The 2026 Florida Amendment Series: Amendment 2
Bottom Line: There will be three proposed constitutional amendments on Florida’s ballots in November’s general election. All three of those proposed amendments were referred by the Florida legislature. This is the second of the three proposed amendments set to appear on our ballots this year.
The title of the proposed amendment:
Florida Exempt Tangible Personal Property Used for Agriculture or Agritourism from Property Taxes Amendment
The summary of the proposed amendment as it will appear on voter ballots:
EXEMPTION OF TANGIBLE PERSONAL PROPERTY ON AGRICULTURAL LAND FROM TAXATION.—Proposing an amendment to the State Constitution to exempt tangible personal property habitually located or typically present on land classified as agricultural, used in the production of agricultural products or for agritourism activities, and owned by the landowner or leaseholder of the agricultural land from ad valorem taxation. If approved this amendment would first apply for tax years beginning January 1, 2027.
A "yes" vote supports amending the state constitution to:
- exempt tangible personal property, such as farm equipment or tools, from property taxes if the property is typically present on agricultural land, used for farming or agritourism activities, and owned by the landowner or leaseholder of the land.
- A "no" vote opposes amending the state constitution to exempt tangible personal property – leaving current policy in place.
Support for Amendment 2 has been led by Florida Agriculture Commissioner Wilton Simpson who has said: Food security is a national security issue, and this proposed constitutional amendment represents a pivotal step towards securing the permanent future of agriculture in Florida. By eliminating the burdensome multiple taxation of agricultural production, we can pave the way for sustained growth and resilience within our agricultural sector, strengthen and secure our food supply chain, support our hardworking farmers, and safeguard our state and nation's well-being.
Opposition to Amendment 2 has been voiced by Florida Representative Anna Eskamani who has said: This bill would have a $30 million fiscal impact for local governments, with no guardrails to prevent windfalls. It would also mostly benefit a handful of giant agribusinesses with multiple TPP (tangible personal property) accounts. There could be a more targeted approach to support smaller business owners and farmers, but this approach is not targeted enough to earn my support.
My recommendation is a “Yes” vote on Amendment 2. While the arguments against this proposed amendment focus on the loss of $31 million in annual tax revenue to local governments through creating new exceptions, and benefits extend to large agricultural interests; in addition to small farmers, the overarching benefit is worth it.
If Amendment 2 passes, it will reduce the cost of producing agricultural products within the state of Florida. A lower cost of production would mean farmers just getting by would be on more solid footing. It would mean companies already thriving would have the opportunity to expand and/or lower the cost of goods produced. This could also lead to greater investment into the state of Florida given the increased competitiveness with lower taxation for agricultural practices in place. It also would hold the potential to lead to lower retail prices for Florida's agricultural goods - which could more than account for the relatively small loss of revenue to local governments in time.
Proposed amendments require a minimum of 60% voter support to pass.