All 3 Florida amendments on the 2026 ballot, explained

TALLAHASSEE, Fla. — This November, Floridians can shape the state’s financial future.

Three proposals, if adopted, would amend the state’s constitution to change how Florida collects taxes and budgets its money.

To pass, an amendment needs at least 60% voter support.

Here’s what to know about each amendment, all of which were put on the ballot by the Florida Legislature.

Amendment 1: Budget Stabilization Fund

Key supporters: House Speaker Daniel Perez, Florida GOP

Key opponents: Gov. Ron DeSantis

This proposal was born out of House Speaker Daniel Perez’s desire for the state to spend less.

The amendment would increase the amount of money that goes toward the state’s rainy day fund each year.

If passed, the Legislature would annually move a chunk of money into that fund — either $750 million or 25% of the state’s general revenue, which is the state’s main pool of money it collects from taxes and other income.

The amendment would allow the Legislature to pull money from the fund during times of “critical state need” with a two-thirds vote. The Legislature could suspend the constitution’s requirement to transfer the money in financially difficult years.

Rep. Lawrence McClure, R-Dover, sponsored the proposal. He said the plan was to prepare Florida for a “break the glass” situation.

“What we have seen very clearly is when we leave money in unallocated (general revenue), government has a tendency to spend it,” McClure said last year. (McClure was the House’s budget chairperson the past two legislative sessions.)

The last time the state withdrew money from its rainy day fund was in 2008, amid the Great Recession.

Nearly all members of Florida’s Legislature voted to put the amendment on the ballot, though some Democrats expressed concern about tying the state’s hands by restricting the chunk of money.

The Republican Party of Florida has endorsed the amendment — to the frustration of Gov. Ron DeSantis, who has said the Legislature’s plan is “foolish.”

“We already have a maxed out rainy day fund and have run the largest surpluses in state history,” DeSantis said on social media this month.

Any additional state money should be used to lower taxes, he said. In 2025, he vetoed $750 million that lawmakers preemptively set aside to move into the rainy day fund if voters passed the amendment.

Amendment 2: Exemption of tangible personal property on agricultural land from taxation

Key supporters: Agriculture Commissioner Wilton Simpson, Florida Farm Bureau Federation

Key opponents: Orlando Democratic state Rep. Anna Eskamani

Floridians on agricultural land pay annual taxes on their farm equipment and other “tangible personal property” — basically everything of value that isn’t the land or the buildings on it. Florida law already allows certain personal goods, like cars, to be exempted from that tax.

This proposed amendment would end those personal property taxes for Florida farmers. If approved by voters, the plan would no longer tax items if they are on agricultural land, used in agricultural production and owned by the landowner, starting in 2027.

Rep. Danny Alvarez, R-Hillsborough County, and Sen. Keith Truenow, R-Tavares, sponsored the bill to put the plan on the ballot. It has been supported by Agriculture Commissioner Wilton Simpson and endorsed by the Florida GOP.

Alvarez, in a presentation to the Legislature in 2025, said agriculture businesses are getting “choked out” by high prices. The industry, he said, is important for national infrastructure.

If voters support it, the plan would cost Florida’s local governments about $31 million in the first year, rising to $32 million and then $34 million in the two years after.

“It literally is a drop in the bucket to us, but it means everything to agriculture,” Alvarez said.

State Rep. Anna Eskamani, D-Orlando, was the sole vote in the Legislature against putting this amendment on the ballot during the full-chamber vote. In a debate last year, she said she was concerned about the financial impact of lost tax revenue on rural, less-wealthy counties.

Amendment 3: Increased homestead exemption; lower cap on increases in non-homesteaded property assessments

Key supporters: Florida GOP, Florida Realtors

Key opponents: Florida sheriffs, Florida firefighters

Of all the amendments on the ballot, Amendment 3 has the biggest potential impact.

This proposal would raise the homestead tax exemption to $150,000 in 2027 and then $250,000 in 2028. That would mean Florida property owners could see big cuts in their property taxes. It also would be a significant loss for local governments’ budgets.

The homestead exemption rewards Floridians who live in the property they own by cutting the amount of taxes they owe. People who own multiple properties can only get the exemption on their main residence.

The amendment would also reduce how much the assessed value of non-homestead properties, which can include second homes or businesses, can increase each year, from 10% to 5%.

Cities and counties across the state could lose nearly $12 billion by 2031 if the plan is adopted, according to projections from Florida economists. Individual homeowners could save thousands, depending on the assessed value of their home.

In Hillsborough County, for example, economists predicted that the area would lose around $261 million in property tax revenue in 2028 and around $468 million the following year.

Miami-Dade County could lose $357 million in the first year and $643 million in the second.

The proposal was pushed initially by DeSantis, who said local governments have mismanaged their money and that he believes people should not have to repeatedly pay the government for their property.

The proposal the Legislature passed includes a key difference from DeSantis’ original plan: It does not include an exemption for property taxes that go to schools.

When the Legislature amended his plan, DeSantis said he would not lead the campaign in favor of the amendment but he said he would still vote for it.

Groups like the Florida League of Cities have raised concerns about the tax cut leading to more costs being put on local residents and renters, saying that when revenue drops, cities still need to maintain public safety, stormwater systems and road repairs.

Florida law enforcement groups, like the Florida Sheriffs Association, have also warned that the amendment could stretch them thin and lead to longer response times.

Other organizations have also raised concerns about the budget loss, including the Florida Hospital Association and various Florida children’s services councils.

DeSantis and others in the Legislature who support the amendment say that local governments’ budgets are overbloated. The group Florida Realtors has also backed the amendment, saying it would make homeownership more attainable.

Under the amendment, only people who are Florida residents by Dec. 31, 2026, could receive the tax break for their primary residence. Others who move to Florida after that date would be able to claim the higher tax break after five years.

A nearly identical provision requiring a five-year waiting period for new residents to get a tax break was struck down by the state’s Supreme Court in the 1980s.

A rewritten version of the amendment summary that will appear on November ballots now says that the residency provision would happen “to the extent permitted by the U.S. Constitution.”

_____