Lawmakers in Texas and Ohio Consider Abolishing Property Taxes

In a 1995 episode of The SimpsonsTeachers at dilapidated Springfield elementary school make impassioned plea for more school funding at PTA meeting, telling parents: “It’s for your children’s future.” Principal Skinner easily changes his mind by simply rubbing his fingers. “Oh yes, taxes, the finger is taxes,” exclaim the disgruntled parents, who then reject any financing requiring an increase in taxes.

There are several parallels between this episode and the real-life property tax revolts that swept Florida and Ohio. In both states, rising property values ​​have led to rising property taxes and growing anti-tax sentiment among homeowners. Lawmakers and activists are responding by proposing to cap, reduce, or even eliminate property taxes altogether.

Florida lawmakers have unveiled not one, not two, but seven different proposed constitutional amendments that would cut property taxes. The two most ambitious would eliminate non-school property taxes on owner-occupied primary residences. One would take effect immediately, while the other would take effect gradually over 10 years.

In Ohio, petitioners are gathering signatures for a constitutional amendment that would eliminate all taxes on real estate.

Taxation is theftsays the libertarian adage. So one could be forgiven for wholeheartedly supporting these efforts to eliminate property taxes. Unfortunately, Ohio and Florida’s property tax critics have the same contradictory attitude toward local government budgets as Springfield’s fictional parents. They don’t like property taxes, but they’re also not eager to cut the government services they fund.

When THE Columbus Expedition Voters surveyed went to the polls in November 2025, almost all of whom said they liked the idea of ​​eliminating the property tax but did not want to see the quality of local services deteriorate.

None of Florida’s proposed property tax reforms include a plan to compensate for lost revenue. Both measures that would eliminate property taxes also include provisions prohibiting local governments from cutting funding for law enforcement.

The Ohio nonprofit Citizens for Property Tax Reform notably is not calling for compensatory spending cuts. Instead, he suggests an increase in sales taxes and income taxes for local school districts.

Neither state is likely to adopt the new revenue solution that Springfield Elementary has settled on: charging the prison system for placing prisoners in open locker rooms.

Making up for lost revenue from property tax cuts would be a significant challenge. The Tax Foundation estimates that Florida’s combined average local and state sales tax rate would need to increase from 7 percent to 15 percent to offset the loss in property tax revenue. In Ohio, that rate is expected to increase from 4.2 percent to 12.6 percent.

Property taxes fund nearly 30 percent of local government services in Ohio and Florida. States that attempt to replace every dollar of property tax revenue with sales or income tax revenue would also end up reducing overall economic efficiency.

Milton Friedman called the property tax (and particularly the tax on the value of undeveloped land) a “less bad tax” because it discouraged economic activity less than sales and income taxes.

Property taxes also create fewer distortions. Individuals and businesses can locate to locations where they are taxed less heavily to avoid local sales and income taxes. On the other hand, real estate generally must remain on site.

There is also a political reason to prefer property taxes.

In most states, local governments levy property taxes on local residents to pay for local services. Ohio localities rely on property taxes for 65 percent of their revenue. Some 73 percent of Florida’s county tax revenue comes from property taxes.

This creates a measure of democratic accountability. People can discern a fairly clear relationship between the costs and benefits of their local government and vote accordingly.

For the same reason, property taxes are often more of a user fee paid by consumers of government services for the benefits they receive than a true tax.

One way homeowners associations raise money is through their own private property fees.

This is not to say that property tax cuts are a bad idea. Far from it. But the piper – and the school district – need to be paid one way or another.

If property tax cuts are financed by spending cuts and privatization of services, that’s good. But Florida and Ohio’s plans to simply shift the tax burden from homeowners to employees or consumers would be grossly ineffective.