October 12, 2025
Florida is often celebrated as a low-tax beacon, yet for many households, housing costs have become a real concern. The latest James Madison Institute poll should surprise no one: 66% of Floridians report concerns about affording their homes due to rising property taxes and housing costs.
That level of anxiety should give even staunch tax cutters pause. For many families, the burden of property tax is no longer just a line item — it has become a brake on mobility, on generational wealth formation, and, in some markets, on maintaining residency at all.
The polling signals not just mood, but mandate, and a few voter preferences stand out.
First, ambitious reform is broadly appealing. 72% of voters want property tax reform. About 33% want elimination entirely, while another 39% prefer strict limits with some revenues preserved.
Second, electoral leverage is real. 45% say they’re more likely to support a candidate advocating for full elimination; only 18% say less likely.
Last, a constitutional path is clear. If a ballot measure reduced or eliminated property taxes, 65% would vote yes; with just 15% indicating a no vote.
In short, the mood among Florida voters is not for timid tinkering, but for structural change.
Yet the poll also reveals that roughly 60% worry that eliminating property taxes might affect local services (e.g., law enforcement, schools). That’s a natural concern: property taxes fund much of county and municipal services. Any reform must account for that fiscal backbone.
Here’s what Florida should worry about, and lean on. This state stands at a crossroads. Property taxes have grown into a heavy burden that undermines homeownership, squeezes renters, and threatens the state’s long-term competitiveness. From our vantage point, three guiding principles should frame any serious proposals:
Leaders should prioritize growth, not destruction. It’s tempting to dismiss “eliminate property tax” as populist rhetoric. But with strong voter support, lawmakers must engage. A phased elimination (or deep reduction) paired with growth in the tax base — not blunt cuts — can preserve services while moderating burdens.
The state should target relief, not blanket it. Wholesale repeal would create a massive revenue hole. Estimates suggest replacing lost revenue would exceed $40 billion, or about $2,000 per Floridian. That’s unsustainable without spending reductions or ballooning other taxes, which runs counter to conservative principles. Instead, a “circuit breaker” model, where relief is phased in for middle- and lower-income households, offers targeted support without imploding local budgets.
Often missing in tax debates is the supply side. Relieving property taxes without fixing zoning, permitting, or impact fees risks driving demand into fewer, more expensive areas. The JMI poll shows many voters already support regulatory loosening, like allowing for accessory dwelling units. A modern reform package should pair tax changes with updates to land use and permitting — especially near job centers and transit corridors.
Legislators face both a mandate and a minefield. Here’s a path forward:
- Let data drive decisions. Before drafting amendments, the state needs clear modeling: which services lose funding, where shortfalls hit hardest, and how alternative revenues might be integrated.
- Draft a gradual joint resolution for 2026. To change property tax policy, Florida needs a ballot amendment (60% voter approval). A phased schedule — expanding the homestead exemption, scaling down millage caps, then possible elimination over 10–15 years — makes more sense than abrupt repeal.
- Protect vulnerable jurisdictions. A “hold harmless” buffecould ease the transition for less affluent municipalities.
- Pair tax reform with deregulation. Loosen height limits, streamline permitting, reduce parking minimums, and allow infill density. The goal: raise the taxable base per acre so lower rates still yield strong revenue.
Florida should lead, not retreat. The temptation is to settle for the status quo with minor tweaks. But polling shows voters already believe the status quo is failing them.
Free-market thinkers have a unique role: to bridge politics and economics. We can argue credibly for ambitious reform without gimmicks. We can help design transitions that protect local services, reward productivity, and restrain government expansion.
The 2026 legislative session presents a rare opportunity to rethink how we fund local government and, in doing so, free Floridians from a property tax model that no longer connects to modern realities. We must chart a bold, responsible course grounded in the free-market and limited-government principles that have made Florida the freest state in the nation.
