue mechanisms.

Service reductions — Some municipalities may reduce services — park maintenance, code enforcement, non-emergency infrastructure — to absorb the revenue loss without corresponding tax increases.

State revenue sharing — Tallahassee could establish a state-level mechanism to partially replace lost local property tax revenue through general revenue sharing.

The reality is that the revenue replacement question has not been definitively answered by the proposals currently advancing through the legislature. This is the most significant unresolved issue in the debate — and it will be central to how Florida voters ultimately decide whether to approve the amendment in November.

---

What This Means for the Central Florida Real Estate Market

Whether the full elimination of non-school property taxes or a more moderate reform ultimately reaches the ballot, the potential market implications for Central Florida buyers, sellers, and investors are significant. Creegan Group has been analyzing these scenarios closely, and here is our assessment.

For Buyers — Increased Purchasing Power

Property taxes are a carrying cost — a recurring annual expense that affects a buyer’s ability to qualify for financing and their long-term affordability calculation. When property taxes are reduced, a buyer’s effective monthly housing cost decreases — which means they can qualify for a larger loan or allocate the savings toward a higher purchase price.

Consider a buyer purchasing in Orange County at the current $395,000 metro median price point. At a 1.0% effective property tax rate, they are paying approximately $3,950 per year — roughly $329 per month — in property taxes. If non-school taxes are phased out and that figure is reduced by 60–65%, the monthly carrying cost savings of $190–$215 per month is real and meaningful to a buyer’s budget.

Over a 30-year ownership period, the compounding effect of this savings — particularly as home values appreciate — represents a substantial reduction in the true cost of homeownership in Florida.

For buyers arriving from high-property-tax states — New York, New Jersey, Illinois, California — the comparison is even more dramatic. A buyer paying $15,000–$25,000 per year in property taxes on a comparable home in those markets would be looking at a Florida carrying cost that is not just lower, but potentially trending toward near-zero over the next decade. This is a powerful incentive for continued relocation into Central Florida.

For Sellers — Potential Upward Pressure on Prices

Lower carrying costs typically translate into higher home prices — because buyers can afford to pay more when their monthly costs are reduced. If property taxes for homesteaded properties decline materially over the next 10 years, Central Florida home prices — already supported by strong population growth, no state income tax, and limited supply in key markets — could see additional upward pressure.

This effect may not be linear or immediate. Markets absorb structural changes over time rather than in single-year jumps. But sellers in markets like Winter Park, Lake Mary, Oviedo, and Windermere — where buyers are already paying premium prices — could see that premium expand further as the tax savings for owner-occupants become increasingly compelling relative to rental or other investment alternatives.

Important caveat for sellers: Investment properties — rental homes, vacation properties, non-homesteaded real estate — do not qualify for the homestead exemption and would not benefit directly from these proposals. The tax relief is specifically and exclusively for primary residences that have been homesteaded by Florida residents. This distinction is important for investors evaluating the full picture.

For Investors — Mixed Implications

The property tax proposals present a nuanced picture for real estate investors. On one hand, non-homesteaded properties (rentals, second homes, commercial real estate) are not covered by these proposals — meaning investors will continue to pay full property taxes while owner-occupants’ costs decline. This could, over time, create a cost disparity that affects investor return calculations.

On the other hand, lower carrying costs for owner-occupants could increase the overall desirability of Florida real estate — drawing more buyers to the market, supporting prices, and improving the appreciation environment that makes real estate investment in Florida attractive in the first place.

For investors in short-term rental markets — particularly in Osceola County, Davenport, and the Disney-area communities where vacation rentals are concentrated — the proposals do not provide direct tax relief, but the broader market dynamics of an increasingly desirable Florida could support sustained rental demand.

For the Rental Market — A More Complex Story

If property tax elimination proceeds and more renters are incentivized to become owners — because the long-term cost advantage of homeownership becomes even more compelling — rental demand could soften in some markets. Conversely, if local governments replace property tax revenue with higher sales taxes or fees, the cost of living for renters (who do not receive direct tax relief) could increase.

The rental market implications of these proposals are genuinely uncertain and will depend significantly on what revenue replacement mechanism Florida ultimately adopts.

---

The Broader Context — Why Florida Is Uniquely Positioned for This Reform

Florida’s proposal to eliminate property taxes on homestead properties is not happening in a vacuum. It reflects a broader set of conditions that make Florida uniquely positioned to attempt this kind of structural tax reform.

