­­We Can End Property Taxes

This article is designed to be updated periodically as new data becomes available and as new challenges to the plan are put forward. Please check back periodically for updates - Don’t hesitate to contact us if you see anything that requires correction by emailing us at: communication@willcampbellfortexas.com

Ending Property Taxes in Texas: A Complete Plan

A mathematically verified proposal to replace all Texas property taxes with a 5% flat sales tax on all transactions — no exemptions, no carve-outs, no special deals.

Abstract

Texas collected $86.6 billion in local property taxes in 2024, yet the state's total gross sales base exceeds $3.47 trillion annually (Texas Comptroller, 2025b). This article demonstrates that a 5% flat sales tax on all transactions — with no exemptions — generates $173.4 billion in annual revenue, enough to replace every dollar of property tax, the franchise tax, and the existing state sales tax while producing a $30.6 billion annual surplus (21.4% structural buffer). All five income quintiles save money. The regressivity ratio improves from 11.1x to 2.8x (a 75% improvement). The math works. The data is official. The path is clear.

Introduction

"I know so many people that when they get their appraisal, their hand is quivering with that envelope in their hand because they're afraid to see how much their property taxes are going up."
— Governor Greg Abbott, Fort Worth, December 2025 (Abbott, 2026)

Every year, millions of Texans open an envelope from their county appraisal district with a trembling hand — not because they've done something wrong, but because they have no idea how much more they'll owe on the home they already paid for.

The governor is right about the problem. But his solution — a 3% appraisal cap — is a band-aid on a broken limb (O'Connor, 2026; NBER, 2005). This article presents something different: a complete, mathematically verified plan to end property taxes in Texas forever, funded entirely by a 5% flat sales tax on all transactions — no exemptions, no carve-outs, no special deals. Just equal treatment for every dollar that changes hands in this state.

The math works. The data is official. The path is clear. Here is the case.

The Current State of Texas Taxes

Texas operates without a personal income tax, making it one of only nine such states in the nation (Tax Foundation, 2025). Instead, the state funds its $181.7 billion in annual expenditures (FY 2025) through a combination of sales taxes, franchise taxes, severance taxes, federal funds, and fees (Texas Comptroller, 2025a; Texas ACFR, 2025).

The state sales tax — currently set at 6.25% — generated $49.1 billion in FY 2025, making it by far the single largest source of state revenue. Cities and counties may add up to 2% in local sales taxes, bringing the maximum combined rate to 8.25% — the constitutional cap established under Texas Tax Code §151.051 and Article VIII (Texas Legislature Online, 2025a; Texas Legislature Online, 1876).

But here is what most Texans don't know: property taxes are entirely local. The state of Texas levies no property tax. Every dollar of the $86.6 billion collected in property taxes during 2024 went to school districts, cities, counties, and special districts — not the state treasury. This distinction is critical, because it means replacing property taxes requires restructuring local revenue, not just state revenue (Texas Policy Research, 2025).

The state spends $40.2 billion of its budget on public education, while school districts simultaneously collect $41.7 billion in local property taxes — creating a double-funding structure where schools receive roughly $81.9 billion combined, but Texans pay for it twice through both sales taxes and property taxes (Texas Comptroller, 2025a).

HD 109 — Dallas County Context: House District 109 sits in the heart of Dallas County, where the average effective property tax rate is among the highest in the state. The typical HD 109 household pays a property tax bill driven by school district M&O rates, city rates, county rates, and special district levies — all stacked on an appraised value that rises every year regardless of whether the homeowner's income does (Census Reporter, n.d.).

1
Texas Revenue Dashboard
$183.0B
Total State Revenue
FY 2025 all sources
$84.2B
State Tax Collections
FY 2025 tax revenue only
$86.6B
Property Tax Levy
2024 total local levies
$24.8B
Rainy Day Fund
Economic Stabilization Fund
Key Findings
  • Texas collects $86.6B in property taxes — entirely local, not state revenue
  • State sales tax ($49.1B) is the single largest state revenue source
  • Schools receive $81.9B combined from state + local property taxes — Texans pay twice
  • The Rainy Day Fund holds $24.8B — proving Texas can manage large reserves
Methodology

All figures from the Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts FY 2025 Annual Cash Report and 2024 Property Tax Levy Data. Revenue figures are actual collections, not projections.

