2 min read
Add as a preferred source on Google

Economists Say California Property-Tax Changes Could Outraise Prop. 40 Over Time

Their hypothetical compares California’s 0.8% property-tax rate with 2% in Texas and argues residential revenue would more than double, without specifying a dollar amount.

A California home and ballot box cast contrasting shadows / TokenPost.ai
A California home and ballot box cast contrasting shadows / TokenPost.ai

Economists Owen Zidar and Eric Zwick argue that changing California’s property-tax system could generate more revenue over time than Proposition 40’s proposed one-time tax on certain taxpayers with wealth above $1 billion. Voters will decide on the measure Nov. 3.

Their hypothetical compares a 0.8% property-tax rate in California with a 2% rate in Texas. They argue that applying the higher rate would more than double California’s residential property-tax revenue. They do not specify a dollar amount or time frame for that increase. A separate 2024 calculation of effective rates on owner-occupied homes put California at 0.70% and Texas at 1.40%, using a different rate measure.

California recorded about $100 billion in statewide property-tax revenue in fiscal 2024-25, which ended June 30, 2025. Of that total, $53.5 billion went to schools and $46.5 billion went to counties, cities and special districts. The statewide figures include property beyond residential homes, so they do not provide a residential-only baseline for the economists’ comparison.

California’s 1978 Proposition 13 generally limits property-tax rates to 1% of assessed value and caps annual assessment increases at the lower of inflation or 2%. Assessments generally reset when a property is sold. The higher rate in Zidar and Zwick’s scenario is hypothetical and is not on the Nov. 3 ballot.

Proposition 40 would impose a one-time 5% tax on certain taxpayers with wealth above $1 billion. The measure’s official estimate projects tens of billions of dollars over several years. Economists who helped draft it estimate about $100 billion from 2027 through 2031, assuming 10% avoidance.

After administrative costs, 90% of Proposition 40 revenue would go to health care, with 10% directed to education and food assistance. Property taxes provide recurring revenue for schools and local governments across property types; Proposition 40 would raise money once for state programs.

Zidar and Zwick wrote, “It is simply not possible to fund the state’s needs by leaning on a few hundred people, as politically appealing as that may be.”

California voters will decide on Proposition 40 Tuesday, Nov. 3.

Riza Dagoc

Riza Dagoc reports on regulation, investing and the digital-asset business for TokenPost. Send corrections or tips to info@tokenpost.com.

Loading…