No state income tax. Florida is already one of a handful of states with no personal income tax. This makes the state structurally different from states where income, property, and sales taxes all exist as major revenue pillars. Florida’s revenue model is already more sales-tax-dependent than most states — which may make a shift away from property taxes less operationally radical than it would appear in other states.

Population growth as a revenue driver. Florida has gained more than 2.5 million residents since 2020 — making it the fastest-growing state in the country. A larger population base generates more sales tax revenue, more economic activity, and more taxable transactions — creating a revenue tailwind that could partially offset the loss of property tax income at the local level.

Continued relocation from high-tax states. The proposal, if enacted, would make Florida’s homeownership cost advantage over New York, California, New Jersey, and Illinois even more dramatic — potentially accelerating the already-significant relocation trends that have defined Florida’s growth over the past decade.

Political alignment. Governor DeSantis has been publicly supportive of property tax relief, proposing $1,000 property tax rebates as an interim measure while the legislature works through the larger structural proposals. The Republican supermajority in both the House and Senate creates the political conditions for meaningful property tax reform to advance — even if the final form is more moderate than HJR 203’s full elimination proposal.

---

How Creegan Group Is Positioning Our Clients

Creegan Group is not waiting for this legislation to be finalized before helping our clients think through its implications. We are actively incorporating the property tax reform landscape into the guidance we provide to every buyer and seller we work with in Central Florida.

For buyers, we are helping our clients understand how the proposed changes would affect their total cost of ownership over a multi-year horizon — and how Florida’s already-advantageous tax position could become even more compelling if these proposals advance. For buyers arriving from high-tax states, the comparison is stark and important to quantify explicitly.

For sellers, we are helping our clients understand how sustained buyer interest — driven in part by Florida’s improving tax position — supports their pricing strategy and their confidence in the current market. A market that is becoming structurably more affordable for owner-occupants is a market with durable long-term demand.

For investors, we are providing clear-eyed analysis of what these proposals do and do not affect for non-homesteaded properties — and helping our investment-focused clients think through both the opportunities and the uncertainties that the revenue replacement question introduces.

For relocation clients, many of whom are arriving specifically because of Florida’s tax advantages, we are making sure they understand that those advantages may be growing — and how to factor that into both their purchase timeline and their community selection decisions.

Creegan Group’s position in the market — 500+ closings per year, $2 billion+ in career sales, 600+ qualified leads per month — means we are seeing the full picture of buyer and seller behavior in real time. When legislation of this significance is advancing, that market intelligence matters. We intend to use it on behalf of every client we represent.

---

What to Watch — The Next Steps in This Story

As of March 2026, here is the specific sequence of events to monitor:

Legislative session deadline — March 13, 2026. The Florida Legislature’s regular session ends on this date. If the Senate has not passed a property tax joint resolution by then, the question moves to a potential special session or the following year’s session.

Senate Appropriations Committee action. Watch for the Senate to introduce its own proposal — which is expected to be more moderate than HJR 203. A Senate bill that still achieves meaningful relief (even a partial phase-out or a 25% exemption) would represent a significant win for Florida homeowners.

Conference negotiation. If the House and Senate pass different versions, negotiators will work toward a unified joint resolution. The closer the two chambers are on the fundamental structure, the faster this process resolves.

November 2026 ballot. If a joint resolution is approved by both chambers and reaches the ballot, the 60% voter approval threshold will be the final — and far from certain — hurdle. Florida’s history with constitutional amendments requiring supermajority approval is mixed, and public debate about revenue replacement will intensify as the election approaches.

Implementation — January 1, 2027. If the amendment is approved by voters, the first year’s $100,000 exemption increase (under HJR 203) takes effect for the 2027 tax year.

Creegan Group will continue providing updates on this legislation as it develops. For buyers and sellers navigating the Central Florida market in 2026, understanding this landscape is part of making the best possible decision — and we are here to provide that guidance at every step.

---

Ready to Discuss How Florida’s Property Tax Proposals Affect Your Situation?

Whether you are actively buying or selling, evaluating a Central Florida purchase from out of state, or simply trying to understand what these proposals mean for your current home’s value and carrying costs, Creegan Group’s team is ready to walk through the specifics with you.

📞 407.622.1111 🌐 www.CreeganGroup.com 📍 439 Lake Howell Road, Maitland, FL 32751 | Also serving Clermont & West Orange County

---

This post is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal, tax, or financial advice. Legislative proposals are subject to change. Readers should consult a qualified tax professional or attorney regarding how proposed changes may affect their individual situation. All legislative status information reflects publicly available information as of March 2026.