FY 2025 State Revenue by Source

Revenue SourceAmount (Billions)Share
Sales Tax$49.126.8%
Federal Funds$51.228.0%
Franchise Tax$7.083.9%
Motor Vehicle Sales/Rental Tax$5.83.2%
Severance Taxes (Oil & Gas)$6.93.8%
Insurance Taxes$4.22.3%
Motor Fuels Tax$3.82.1%
Fees, Licenses & Other$47.826.1%
Interest & Investments$7.13.9%
Total State Revenue$183.0100.0%
State Revenue Composition, FY 2025

State Tax Collections Detail, FY 2025

Tax TypeCollections (B)% of Tax Revenue
State Sales & Use Tax$49.158.3%
Franchise Tax$7.088.4%
Motor Vehicle Sales/Rental$5.86.9%
Oil Production Tax$4.85.7%
Natural Gas Production Tax$2.12.5%
Insurance Premiums Tax$4.25.0%
Motor Fuels Tax$3.84.5%
Hotel Occupancy Tax$0.91.1%
Other Taxes$6.47.6%
Total Tax Collections$84.2100.0%

Sales Tax Base Analysis, Q3 2025

$867.1B
Q3 Gross Sales
Total reported sales, Q3 2025
$200.4B
Q3 Taxable Sales
Only 23.1% of gross
$3,468.3B
Annualized Gross
Full-year gross sales base
MetricQ3 2025AnnualizedShare of Gross
Gross Sales (Total)$867.1B$3,468.3B100.0%
Taxable Sales$200.4B$801.6B23.1%
Exempt Sales$666.7B$2,666.8B76.9%
Sales Tax Exemptions (value)$16.7B$66.8B
Critical Insight

76.9% of Texas economic activity is untaxed. Only 23.1% of gross sales are currently subject to sales tax. This is the key to the 5% plan — removing exemptions unlocks $2.67 trillion in additional tax base annually.

State Expenditure Highlights, FY 2025

CategoryAmount (Billions)Share
Public Education (State Share)$40.222.0%
Health & Human Services$84.846.7%
Public Safety & Criminal Justice$14.88.1%
Higher Education$19.610.8%
Transportation$14.47.9%
General Government & Other$7.94.3%
Total Expenditures$181.7100.0%

2024 Property Tax Levies by Entity Type

Entity TypeLevy (Billions)Share
School Districts$41.748.2%
Cities$15.718.1%
Counties$15.718.1%
Special Districts$13.515.6%
Total Property Tax Levy$86.6100.0%
Property Tax Levy Distribution, 2024
Important

Property taxes are 100% local. The State of Texas levies no property tax. All $86.6 billion flows to school districts, cities, counties, and special districts — meaning replacement requires restructuring local revenue, not just state revenue.

Texas operates without a personal income tax, making it one of only nine such states in the nation (Tax Foundation, 2025). Instead, the state funds its $181.7 billion in annual expenditures (FY 2025) through a combination of sales taxes, franchise taxes, severance taxes, federal funds, and fees (Texas Comptroller, 2025a; Texas ACFR, 2025).

The state sales tax — currently set at 6.25% — generated $49.1 billion in FY 2025, making it by far the single largest source of state revenue. Cities and counties may add up to 2% in local sales taxes, bringing the maximum combined rate to 8.25% — the constitutional cap established under Texas Tax Code §151.051 and Article VIII (Texas Legislature Online, 2025a; Texas Legislature Online, 1876).

But here is what most Texans don't know: property taxes are entirely local. The state of Texas levies no property tax. Every dollar of the $86.6 billion collected in property taxes during 2024 went to school districts, cities, counties, and special districts — not the state treasury. This distinction is critical, because it means replacing property taxes requires restructuring local revenue, not just state revenue (Texas Policy Research, 2025).

The state spends $40.2 billion of its budget on public education, while school districts simultaneously collect $41.7 billion in local property taxes — creating a double-funding structure where schools receive roughly $81.9 billion combined, but Texans pay for it twice through both sales taxes and property taxes (Texas Comptroller, 2025a).

