Amendment 3 asks whether to raise the homestead exemption on non-school property taxes from roughly $50,000 today to $150,000 in 2027, and then to $250,000 in 2028. After that, the exemption would rise each year with inflation. It also proposes cutting the annual cap on assessment increases for non-homestead property from 10 percent to 5 percent.
I have had more conversations about this in the past month than about interest rates, which tells you something. So here is what I understand about it, what I do not yet know, and the one date I think every client should have written down.
What the measure actually does
The exemption increase applies only to the non-school portion of your tax bill. School taxes stay where they are, calculated on a $25,000 exemption. That distinction gets lost in a lot of the conversation, and it matters, because the school portion is one of the largest single pieces of a Miami-Dade bill.
If it passes, the change takes effect January 1, 2027. You would first see it on your TRIM notice in August 2027 and on the tax bill that arrives that November. Nothing changes on this year's bill.
Constitutional amendments in Florida need 60 percent voter approval, not a simple majority. That is a meaningful bar, and it is worth remembering that the ballot language itself was challenged in court earlier this year and had to be rewritten before it could go to voters.
Save Our Homes, portability, and the veteran, senior, and widow exemptions are not affected.
The part that matters most for second-home owners
Much of the coverage has focused on the headline exemption number. For a lot of the people I work with, the more consequential provision is the other one.
The homestead exemption only applies to a primary residence. If you own a Miami Beach condo you use seasonally, or a Bal Harbour unit you rent out, that exemption does nothing for you. What would apply is the change to the assessment cap, dropping the maximum annual increase in assessed value from 10 percent to 5 percent on non-homestead property.
In a market where values have moved quickly, that cap is the thing that determines your taxable value over a decade of ownership. Cutting it in half changes the arithmetic of holding a property here long term. It is a quieter provision than the exemption, and for a large share of South Florida ownership it is the one with real teeth.
The December 31 deadline
This is the detail I want everyone to know, because it is the only piece that requires action before the vote.
Under the amendment, you would need to be a permanent Florida resident as of December 31, 2026, to receive the expanded exemption when it takes effect. Anyone who establishes residency after that date would start with the current exemption and become eligible for the full amount in their fifth year. There is a provision allowing local governments to shorten that wait after 2030, but that is a future decision, not a guarantee.
If you have been considering making Florida your primary residence, and the timing has been flexible, this turns a soft question into a dated one. I would not make a relocation decision on a ballot measure that has not passed yet. I would, however, make sure you know the deadline exists and have talked it through with your accountant well before the holidays.
The honest other side
I am not going to tell you how to vote, and I would be suspicious of anyone in my position who did.
What I will say is that the revenue side is real and worth understanding. State economists project the measure would reduce local government property tax revenue by roughly $12 billion a year once fully implemented. Miami-Dade has estimated its own losses at about $386 million in 2027, growing to roughly $697 million in 2028. That money currently funds police and fire rescue, parks, libraries, and transit.
Supporters argue that homeowners have absorbed years of rising assessments and insurance costs and are due meaningful relief, and that local governments have room to prioritize. Opponents argue the shortfall gets made up somewhere, whether through fees, service reductions, or pressure on commercial and rental property that eventually reaches tenants. Both of those arguments are being made seriously by people who have looked at the numbers.
For those of us who care about property values, there is a version of this where lower carrying costs support demand, and a version where thinner municipal services affect the quality of the neighborhoods that make people want to be here in the first place. I do not think anyone honestly knows which effect dominates.
Joelle & Team
This post is general information about a proposed constitutional amendment, not tax or legal advice. Amendment 3 is not current law and takes effect only with 60 percent voter approval in November. Figures cited come from state and county estimates and may be revised. Please consult a qualified tax professional about your own property.
