Florida Amendment 3: Raise the homestead exemption and cap non-homestead assessment increases at 5%
What it does. Amendment 3 would raise the homestead exemption for non-school property taxes to $150,000 in 2027 and $250,000 in 2028, adjusted for inflation after that. People who were not Florida residents on December 31, 2026 would get the existing exemption when they first qualify, with the larger exemption starting in the fifth year. It would lower the annual cap on assessment increases for non-homestead property, such as rentals and commercial property, from 10% to 5%. It would require the Legislature to set a uniform procedure for counties and municipalities to raise the exemption up to full assessed value, and would limit what counties and municipalities may spend property taxes on to listed purposes. It takes effect January 1, 2027. [1] [2]
Official ballot question. Increased homestead exemption; lower cap on increases in non-homestead property assessments. [1] [2]
If you vote yes
A yes vote would approve the amendment: the non-school homestead exemption would rise to $150,000 in 2027 and $250,000 in 2028, the annual cap on non-homestead assessment increases would drop from 10% to 5%, and counties and municipalities would be limited to listed purposes when spending property taxes. [1] [2]
If you vote no
A no vote would leave the current homestead exemption, the 10% cap on non-homestead assessment increases, and current rules on local property tax spending in place. [1] [2]
What it would cost
The Florida Revenue Estimating Conference’s middle estimate (reviewed June 12 and July 10, 2026) is a reduction in local non-school property tax revenue of $4,929.5 million in 2027-28 and $8,714.5 million in 2028-29, rising to a recurring reduction of $11,834.7 million per year. It estimates no impact on school taxes. It says the effect of requiring the Legislature to set procedures for fully exempting homesteads from county and municipal levies is unknown, because it depends on future legislative action. The campaigns make their own claims, which are not official estimates. The Vote No campaign says the amendment “could eventually bleed $34 billion from local government budgets.” The Vote Yes campaign says it will “help a majority of Florida homeowners achieve SIGNIFICANT savings on their future property tax bills.” [2] [3] [4]
Both sides
Strongest case for
Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) says “Property tax revenue collected by local governments has nearly doubled in the past seven years and is expected to reach an astounding $83 billion by 2032. Florida homeowners need relief. Now is the time to stand up for taxpayers, enact a historic reform, and save the home of every Floridian.” [5]
State Sen. Bryan Avila (R) says the amendment “takes a historic step, providing meaningful relief for Florida families, while protecting businesses from extreme tax increases and safeguarding local funding for education, law enforcement, infrastructure, and other essential government functions.” [5]
The Republican Party of Florida says “Homeowners shouldn’t be taxed out of the homes they’ve worked for. Amendment 3 delivers real tax relief, slows runaway assessments, and makes local governments spend your money on core priorities.” Sen. Rick Scott (R) says “every county has waste to cut.” [5]
Strongest case against
Sadaf Knight of the Florida Policy Institute says the measure “does not represent cost savings, but rather a cost shift — one that will force local lawmakers to cut local services that families rely upon or increase other taxes and fees to make up for the missing revenue.” [5]
Jacksonville Mayor Donna Deegan (D) says the reduction “will inevitably result in roads deteriorating, libraries, pools, and parks closing, public safety response times going up, housing affordability worsening, and more homeless on our streets.” [5]
Former state Sen. Jeff Brandes, president of the Florida Policy Project, says “Nobody in all of Florida understands how this is going to play out. We have no models, no math, nothing. It’s budget chaos.” Former county commissioner Bryan Desolge says the bills for “public safety, roads and bridges, stormwater protection and even hurricane response don’t go away.” [5]
What neither side is saying
Context that bears on what this measure does or who it affects but that the arguments above do not address. These are sourced facts, not arguments for or against the measure.
- A court found the original ballot language defective. Ballotpedia reports that on August 3, 2026, a Leon County circuit judge ruled that the Legislature’s title and summary were “clearly and conclusively defective,” kept that language off the ballot, and ordered the Attorney General to submit corrected language within 10 days. The title and summary on this page come from the state’s booklet updated September 3, 2026. [5]
- How far the exemption could go, and who gets the smaller one. The Revenue Estimating Conference says the amendment would require the Legislature to prescribe a uniform procedure for counties and municipalities to raise the exemption so that all homesteads are fully exempt from county and municipal levies, and that “No timeline or limit is provided.” People who did not maintain a permanent residence in Florida as of December 31, 2026 would receive a $50,000 exemption for four years and the larger exemption in the fifth year. [2]
Editorial context, not the opinion of We Elect. Each point is a fact we found in a source we opened and read; where sources disagree or data are missing, we say so. How we choose these.
Follow the money
Contributions reported by committees registered to support or oppose Amendment 3. Major donors are those who gave $100,000 or more; where fewer than three did, up to five of the largest listed donors giving $5,000 or more are shown.
Supporting (Yes)
Total raised $21,516,510
Committee
- Vote Yes on 3 $21,516,510
Major donors
| Florida Realtors | $19,500,000 |
| National Association of Realtors | $2,016,500 |
Donors shown gave 100% of this side’s total.
Opposing (No)
Total raised $1,765,177
Committees
- Floridians for Shared Prosperity, Inc. $916,146
- Vote No on 3 Florida $512,931
- No On 3. Protect Our Homes $336,000
- Florida Public Servants No on 3 $100
Major donors
| Hopewell Fund | $434,150 |
| Our Democracy PC | $311,000 |
| Stop Unfair Tax Shifts Today | $280,000 |
| Scott Barancik | $200,000 |
| CBPP Action | $100,000 |
| Florida Association of Special Districts | $100,000 |
Donors shown gave 81% of this side’s total.
Reported contributions through Oct. 29, 2026, as compiled by Ballotpedia from state filings; the source lists each side’s top donors, not every donor. Figures are reported contributions and may be updated as new reports are filed. Amounts are rounded to the nearest dollar. Official filings: Florida Division of Elections, committee search.
Sources
- Proposed Constitutional Amendment Booklet, November 3, 2026 (ballot title, summary and full text of Amendment 3) — Florida Department of State, Division of Elections (Official state ballot booklet, 2026-09-03)
- Revenue impact: Homestead Exemption Increases; Assessment Increase Limitation 10% to 5% (CS/HJR 1F) — Florida Revenue Estimating Conference (Office of Economic and Demographic Research) (Official fiscal estimate, 2026-07-10)
- Vote No on 3: Stop Unfair Tax Shifts (campaign website) — Vote No on 3 (opponents’ campaign) (Campaign website (opponents), accessed 2026-10-28)
- Vote YES on Amendment 3 (campaign website) — Vote Yes on 3 (supporters’ campaign) (Campaign website (supporters), accessed 2026-10-28)
- Florida Amendment 3, Homestead Tax Exemptions, Property Assessments, and Spending Restrictions Amendment (2026) — Ballotpedia (Reference (quotes supporters and opponents), accessed 2026-10-28)
Editorial summary of arguments made by others, not the opinion of We Elect. Last reviewed 2026-10-28. How we write both sides.
We Elect is a Brunner Creative site. Editorial summary of arguments made by others, not the opinion of We Elect. Each side is written to be the strongest case its supporters would recognize, and every claim is tied to a source we opened and read.