Section 1 References

Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts. (2025a). Annual cash report: Fiscal year 2025. State of Texas. https://comptroller.texas.gov/transparency/revenue/

Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts. (2025b). Quarterly sales tax report: Q3 2025. State of Texas. https://comptroller.texas.gov/transparency/local/quarterly-report/stxqtr01.php

Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts. (2025c). Property tax in Texas: 2024 levy data. State of Texas. https://comptroller.texas.gov/taxes/property-tax/

Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts. (2025d). A field guide to the taxes of Texas. State of Texas. https://comptroller.texas.gov/transparency/revenue/docs/96-1774.pdf

Texas Legislature Online. (2025a). Texas Tax Code §151: Limited sales, excise, and use tax. State of Texas. https://statutes.capitol.texas.gov/Docs/TX/htm/TX.151.htm

Texas Legislature Online. (1876, as amended). Texas Constitution, Article VIII: Taxation and revenue. State of Texas. https://tarlton.law.utexas.edu/constitutions/texas-1876-en/article-8-taxation-revenue

What Texas Households Actually Spend

To understand whether a 5% flat sales tax is a fair trade for ending property taxes, we need to know where Texas households spend their money. The Bureau of Labor Statistics Consumer Expenditure Survey (CEX) gives us that answer (U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2025).

The average Texas household earns $91,099 per year in pre-tax income and spends $69,802 annually on all goods and services combined (BLS, 2025). Under the current system, the average household pays approximately $2,422 per year in sales tax (8.25% combined rate on the narrow taxable base of roughly $29,533 in currently taxable expenditures). Under the 5% plan, the expanded taxable base per household is approximately $54,441, yielding a new annual sales tax of approximately $2,722 — a net increase of only ~$300 per year (BLS, 2025).

The average blended property tax burden per Texas household (homeowners paying directly, renters paying through rent) is $4,326 per year (U.S. Census Bureau, 2024). Homeowners pay an average of $5,124 per year directly. Renters carry an indirect burden of approximately $2,973 per year embedded in rent (U.S. Census Bureau, 2024; Every Texan, 2024). Total residential property taxes reach $46.5 billion ($34.6B homeowner + $11.9B renter-embedded) (Texas Policy Research, 2025).

The effective property tax rate for the lowest income quintile is 22.59% of income; for the highest quintile, it is just 2.04% — an 11-to-1 ratio (ITEP, 2024).

Net annual savings per household: approximately $4,026.

This is not a tax shift — it is a tax cut with broad-base funding that treats every economic actor identically.

2
Household Expenditures Dashboard
$69,802
Avg HH Expenditures
BLS CEX, Texas
10.75M
TX Households
Census estimate
$86.6B
Property Tax Levies
2024 total collections
62.9%
Homeownership
TX homeownership rate
Key Findings
  • Average Texas household spends $69,802/year on goods and services
  • Current ST per household: ~$2,422/yr; New 5% ST: ~$2,722/yr; net increase ~$300/yr
  • Homeowner avg direct PT: $5,124/yr; Renter avg indirect PT: $2,973/yr
  • Blended PT burden per household: $4,326/yr
  • Net savings per household: approximately $4,026/year
  • 38% of Texas households are renters (Every Texan, 2024) — they pay $2,973/yr in property taxes through rent but receive zero current relief

Average Annual Household Expenditures — Texas

CategoryAnnual AmountShare of Total
Housing$22,62432.4%
Transportation$12,29517.6%
Food$9,32613.4%
Personal Insurance & Pensions$7,87311.3%
Healthcare$5,4527.8%
Utilities & Public Services$4,1065.9%
Entertainment$3,2074.6%
Apparel & Services$1,8972.7%
Education$1,3852.0%
All Other$1,6372.3%
Total Expenditures$69,802100.0%
Household Expenditure Breakdown

Expenditures by Income Quintile

QuintileAvg IncomeAvg SpendingSpend/Income
Q1 (Lowest 20%)$15,400$30,700199.4%
Q2$34,800$41,200118.4%
Q3 (Middle)$58,100$55,40095.4%
Q4$90,200$74,60082.7%
Q5 (Highest 20%)$199,500$147,10073.7%
What This Means

Lower-income households spend a higher share of income — which is why a consumption tax seems regressive in isolation. But when it replaces a property tax system that is even more regressive (11.1x ratio), the net effect is progressive. All quintiles save money under this plan.

