On a night in which voters gave Republicans a drubbing, they mostly rejected sweeping tax changes while locking in recent reforms and sending a message that the affordability agenda runs, at least in part, through the tax code. In red and blue states alike, voters showed wariness toward novel changes to the tax code, with two notable exceptions.
The ratification of Florida Amendment 3—a $250,000 homestead exemption for non-school property taxes—clearly demonstrates Floridians’ discontent with high property taxes, but also leaves local governments in the lurch and incentivizes them to raise rates on property still in the tax base or to generate more revenue from less economically efficient taxes. High effective rates on newer homeowners, the result of a prior effort at property tax relief (the Save Our Homes Amendment), may have led voters to adopt yet another temporary patch that will only create more problems down the road.
And in Colorado, voters appear to have narrowly approved a measure that would implement a graduated-rate income tax with a top rate of 8.4 percent, replacing the state’s current 4.4 percent single-rate income tax. (As of this writing, the race has not yet been called, and the outcome could still change.) The state’s constitution currently requires a flat tax; Amendment 87, which leads by about one percentage point with 75 percent of votes in, would amend the state constitution to permit a graduated-rate income tax and also implement an initiated statute to establish new rates.
Those are important exceptions, but they are still exceptions.
Outside Florida, voters were more wary of eviscerating the property tax. In North Carolina, voters approved a much more responsible approach to property tax relief by requiring the legislature to implement levy (revenue) limits, capping the annual growth of property tax collections from all existing property in aggregate. Oklahoma voters rejected a measure that would have tightened existing assessment limits, which distort property markets and create highly non-neutral tax burdens. And Wyoming voters rejected an irresponsibly large exemption for house values.
Voters in Iowa and North Carolina adopted new tax limits that restrict the ability of elected officials to raise taxes. Iowans approved a two-thirds supermajority requirement for the legislature to raise income taxes, and North Carolina voters capped the income tax rate at 3.5 percent, just above the 3.49 percent rate planned for 2027. However, voters in both Utah and California rejected measures that would make it more difficult for the voters themselves to approve tax increases through future ballot questions.
And in the night’s star attraction, California voters appear to have rejected the wealth tax, a result with far-reaching economic and political ramifications. California’s failure to pass a first-in-the-nation wealth tax may dampen enthusiasm for similar measures in Oregon, Minnesota, Hawaii, and Washington. (Nevertheless, supporters of the California measure have already signaled interest in trying again in 2028.) And while some detractors, like Gov. Gavin Newsom, opposed a California wealth tax while supporting a federal wealth tax, members of Congress will likely take note of this result from one of the nation’s most progressive states as well.
The 2026 midterms demonstrated that voters are deeply unsatisfied with the status quo, while also revealing that most voters are wary of far-reaching tax changes from either side of the political spectrum. The results on tax-related ballot measures lack the strong narrative of congressional results, but perhaps that is itself the takeaway: voters’ views on specific tax policies don’t seem to have changed much in recent years, even against a backdrop of significant partisan churn.
This analysis first ran on the Tax Foundation blog.
Obligatory Marketing Note
My consultancy provides tax policy research, writing, and other services, both project-specific and on retainer (or in visiting fellow-style roles). If you are in the market for tax policy research or know someone who is, please let me know.
Please Share this Substack
If you find this Substack valuable, please do me a favor and share it with colleagues and others who may be interested. And if you haven’t yet subscribed (it’s free), please consider doing so!