Sales tax goes into the State treasury, property taxes go into the local government's pocket. This is a way to give more money to DeSantis to give out the way he pleases, while making the tax system more regressive.
Interesting---maybe someone should look at how the Education systems are funded---in FLORIDA--sales tax and property taxes pay for school needs--but very poorly. other countries value education--fund education first then pay their bills. but Florida funds education last -- but the politicians still get their pay--ever increasing. Schools still try to make due with poor funding and support--//yes--retired teacher//.
It should be noted that as of 10/1/2025 sales tax is no longer collected on rent for commercial properties, except parking lots. So that's a huge chunk that is no longer being paid in by businesses on their retail and office space leases. In the last several years that tax was lowered from 7% to 3%, until it was eliminated completely. If they eliminate or reduce property taxes on homesteaded residences, what are they going to do, raise the sales tax on goods and dining and other items to some crazy amount far above the current 7%?
I live in Gainesville, to which the governor has given extra attention, doing his best to downgrade and impoverish UF (in particular by making its presidency a sinecure for cronies) and upset our rather delicately balanced and admittedly problematic civic finances. He sent a DOGE group specifically to Gainesville to investigate our high property taxes.
I also recall that a law was passed fairly recently that made it impractical for small Florida towns relying on volunteer civic officers to self-govern.
I read with interest all the comments here. It seems to me that the governor does not like two things: peaceful communities and education.
I think the real motive behind this is to take local decision-making away from cities and counties and put it in the hands of the state. Who knows better than local entities what their constituents need? They do, not the state.
The state has said that education and public safety services will not be affected, but who knows if that is true? What happens to the Save Our Tax Act if property taxes are eliminated? If they later decide to bring them back, will citizens have to get that passed again, or will it just go back into effect? I don't trust DeSantis and the state legislators to do what is right for Floridians.
People who can afford to buy a home should pay property taxes. Primary residence homeowners get a homestead exemption after the first year and the benefit of the Save Our Tax Act. That should be enough for them.
Yes, I am far more interested in resolving the insurance crisis here. My taxes are limited under Save Our Homes but my insurance has gone from $1,900 / year in 2019 to $11,000 / year in 2025 for a townhouse, inland, not coastal, in Broward. I have accordion shutters and the house is poured, formed concrete with a concrete roof deck. We did not get a discount for our new roofs 2 years ago and my neighbors who were persuaded to swap out shutters for impact glass got such a small discount (less than $300) that they mostly wish they had saved the $40-60k and kept their shutters. I'm about to retire, mortgage is paid off, but affording windstorm insurance is a real issue for everybody. The handful of homes that are rentals are having to charge crazy amounts for a 1,600 - 1,800 sf home because of insurance and the higher taxes for non-homesteads. Middle class neighborhood, all working public service like police or fire, teachers, nurses, some utility workers, retired people, a few young families - nobody is selling and the rentals are between $3,200 - $4,800 / month.
I think it is at least a year since this proposition started circulating. In that entire time, I have yet to see any mathematical analysis of how revenues change, in total, or the allocation between state and local. How does one become for or against something that isn’t developed beyond a sound bite?
I’d be glad to pay more taxes based on my income, IF I knew others were paying a similar share. I suspect that if the very wealthy paid a percentage equal to the percentage I pay, that most people’s taxes would decrease.
But, you know, care for other human beings is not stronger than greed.
In general, higher-income individuals pay a lower proportion of their income in taxes for a variety of reasons, most notably more effective tax planning. This is not unique to Florida and is not specific to property taxation. Moreover, increasing income tax rates has not historically produced better fiscal outcomes or sustained increases in government revenue; historical data consistently supports this conclusion.
More importantly, the proposal’s core objective has been missed. Primary homeownership should be rewarded, not penalized. The opposing view implies that non-homeowners are being unfairly disadvantaged because they have not purchased a home. In reality, this proposal is intended to incentivize homeownership and make it more financially attainable and competitive. Numerous studies show that individuals who purchase a home and remain in it for fewer than seven years are often financially better off renting rather than buying. Property taxes are a meaningful factor in that calculation and act as a deterrent to home ownership for periods of less then 7 years.
Equally critical is the impact on elderly homeowners. Many Floridians have lived in their homes for decades, raised families, and now rely primarily on fixed retirement income and Social Security. Over a 30-year period, property tax increases often outpace retirement income growth, resulting in tax burdens that effectively force seniors to sell their homes. This is a documented and unfortunate reality in many states, including Florida.
While no policy change is without tradeoffs, I believe the positive outcomes outweigh the potential negatives. Eliminating property taxes on primary residences would encourage longer-term homeownership, create a meaningful incentive to purchase a home, and provide homeowners with increased disposable income. These benefits deserve serious consideration.
The opinion piece opposing this proposal fails to address these potential positive outcomes and presents an incomplete analysis of the policy’s broader economic and social implications.
Sales tax goes into the State treasury, property taxes go into the local government's pocket. This is a way to give more money to DeSantis to give out the way he pleases, while making the tax system more regressive.