Housing Tenure in Texas

62.9%
Homeowners
~6.76M households
37.1%
Renters
~3.99M households
Why Renters Matter
  • Renters pay property taxes indirectly through rent — landlords pass the cost through
  • No current proposal (Abbott, Legislature) provides renter relief
  • The 5% plan is the only proposal that benefits both homeowners and renters equally
  • 3.99 million Texas renter households are invisible under current property tax relief proposals

Current vs. Proposed Tax Treatment by Spending Category

CategoryAnnual SpendCurrently Taxed?Under 5% Plan
Groceries (home)$5,200No (exempt)Yes, 5%
Restaurants$4,126Yes (8.25%)Yes, 5%
Clothing & Apparel$1,897Yes (8.25%)Yes, 5%
Vehicles (purchase)$4,800Yes (6.25% MV)Yes, 5%
Gasoline & Motor Oil$2,600Fuel tax onlyYes, 5%
Utilities$4,106PartialYes, 5%
Healthcare$5,452No (exempt)Yes, 5%
Insurance Premiums$7,873Insurance taxYes, 5%
Entertainment$3,207PartialYes, 5%
Education$1,385No (exempt)Yes, 5%
Net Effect

Some categories see new taxation (groceries, healthcare), but many see a rate reduction (restaurants drop from 8.25% to 5%, clothing drops from 8.25% to 5%). The net new burden is approximately $1,474/year — far less than the $5,500 property tax savings.

Estimated Property Tax Burden by Household Type

Household TypeEstimated Annual PTHow Paid
Homeowner (median home $300K)$6,600–$7,800Direct tax bill
Homeowner (statewide average)$5,124Direct tax bill
Renter (average)$2,973Embedded in rent
Senior (fixed income, $200K home)$4,400–$5,200Direct (may defer)
Blended average (all HH)$4,326Mixed

Net Savings Under 5% Plan

$4,026
Net Savings/Year
Average household
$4,326
PT Eliminated
Blended avg all HH
~$300
Net ST Increase
$2,722 new vs $2,422 current
The Bottom Line
  • Property tax eliminated: $4,326/year (blended avg all HH)
  • Homeowner direct PT eliminated: $5,124/year
  • Net sales tax increase: ~$300/year ($2,722 new vs $2,422 current)
  • Net savings: $4,026/year per household
  • For HD 109 homeowners ($300K home): savings of $5,100–$6,300/year

Section 2 Sources

U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2025). Consumer Expenditure Survey (CEX): Texas state table. U.S. Department of Labor. https://www.bls.gov/cex/

Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts. (2025c). Property tax in Texas: 2024 levy data. State of Texas. https://comptroller.texas.gov/taxes/property-tax/

Texas Taxpayers and Research Association. (2025). Reducing taxes on personal property: A sigh of relief for Texas businesses. TTARA. https://ttara.org/eliminating-taxes-on-personal-property-a-sigh-of-relief-for-texas-businesses/

Census Reporter. (n.d.). State House District 109, TX [Data profile]. https://censusreporter.org/profiles/62000US48109-state-house-district-109-tx/

To understand whether a 5% flat sales tax is a fair trade for ending property taxes, we need to know where Texas households spend their money. The Bureau of Labor Statistics Consumer Expenditure Survey (CEX) gives us that answer (U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2025).

The average Texas household earns $91,099 per year in pre-tax income and spends $69,802 annually on all goods and services combined (BLS, 2025). Under the current system, the average household pays approximately $2,422/yr in sales tax. Under the 5% plan, the new annual sales tax is approximately $2,722 — a net increase of only ~$300/yr (BLS, 2025).

The average blended property tax burden per Texas household is $4,326/yr. Homeowners pay $5,124/yr directly; renters carry $2,973/yr indirectly through rent (U.S. Census Bureau, 2024).

Net annual savings per household: approximately $4,026.

This is not a tax shift — it is a tax cut with broad-base funding that treats every economic actor identically.

HD 109 in the Texas Context

House District 109 is not an island. It exists within a state legislative framework, a Dallas County taxing structure, and a school finance system that makes it impossible to solve the property tax problem district by district (Census Reporter, n.d.).

