Estimated Time to Read: 13 minutes
When Texas Governor Greg Abbott (R) came onto the stage in Houston to launch his 2026 re-election campaign, his message was unmistakable: property tax reform will define his fourth-term agenda. Surrounded by supporters, he promised to “end out-of-control property taxes,” return power to voters, and make homeownership affordable again.
For many Texans, the rhetoric was familiar. Every election cycle seems to bring a new pledge to fix the state’s broken property tax system, yet the tax burden continues to get worse, and structural reform remains elusive. Still, Abbott’s latest proposals at least move the conversation in the right direction. His six-pillar plan embraces many reforms long advocated by fiscal conservatives and supported by Texas Policy Research. If enacted faithfully, they could lay the foundation for lasting relief.
The question is not whether the ideas are sound, but whether political will and fiscal discipline will follow.
The First Pillar: Two-Thirds Voter Approval for Local Tax Increases
Abbott’s call for a two-thirds supermajority requirement for any local tax increase is rooted in the belief that taxpayers deserve greater protection against runaway local spending. At present, cities and counties may increase property tax revenue by 3.5 percent annually without voter consent, and school districts by 2.5 percent. Raising the threshold for approval would make it significantly harder for local governments to increase tax burdens year after year.
Such a measure would strengthen voter oversight and force local officials to justify every increase. It would also counter the long-standing pattern of local governments exploiting technical loopholes, such as issuing new debt or claiming “disaster exceptions,” to avoid direct accountability.
The challenge, however, lies in its feasibility. Similar proposals have repeatedly died in the Legislature, stymied by local-government lobbying and bipartisan reluctance to surrender fiscal flexibility. Implementing this threshold will require a governor willing to exert pressure beyond campaign season, a test Abbott has yet to pass in prior efforts related to property tax relief and reform.
The Second Pillar: Local Spending Limits
The most promising of Abbott’s proposals is a statutory limit on local government spending growth tied to the lesser of population plus inflation or 3.5 percent. This idea strikes directly at the heart of Texas’s property tax problem.
Texas does not levy a state property tax. Instead, property taxes are imposed by local governments, cities, counties, school districts, and special districts, whose budgets have grown far faster than population or inflation for over a decade. Each year, these entities approve higher spending levels, often financed by rising appraisals, which guarantee tax increases even when nominal rates decline.
Capping local spending growth would inject long-needed discipline into local budgeting. It would ensure that basic services remain funded while forcing governments to live within their means, rather than relying on endless appraisal growth to fund expansions. Importantly, the state already abides by several statutory and constitutional spending limits, including caps tied to population growth and inflation. If the state government must operate within fiscal guardrails, there is no reason local governments should not be held to the same standard. Currently, local governments in Texas face no comparable restraint, allowing unchecked growth in spending that fuels the property tax burden year after year.
This concept closely aligns with TPR’s long-standing call for structural reform. Without spending restraint at the local level, every state-funded “tax relief” effort is effectively temporary. The state compresses school tax rates with surplus dollars, only for cities and counties to consume those savings through new spending. A spending cap would at least break that cycle.
Still, the reform faces fierce opposition from local officials who argue it would undermine “local control.” In truth, real local control belongs to taxpayers, not to bureaucracies. Whether Abbott will champion this distinction when opposition intensifies remains uncertain.
The Third Pillar: Rollback Elections by Citizen Petition
Abbott’s plan to allow citizens to petition for elections that roll back local tax rates reflects a growing frustration among Texans who feel powerless in the face of local fiscal expansion.
Under his proposal, if a significant share of local voters, perhaps 15 percent of registered voters, sign a petition, the community could trigger an election to reduce property tax rates to prior levels. This would make it possible for residents to correct course when local officials overreach.
The strength of this approach lies in direct accountability. It places ultimate authority in the hands of taxpayers and would create a meaningful deterrent to local governments contemplating aggressive budget growth.
The downside is logistical. Collecting signatures from such a large share of registered voters would be difficult in practice, particularly in large urban counties. Moreover, special interests and government-aligned organizations would likely spend heavily to defeat rollback efforts at the ballot box.
