![\"A](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-fl\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/07\/GettyImages-1447230160.jpg\" "\\"A")
<\/p>\n <\/p>\n
A \u2018For Rent’ sign in front of a building on Dec. 6, 2022 in Miami Beach. If non-homestead taxes rise to make up for a property tax cut, tenants could see a rent hike. Half of the county\u2019s 2.8 million residents are renters.<\/p>\n
Joe Raedle<\/p>\n
Getty Images<\/p>\n
This November, Florida voters will be asked to decide on the most radical restructuring of Florida\u2019s tax system in decades. HJR 1-F<\/a> would increase the homestead exemption to $250,000 over two years and lay the groundwork for the potential elimination of homestead property taxes.<\/p>\n Florida legislators have argued<\/a> that this measure is needed to provide financial relief to struggling taxpayers. But if this proposal were truly about affordability, it would target the lower-income homeowners who need relief most. In fact, dramatically reducing property taxes would make Miami-Dade less affordable and less livable for most residents. Essential services would be cut, and the tax burden could shift onto renters and small businesses.<\/p>\n Property taxes fund the local government services we all depend on every day: roads, public schools, parks, libraries, police and fire departments and Jackson Health System. Through the Children\u2019s Trust, property taxes also support preschools, day care centers and free swim lessons across Miami-Dade.<\/p>\n If homestead property tax revenue disappears, it will come at the expense of these services. Miami-Dade County could lose nearly $700 million<\/a> by 2028 if the homestead exemption increases to $250,000, and it would lose over $1 billion<\/a> if homestead taxes are eliminated entirely. Facing budget deficits, county and municipal authorities may have little choice but to cancel after-school programs, cut police patrols and scale back hospital services. Public employees could face layoffs, affecting the local economy. Smaller municipalities would likely have to dissolve altogether.<\/p>\n If local governments want to maintain services at close to normal levels, they\u2019ll be forced to collect that money elsewhere. One option is to charge fees for services that are normally free to the public, like parks, libraries and police protection. Homeowners could see a lower tax bill on the front end but end up paying higher fees on the back end, undercutting any savings. Sales taxes could also be increased \u2014 a regressive move that disproportionately affects lower-income residents, who will pay more as a percentage of their income and wealth. This would thrust the burden of public deficits on those who can least afford to shoulder it.<\/p>\n Another option is to raise taxes on non-homesteaded properties, which include rental and commercial properties. While tenants don\u2019t pay property taxes directly, they do so indirectly through their rent. If non-homestead taxes rise, tenants could see a rent hike. Because half of the county\u2019s 2.8 million residents are renters, and because most renters are cost-burdened<\/a>, this would hurt a massive amount of people who are already struggling to cover the bills.<\/p>\n