HD 109 spans portions of southern Dallas County, including Cedar Hill, DeSoto, and Lancaster — communities where property values have risen substantially over the past decade even as household income growth has lagged behind. This creates the classic appraisal trap: rising taxable values, rising tax bills, but not necessarily rising ability to pay.

The district is served by multiple overlapping taxing entities: Cedar Hill ISD, Dallas County, the City of Cedar Hill (and others), and various special districts. A homeowner with a $300,000 home in HD 109 may be paying an effective combined rate of 2.2–2.6%, yielding an annual bill of $6,600–$7,800 — well above the statewide average (Census Reporter, n.d.).

Under the proposed 5% flat sales tax plan, every one of those levies disappears. The school district M&O tax, the city operating levy, the county levy, the MUD fee — all replaced with a single, predictable, consumption-based revenue stream that grows with the economy rather than with appraisal district decisions made behind closed doors.

3
HD 109 District Analysis
185,049
HD 109 Population
Census estimate
62,106
Households
Total HH in district
$32,612
Per Capita Income
Below state average
$66,771
Median HH Income
vs. $67,321 statewide
67.5%
Homeownership
Above state avg (62.9%)
Key Findings
  • HD 109 has above-average homeownership (67.5% vs 62.9%) but below-average income
  • This combination means property taxes hit HD 109 families harder relative to ability to pay
  • Typical HD 109 property tax bill: $6,600–$7,800 on a $300K home
  • Multiple overlapping taxing entities: 4 school districts, county, cities, special districts

HD 109 Demographic Profile

MetricHD 109Texas
Total Population185,04930.5M
Total Households62,10610.75M
Persons per Household2.982.84
Median Age34.235.3
Homeownership Rate67.5%62.9%
Renter Rate32.5%37.1%
Communities in HD 109

Cedar Hill, DeSoto, Lancaster, Hutchins, Wilmer, and portions of Seagoville. School districts include Cedar Hill ISD, Lancaster ISD, DeSoto ISD, and portions of Dallas ISD.

Income & Housing Comparison

MetricHD 109TexasDifference
Per Capita Income$32,612$36,850-11.5%
Median HH Income$66,771$67,321-0.8%
Median Home Value$245,000$238,000+2.9%
Median Gross Rent$1,380$1,295+6.6%
Housing Cost Burden (>30%)28.4%26.8%+1.6pp
HD 109 vs. Texas Comparison (Indexed, Texas = 100)

Estimated HD 109 Household Expenditures

CategoryHD 109 Est.Texas Avg
Housing$21,450$22,624
Transportation$11,680$12,295
Food$8,860$9,326
Insurance & Pensions$7,480$7,873
Healthcare$5,180$5,452
Utilities$3,900$4,106
Other$7,750$8,126
Total$66,300$69,802
Methodology

HD 109 estimates are scaled from BLS CEX Texas state data using the income ratio (HD 109 median $66,771 / TX median $67,321 = 0.99x), with housing adjusted for local cost differences.

HD 109 Property Tax Burden Analysis

Home ValueEst. Annual PT% of Median Income
$150,000$3,300–$3,9004.9–5.8%
$200,000$4,400–$5,2006.6–7.8%
$250,000$5,500–$6,5008.2–9.7%
$300,000$6,600–$7,8009.9–11.7%
$350,000$7,700–$9,10011.5–13.6%
$400,000$8,800–$10,40013.2–15.6%
The Appraisal Trap

A $300,000 home in HD 109 generates a tax bill of $6,600–$7,800 — consuming 9.9–11.7% of median household income. This is the textbook definition of the appraisal trap: rising home values create rising tax bills that outpace income growth.

HD 109 Impact Under 5% Plan

$5,100+
Annual Savings
HD 109 homeowner, $300K home
$1,400
New Sales Tax
Est. net new burden
$0
Property Tax Bill
Eliminated entirely
What Changes for HD 109 Families
  • No more annual appraisal notices — the system is eliminated
  • No more stacked taxing entity rates (school + city + county + special)
  • Homeowners with $300K homes save $5,100–$6,300/year
  • Renters see downward pressure on rents as landlord costs drop
  • Fixed-income seniors no longer face rising bills on paid-off homes

Section 3 Sources

Census Reporter. (n.d.). State House District 109, TX [Data profile]. https://censusreporter.org/profiles/62000US48109-state-house-district-109-tx/

Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts. (2025c). Property tax in Texas: 2024 levy data. State of Texas. https://comptroller.texas.gov/taxes/property-tax/

U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2025). Consumer Expenditure Survey (CEX): Texas state table. U.S. Department of Labor. https://www.bls.gov/cex/

House District 109 is not an island. It exists within a state legislative framework, a Dallas County taxing structure, and a school finance system that makes it impossible to solve the property tax problem district by district (Census Reporter, n.d.).

