Amendment One – Just Say No
FYI: the Florida League of Cities is the prime mover behind Florida is Our Home, the organization sending out all of the fliers and making the robo-calls against Amendment 1. I agree with them on the amendment, but they should tone down the rhetoric.
Here’s the text that will appear on your ballot tomorrow:
CONSTITUTIONAL REVISION
ARTICLE VII, SECTIONS 3, 4, AND 6
ARTICLE XII, SECTION 27
(Legislative)
Property Tax Exemptions; Limitations on Property Tax Assessments
This revision proposes changes to the State Constitution relating to property taxation. With respect to homestead property, this revision: (1) increases the homestead exemption except for school district taxes and (2) allows homestead property owners to transfer up to $500,000 of their Save-Our-Homes benefits to their next homestead. With respect to nonhomestead property, this revision (3) provides a $25,000 exemption for tangible personal property and (4) limits assessment increases for specified nonhomestead real property except for school district taxes.
In more detail, this revision:
(1) Increases the homestead exemption by exempting the assessed value between $50,000 and $75,000. This exemption does not apply to school district taxes.
(2) Provides for the transfer of accumulated Save-Our-Homes benefits. Homestead property owners will be able to transfer their Save-Our-Homes benefit to a new homestead within 1 year and not more than 2 years after relinquishing their previous homestead; except, if this revision is approved by the electors in January of 2008 and if the new homestead is established on January 1, 2008, the previous homestead must have been relinquished in 2007. If the new homestead has a higher just value than the previous one, the accumulated benefit can be transferred; if the new homestead has a lower just value, the amount of benefit transferred will be reduced. The transferred benefit may not exceed $500,000. This provision applies to all taxes.
(3) Authorizes an exemption from property taxes of $25,000 of assessed value of tangible personal property. This provision applies to all taxes.
(4) Limits the assessment increases for specified nonhomestead real property to 10 percent each year. Property will be assessed at just value following an improvement, as defined by general law, and may be assessed at just value following a change of ownership or control if provided by general law. This limitation does not apply to school district taxes. This limitation is repealed effective January 1, 2019, unless renewed by a vote of the electors in the general election held in 2018.
Further, this revision:
a. Repeals obsolete language on the homestead exemption when it was less than $25,000 and did not apply uniformly to property taxes levied by all local governments.
b. Provides for homestead exemptions to be repealed if a future constitutional amendment provides for assessment of homesteads “at less than just value” rather than as currently provided “at a specified percentage” of just value.
c. Schedules the changes to take effect upon approval by the electors and operate retroactively to January 1, 2008, if approved in a special election held on January 29, 2008, or to take effect January 1, 2009, if approved in the general election held in November of 2008. The limitation on annual assessment increases for specified real property shall first apply to the 2009 tax roll if this revision is approved in a special election held on January 29, 008, or shall first apply to the 2010 tax roll if this revision is approved in the general election held in November of 2008.
Basically this benefits older, long-time home owners against new people, including the children of the people it helps. It is shifting the burden of any increases on to the new home owners, and forces school boards to make large cuts, or raise their tax rates to maintain their current level of funding.
4 comments
[…] Why Now – Amendment One – Just Say No. […]
I’m not in Florida, but I hope it loses. No sense any other states getting goofy ideas like this. It’s not in the interest of most homeowners. Seems to give the most relief to those who need it the least. Not as bad as Prop 13 in CA, but still bad news.
As a Property Tax Consultant (occupational disclosure here) I agree with a personal property exemption. The counties are probably spending more money processing the paperwork and issuing bills than they are receiving in tax dollars on the small accounts. And businesses consider it a nuisance. Most states have done away with personal property tax for individuals, and more are moving away from it for businesses. I can say with a lot of certainty that it’s an unfair tax.
Good luck on the voting.
That is one of the changes that needs to be made in an overall re-write of the tax system in the state. There is no single, consistent source of revenue. The property tax leaps around every time an area gets reassessed which is stupid. A tax system needs predictability for those who pay and those who receive, so that budgeting and planning can take place.
Currently they develop a budget based on the revenue projections at the start of a session [two months in the Spring] and then revise it to account for the projection that occurs during the middle of the session. There have been major changes during the two month period, which is absurd.
‘just say no’ didn’t work for nancy reagan, either.