If you’re a Realtor or Chamber of Commerce leader, you’ll probably love Amendment 4. If you’re a snowbird, landlord or business property owner, you’ll probably also like most of what No. 4 would do.
But if you’re a mayor, county administrator, city or county commissioner in Florida, you’re probably losing sleep over Amendment 4.
What if you’re none of the above – just an ordinary citizen who may or may not own a home? Should you like 4? That depends. If you’re a young couple living in an apartment, putting away savings for a down payment on your first home, you’ll cheer. If you’re a long-term homeowner who has seen the value of your home plummet in the bursting of the real estate bubble, you also may smile as you choose the “yes” box. But if you recently bought a home next-door to the one that young couple is about to buy if No. 4 passes, you may feel cheated.
How can one amendment have so many facets to love or hate? Easy. Amendment 4 is at least three amendments in one – a catch-all put on the ballot by the Legislature to stimulate the housing and real estate market, generate economic activity, and restore equity to the state’s patchwork property tax structure – to rectify inequities caused by previous property tax reform amendments. To borrow from Meryl Streep in the 2009 movie by the same name, it’s complicated.
Is it ever! Amendment 4 gives new meaning to the term “bed-sheet ballot.” This one would fit a king-size bed. The official ballot summary runs more than 660 words. Constitutional purists argue that amending the Florida Constitution may not be the best vehicle for economic stimulation. Yet this would be one effect of Amendment 4 if passed – to the delight of the Florida Realtors Association and Florida Chamber of Commerce. Florida TaxWatch estimates that over 10 years, Amendment 4 would create more than 19,000 jobs, increase gross domestic product by $1.1 billion, and boost personal income by $5.3 billion in 10 years.
Here’s what the amendment would do:
Exempt 50 percent of the market value – up to $150,000 – of a home from property taxes for five years for first-time home buyers or those who have not owned property for three or more years.
Give owners of non-homestead properties – snowbirds with second homes in Florida, owners of rental and commercial properties – a break on property taxes as the market recovers from the Great Recession. Currently, those non-homesteaded properties have a 10 percent cap on the annual increase in assessments subject to property tax. Amendment 4 would reduce that tax cap to 5 percent.
Repeal one of the most hated side-effects of previous property tax amendments, the so-called “recapture” rule. Because of plunging property assessments in the housing bust, the value on which next year’s tax bill is calculated may be higher than the current market value of your home. Lots of irate taxpayers have complained to their elected officials about their taxes going up while their property values are going down.
So, tax breaks all around – for snowbirds, landlords, first-time home buyers and underwater home owners.
What’s the downside? City and county officials say it would be devastating to local governmen funding. Estimates of the revenue cost to local government range from $1 billion to $1.6 billion over four years. With cities and counties already struggling to maintain essential services – counties have cut spending by $3 billion since ’07 – the additional cuts imposed by Amendment 4 could put local government in a real bind. Either essential services would have to be slashed – think closed parks, laid-off cops, potholed streets – or else millage rates would have to go up. Which means higher taxes for all – except those lucky enough to be exempted.
Opponents say Amendment 4 is merely tax shifting and represents a fundamental change in current Florida tax policy that favors year-round residents over part-time residents. Rather than simplifying and restoring equity to the tax code, it would make the code more complicated and less equitable, they argue.
Proponents like Tax Watch argue that the property tax cuts would spur enough growth to offset losses in city and county revenues. Whether that optimistic projection will pan out is what concerns local government officials.
To summarize, these are the issues of contention on Amendment 4:
Tax breaks to help first-time home buyers get into the market, thereby giving the real estate industry a shot of adrenalin. Current homeowners looking to upsize or downsize would get no such tax breaks.
Tax relief for non-homesteaded properties, which may attract more second-home buyers. Opponents say it would discourage investment as it makes new businesses less competitive with existing businesses.
Tax relief for underwater homeowners if values keep dropping.
From all three components, less revenue for local government to provide essential services.
That is a lot to consider. And, as we have seen with previous property tax tinkering through the constitutional amendment process, the unintended consequences can be unsettling.
Comment on this Roundtable Using Facebook