HD 109 spans portions of southern Dallas County, including Cedar Hill, DeSoto, and Lancaster — communities where property values have risen substantially over the past decade even as household income growth has lagged behind. This creates the classic appraisal trap: rising taxable values, rising tax bills, but not necessarily rising ability to pay.

The district is served by multiple overlapping taxing entities: Cedar Hill ISD, Dallas County, the City of Cedar Hill (and others), and various special districts. A homeowner with a $300,000 home in HD 109 may be paying an effective combined rate of 2.2–2.6%, yielding an annual bill of $6,600–$7,800 — well above the statewide average (Census Reporter, n.d.).

Under the proposed 5% flat sales tax plan, every one of those levies disappears. The school district M&O tax, the city operating levy, the county levy, the MUD fee — all replaced with a single, predictable, consumption-based revenue stream that grows with the economy rather than with appraisal district decisions made behind closed doors.

The Untaxed Economy: How We Get to 5%

This is where the plan departs from every other proposal — and where the math becomes compelling.

Texas's current sales tax only applies to 23.1% of the state's total economic activity. The Texas Comptroller's own Q3 2025 data shows that businesses reported $867.1 billion in total gross sales — but only $200.4 billion of that was subject to sales tax. The other 76.9%, representing $666.7 billion in a single quarter, was either exempt by statute or excluded from the tax base entirely (Texas Comptroller, 2025b).

The Two Approaches

To establish the viable range for this plan, the analysis examines both approaches at the existing 8.25% constitutional cap. Approach 1 establishes the floor — showing the plan works even under the most conservative assumptions. Approach 2 establishes the ceiling — showing the full potential when every transaction is included. The recommended 5% rate sits between them.

Approach 1 — Conservative Base ($1,853.5B annualized): This approach starts from the Comptroller’s own numbers: the current taxable sales base plus the exempt transactions already documented in Report 96-463. It adds back items that are currently taxed under other laws (motor vehicles, insurance premiums, motor fuels) — items that would be folded into the unified system. At the existing 8.25% cap, this conservative base generates $152.9B — more than enough to cover the $142.8B replacement need with a $10.1B surplus. The beneficial minimum rate on this base is 7.70%. Even the most conservative reading of the data shows the math works without touching a single transaction outside the existing tax framework (Texas Comptroller, 2025b; Texas Policy Research, 2025).

Approach 2 — Full Gross Sales Base ($3,468.3B annualized): This approach uses the full gross sales figure — every transaction reported to the Comptroller — as the tax base. When the exemption wall is removed entirely and every dollar of economic activity is treated equally, the base grows to $3,468.3 billion annually. At 8.25%, this generates approximately $286.1B — far more than needed — creating massive room for rate reduction. The minimum replacement rate falls to just 4.12%. This is the ceiling: the upper bound of what the full Texas economy can support (Texas Comptroller, 2025b).

The 5% recommendation sits between these two points. Approach 1 (the floor) proves the plan works conservatively. Approach 2 (the ceiling) proves the full economy can carry a much lower rate. At 5% on the full base, revenue is $173.4B — a $30.6B surplus (21.4% buffer) — well within the demonstrated range.

Why the Full Gross Base Is the Right Approach: The Comptroller data shows that three-quarters of Texas economic activity escapes the current sales tax because of decades of accumulated exemptions — groceries, manufacturing inputs, agricultural equipment, insurance premiums, wholesale transactions, and hundreds of narrowly-crafted business carve-outs. These exemptions were created piecemeal by lobbying, not principle (Texas Comptroller, 2025e).

A no-exemptions flat rate treats a grocery purchase the same as a restaurant meal. It treats a wholesale transaction the same as a retail one. It treats a rancher buying equipment the same as a homebuilder buying lumber. Fairness requires equality of treatment, not a system where lawyers and lobbyists determine which transactions are blessed and which are taxed.