Even so, this mechanism represents a concrete step toward empowering citizens rather than bureaucracies, and it reinforces the central principle that Texans, not local governments, should decide how much government they can afford.
The Fourth Pillar: Five-Year Appraisal Cycle
Abbott’s call to move from one- to three-year appraisal cycles to a fixed five-year cycle addresses one of the most common frustrations homeowners face: unpredictable, annual jumps in property valuations. By spacing out appraisals, property owners could plan more effectively for future tax bills and be insulated from short-term market fluctuations.
However, this reform carries potential trade-offs. Extending the appraisal cycle would slow annual increases, but it would also lead to sharper corrections when the next appraisal occurs, since valuations would reset to reflect years of accumulated market growth. The result could be periods of relative calm followed by significant spikes, particularly in fast-growing markets like Austin or Dallas-Fort Worth.
A five-year cycle would undoubtedly offer predictability, but it would not solve the underlying issue of excessive government spending. Without broader fiscal constraints, appraisal timing becomes little more than a pacing mechanism for tax increases.
The Fifth Pillar: Three Percent Appraisal Cap for All Property
Abbott’s proposal to lower the appraisal cap to three percent annually and apply it to all property, including commercial and rental properties, could dramatically reshape how Texas assesses and distributes tax burdens.
Currently, homestead properties are limited to a 10 percent annual increase in taxable value, while other property types face no cap at all. Expanding a tighter, uniform cap would protect homeowners and small business owners alike from runaway appraisals, which often push long-time residents and independent enterprises to the brink.
Still, the policy comes with economic complexities. Appraisal caps can distort markets by creating disparities between long-term owners and newer buyers, effectively penalizing those entering the market. They may also reduce mobility, discouraging families from moving because they risk resetting their taxable value to the full market price.
The key will be designing a system that balances fairness with market integrity. The Legislature would need to ensure that appraisal caps do not simply shift the burden to properties with more frequent transactions. The idea aligns with the broader goal of stability, but it must be paired with spending limits and rate transparency to achieve meaningful results.
The Sixth Pillar: Eliminating School District Property Taxes
The most ambitious part of Abbott’s plan is a constitutional amendment allowing Texans to vote on eliminating school district property taxes for homeowners. The concept of phasing out the Maintenance and Operations (M&O) portion of school taxes has been discussed for years and has long been championed by fiscal conservatives as a path to real, permanent relief.
Replacing these taxes with state-level funding mechanisms, most likely through surplus revenue or a restructured consumption-based model, could remove one of the largest components of Texans’ property tax bills. It would also ensure that the state, not local school districts, bears responsibility for education funding.
However, achieving this goal would require unprecedented legislative cooperation and a clear, sustainable replacement framework. The 89th Legislature considered several proposals to compress or eliminate M&O taxes using surplus funds, but none advanced beyond committee. Lawmakers failed to agree on how to replace the lost revenue, reflecting deep divisions over school finance and spending priorities.
Eliminating M&O taxes remains the most promising structural reform available, but it is also the most difficult politically. It would require careful fiscal modeling, strict spending caps, and unwavering commitment from the governor and legislative leadership, a commitment that has often faltered in prior sessions.
Why History Demands Skepticism
Abbott’s property tax crusade is not new. Since his first term, he has repeatedly declared property tax relief to be a top priority. In 2019, the Legislature enacted the voter-approval rate. In 2023, it passed record “relief” packages financed by surplus funds. In 2025, another round of exemptions and buy-downs followed. Each time, taxpayers were told historic change was on the way.
Each time, property tax burdens still increased around the state.
We compiled data from the Texas Comptroller’s public records that show total property tax levies in Texas have increased by more than 360 percent since 1998, while the combined growth of population and inflation has risen by only about 150 percent. School district property taxes alone account for over half of this growth, having risen more than 400 percent during the same period. The result is that Texans today pay the highest property tax burden in the state’s history, far outpacing their ability to pay.
This imbalance has turned property taxes into a de facto wealth tax that punishes both homeowners and renters, driving up housing costs and undermining long-term affordability. Even after record surpluses and legislative sessions dominated by tax relief rhetoric, property taxes continue to climb because governments, state and local alike, continue to spend beyond their means.