Interesting---maybe someone should look at how the Education systems are funded---in FLORIDA--sales tax and property taxes pay for school needs--but very poorly. other countries value education--fund education first then pay their bills. but Florida funds education last -- but the politicians still get their pay--ever increasing. Schools still try to make due with poor funding and support--//yes--retired teacher//.
It should be noted that as of 10/1/2025 sales tax is no longer collected on rent for commercial properties, except parking lots. So that's a huge chunk that is no longer being paid in by businesses on their retail and office space leases. In the last several years that tax was lowered from 7% to 3%, until it was eliminated completely. If they eliminate or reduce property taxes on homesteaded residences, what are they going to do, raise the sales tax on goods and dining and other items to some crazy amount far above the current 7%?
I live in Gainesville, to which the governor has given extra attention, doing his best to downgrade and impoverish UF (in particular by making its presidency a sinecure for cronies) and upset our rather delicately balanced and admittedly problematic civic finances. He sent a DOGE group specifically to Gainesville to investigate our high property taxes.
I also recall that a law was passed fairly recently that made it impractical for small Florida towns relying on volunteer civic officers to self-govern.
I read with interest all the comments here. It seems to me that the governor does not like two things: peaceful communities and education.
I think the real motive behind this is to take local decision-making away from cities and counties and put it in the hands of the state. Who knows better than local entities what their constituents need? They do, not the state.
The state has said that education and public safety services will not be affected, but who knows if that is true? What happens to the Save Our Tax Act if property taxes are eliminated? If they later decide to bring them back, will citizens have to get that passed again, or will it just go back into effect? I don't trust DeSantis and the state legislators to do what is right for Floridians.
People who can afford to buy a home should pay property taxes. Primary residence homeowners get a homestead exemption after the first year and the benefit of the Save Our Tax Act. That should be enough for them.
Yes, I am far more interested in resolving the insurance crisis here. My taxes are limited under Save Our Homes but my insurance has gone from $1,900 / year in 2019 to $11,000 / year in 2025 for a townhouse, inland, not coastal, in Broward. I have accordion shutters and the house is poured, formed concrete with a concrete roof deck. We did not get a discount for our new roofs 2 years ago and my neighbors who were persuaded to swap out shutters for impact glass got such a small discount (less than $300) that they mostly wish they had saved the $40-60k and kept their shutters. I'm about to retire, mortgage is paid off, but affording windstorm insurance is a real issue for everybody. The handful of homes that are rentals are having to charge crazy amounts for a 1,600 - 1,800 sf home because of insurance and the higher taxes for non-homesteads. Middle class neighborhood, all working public service like police or fire, teachers, nurses, some utility workers, retired people, a few young families - nobody is selling and the rentals are between $3,200 - $4,800 / month.
I think it is at least a year since this proposition started circulating. In that entire time, I have yet to see any mathematical analysis of how revenues change, in total, or the allocation between state and local. How does one become for or against something that isn’t developed beyond a sound bite?
The oh so terribly burdened 1% want it, so no analysis is needed.
I’d be glad to pay more taxes based on my income, IF I knew others were paying a similar share. I suspect that if the very wealthy paid a percentage equal to the percentage I pay, that most people’s taxes would decrease.
But, you know, care for other human beings is not stronger than greed.
In general, higher-income individuals pay a lower proportion of their income in taxes for a variety of reasons, most notably more effective tax planning. This is not unique to Florida and is not specific to property taxation. Moreover, increasing income tax rates has not historically produced better fiscal outcomes or sustained increases in government revenue; historical data consistently supports this conclusion.
More importantly, the proposal’s core objective has been missed. Primary homeownership should be rewarded, not penalized. The opposing view implies that non-homeowners are being unfairly disadvantaged because they have not purchased a home. In reality, this proposal is intended to incentivize homeownership and make it more financially attainable and competitive. Numerous studies show that individuals who purchase a home and remain in it for fewer than seven years are often financially better off renting rather than buying. Property taxes are a meaningful factor in that calculation and act as a deterrent to home ownership for periods of less then 7 years.
Equally critical is the impact on elderly homeowners. Many Floridians have lived in their homes for decades, raised families, and now rely primarily on fixed retirement income and Social Security. Over a 30-year period, property tax increases often outpace retirement income growth, resulting in tax burdens that effectively force seniors to sell their homes. This is a documented and unfortunate reality in many states, including Florida.
While no policy change is without tradeoffs, I believe the positive outcomes outweigh the potential negatives. Eliminating property taxes on primary residences would encourage longer-term homeownership, create a meaningful incentive to purchase a home, and provide homeowners with increased disposable income. These benefits deserve serious consideration.
The opinion piece opposing this proposal fails to address these potential positive outcomes and presents an incomplete analysis of the policy’s broader economic and social implications.
Sincerely,
John Leo
Does Florida foreshadow the 'neoliberal paradise' our elites want America to become?