4
The Untaxed Economy
$867.1B
Q3 Gross Sales
Total reported, Q3 2025
$200.4B
Q3 Taxable Sales
Only 23.1% of gross
7.70%
Approach 1 Min Rate
Floor: conservative base
4.12%
Approach 2 Min Rate
Ceiling: full gross base
$3,468.3B
Annual Gross Base
Full economic activity
$66.8B
Annual Exemptions
Revenue lost to carve-outs
The Core Insight

76.9% of Texas economic activity is untaxed. Approach 1 (floor): even the conservative base works at 8.25%, generating $152.9B with a 7.70% minimum. Approach 2 (ceiling): the full $3.47 trillion gross base lowers the minimum to just 4.12%, and at 8.25% generates $286.1B. The recommended 5% rate sits between these points — producing $173.4B with a $30.6B surplus.

The Exemption Wall: Where $666.7B/Quarter Goes Untaxed

Exemption CategoryEst. Annual ValueRevenue Lost (at 5%)
Manufacturing/Industrial Inputs$680B$34.0B
Wholesale/B2B Transactions$520B$26.0B
Agricultural Equipment & Supplies$95B$4.75B
Groceries & Food (home)$62B$3.1B
Medical & Pharmaceutical$85B$4.25B
Utilities & Energy (partial)$48B$2.4B
Digital/Internet Services$42B$2.1B
Professional & Financial Services$380B$19.0B
Other Exempt Categories$541B$27.1B
Total Exempt/Excluded$2,668B$122.7B
Taxed vs. Untaxed Economic Activity

Approach 1: Conservative Base (The Floor)

At Existing 8.25% Cap

$152.9B

Revenue at 8.25% on $1,853.5B base — covers $142.8B need + $10.1B surplus

Beneficial minimum rate: 7.70%

Conservative Estimate

7.70%

Minimum rate on $1,853.5B base

ComponentAnnual Amount
Current taxable sales (annualized)$801.6B
+ Motor vehicle sales$120.0B
+ Insurance premiums$180.0B
+ Motor fuels (volume-based)$52.0B
+ Existing exempt items with state taxes$755.9B
Approach 1 Tax Base$1,853.5B
MetricValue
Replacement need (PT + franchise + state ST)$142.8B
Approach 1 base$1,853.5B
Revenue at 8.25% cap$152.9B
Surplus at 8.25%+$10.1B
Beneficial minimum rate7.70%
What Approach 1 Shows (The Floor)

Even with the most conservative assumptions, the plan works. Using only the Comptroller’s own documented tax base — current taxable sales plus items already taxed under other statutes — the existing 8.25% cap generates $152.9B, covering all $142.8B in replacement needs with a $10.1B surplus. The beneficial minimum rate is 7.70%, far below TTARA’s claimed 19%. This is the floor: the plan works before touching a single transaction outside the existing framework.

Approach 2: Full Gross Sales Base (The Ceiling)

At Existing 8.25% Cap

$286.1B

Revenue at 8.25% on $3,468.3B base — $143.3B more than needed

Minimum replacement rate: 4.12%

Full Gross Base

4.12%

Minimum rate on $3,468.3B base

ComponentAnnual Amount
Q3 2025 gross sales$867.1B
Annualized (x4)$3,468.3B
All exemptions removed$0
Approach 2 Tax Base$3,468.3B
MetricValue
Replacement need$142.8B
Approach 2 base$3,468.3B
Revenue at 8.25% cap$286.1B
Surplus at 8.25%+$143.3B
What Approach 2 Shows (The Ceiling)
  • The full economy can carry a much lower rate. At 8.25%, the system generates $286.1B — far more than the $142.8B needed — creating massive room for rate reduction
  • The 8.25% cap becomes a safety ceiling, not a target. The minimum rate needed is just 4.12% — less than the current 6.25% state rate
  • Approach 1 is the floor; Approach 2 is the ceiling. The recommended 5% sits between them with a 21.4% structural buffer
  • At 5%, surplus is $30.6B — dedicated to reserves, infrastructure, and transition costs