The consistent failure to achieve real relief is not because Texas lacks ideas or resources. It is because the state lacks spending discipline. So long as lawmakers at every level of government continue to expand budgets, no amount of surplus or exemption tweaking will lower overall burdens in a meaningful way.
Abbott’s plan gestures toward this reality, but history shows that translating campaign rhetoric into binding fiscal policy will require more than optimism. It will demand confrontation—particularly with local governments and legislative factions resistant to reform.
The Role of the Legislature
For the governor’s plan to succeed, the Legislature must do what it has failed to do for the past several sessions: pair tax reductions with enforceable spending limits. Recent experience offers a clear warning.
During the last two sessions, the state used billions in surplus funds to buy down local school tax rates while simultaneously approving record levels of new spending. The result was predictable. Temporary relief was followed by renewed tax growth, leaving taxpayers no better off in the long term.
That pattern continued earlier this year, when Abbott added local spending limits to the agendas of two subsequent special legislative sessions. Lawmakers briefly revisited property tax relief measures but never took up the issue of local spending caps. Beyond adding the item to the call, Abbott did little to push the Legislature to act. This inaction reinforced the broader perception that while the governor is willing to voice support for fiscal restraint, he has so far been unwilling to expend political capital to make it happen.
If the coming session repeats that pattern, funding one-time tax cuts without constraining local budgets, Texans will again see short-term savings evaporate. The lesson from the 88th and 89th sessions is straightforward. Relief that is not accompanied by reform is an illusion.
A Moment for Leadership
Abbott now enters this election cycle with nearly one hundred million dollars in campaign funds and a relatively unified Republican base. He has the political capital to make property tax reform the centerpiece of his legacy. Whether he will use it remains to be seen.
The success of this agenda will depend on the governor’s willingness to hold the Legislature accountable and to resist the urge to settle for half measures. It will also depend on whether lawmakers finally acknowledge what every taxpayer already knows: rising property taxes are not a problem of valuation or appraisal methodology; they are a problem of spending.
A disciplined approach would start with codified spending limits, transparency in local debt issuance, and the dedication of future surpluses exclusively to rate compression and eventual M&O elimination. Anything less would repeat the same cycle of promises without progress.
Cautious Optimism for the Path Forward
There is reason for cautious optimism. Abbott’s latest plan aligns more closely than ever with the reforms necessary for long-term relief. It signals an awareness that property tax reform is not simply a question of rates but of structure and restraint. If pursued earnestly, these reforms could mark a turning point in Texas’s fiscal policy.
Yet optimism must be tempered by experience. For years, the governor has championed these ideas rhetorically, only to watch them stall in the legislative process. The gulf between campaign commitment and legislative execution remains wide. The burden now lies not with the voters, who have consistently demanded relief, but with the political leadership in Austin to deliver it.
Texans should welcome Abbott’s renewed attention to property taxes, but they should also remember the past. Real relief will not come from speeches or short-term exemptions. It will come only when the state enacts lasting structural change, spending caps that restrain government growth, mechanisms that prevent local circumvention, and an unwavering commitment to use every surplus dollar to reduce rates rather than expand programs.
Texas Policy Research remains hopeful that this time will be different. The governor’s plan offers a framework consistent with the principles of limited government, fiscal restraint, and taxpayer empowerment. Whether it becomes reality depends on the resolve of the very officials who have too often been content with promises instead of progress.
Conclusion
Governor Abbott’s campaign kickoff rekindles a debate that has defined Texas politics for more than a decade. His six pillars of property tax reform reflect ideas worth pursuing, and his stated intent aligns with what Texans have demanded for years: less government growth, more voter control, and a future where homeownership remains within reach.
But good ideas are not enough. For Texans to see real change, rhetoric must give way to resolve. The governor has the influence and opportunity to make this the session that finally delivers structural reform. Whether he seizes it will determine not only his legacy but also whether Texans can believe once again that their leaders mean what they say about tax relief.
Texas Policy Research relies on the support of generous donors across Texas.
If you found this information helpful, please consider supporting our efforts! Thank you!