Methodology Notes

Data Sources
  • Gross sales: Texas Comptroller Q3 2025 Quarterly Sales Tax Report — $867.1B reported by all businesses
  • Taxable sales: Same report — $200.4B subject to current sales tax
  • Exemption value: Comptroller Tax Exemptions & Incidence Report 2025 — $66.8B in sales tax exemptions
  • Property tax levies: Comptroller 2024 Property Tax Levy Data — $86.6B total
  • Franchise tax: Comptroller FY 2025 Annual Cash Report — $7.08B
Replacement Calculation

$142.8B replacement need = Property taxes ($86.6B) + Franchise tax ($7.08B) + Existing state sales tax revenue ($49.1B) = $142.8B.

Minimum rate = $142.8B ÷ $3,468.3B = 4.12%

At 5%: $3,468.3B × 0.05 = $173.4B → Surplus of $30.6B (21.4% buffer)

Approach Comparison Summary

Approach 1

7.70%

Conservative base: $1,853.5B

  • Uses current taxable + folded-in taxes
  • Rate above current 6.25% state rate
  • No surplus at 5%

Approach 2

4.12%

Full gross base: $3,468.3B

  • Uses all reported Q3 2025 sales
  • Rate below current state rate
  • $30.6B surplus at 5% (21.4% buffer)

Approach 1 (Floor)

$152.9B

At 8.25% on conservative base: $1,853.5B

  • Uses only Comptroller’s documented base
  • Covers $142.8B need + $10.1B surplus
  • Minimum beneficial rate: 7.70%

Approach 2 (Ceiling)

$286.1B

At 8.25% on full gross base: $3,468.3B

  • All transactions, no exemptions
  • $143.3B surplus — massive rate reduction room
  • Minimum replacement rate: 4.12%

Section 4 Sources

Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts. (2025b). Quarterly sales tax report: Q3 2025. State of Texas. https://comptroller.texas.gov/transparency/local/quarterly-report/stxqtr01.php

Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts. (2025e). Tax exemptions and incidence report, 2025. State of Texas. https://comptroller.texas.gov/transparency/reports/tax-exemptions-and-incidence/2025/96-463.pdf

Texas Taxpayers and Research Association. (2025). Reducing taxes on personal property. TTARA. https://ttara.org/eliminating-taxes-on-personal-property-a-sigh-of-relief-for-texas-businesses/

This is where the plan departs from every other proposal — and where the math becomes compelling.

Texas's current sales tax only applies to 23.1% of the state's total economic activity. The Texas Comptroller's own Q3 2025 data shows that businesses reported $867.1 billion in total gross sales — but only $200.4 billion of that was subject to sales tax. The other 76.9%, representing $666.7 billion in a single quarter, was either exempt by statute or excluded from the tax base entirely (Texas Comptroller, 2025b).

Approach 1 (Floor) — Conservative Base ($1,853.5B): At the existing 8.25% cap, this base generates $152.9B — enough to cover all $142.8B in needs with a $10.1B surplus. Beneficial minimum rate: 7.70%.

Approach 2 (Ceiling) — Full Gross Base ($3,468.3B): At 8.25%, this generates $286.1B — massive room for rate reduction. Minimum replacement rate falls to 4.12%. The recommended 5% sits between these two points.

The Comptroller data shows that three-quarters of Texas economic activity escapes the current sales tax because of decades of accumulated exemptions. A no-exemptions flat rate treats every dollar equally. Fairness requires equality of treatment, not a system where lawyers and lobbyists determine which transactions are blessed and which are taxed.

The Recommended Plan: 5% Flat, No Exemptions

After analyzing both approaches across multiple revenue scenarios, the recommendation is clear: a 5% flat sales tax on all transactions, with no exemptions, no exclusions, and no special carve-outs.

The Numbers: The 5% rate generates $30.6 billion more per year than needed (a 21.4% structural buffer) — a surplus that can be directed to infrastructure, property tax transition relief, education funding stabilization, or debt reduction.

The Rate Split

Each tier receives a constitutional cap — a maximum rate within which that level of government sets its own rate. Cities absorb responsibility for the school districts and special districts they serve, gaining both the funding and the authority to allocate it according to local priorities.

  • State cap: 0.75% → $26.0B
  • County cap: 0.75% → $26.0B
  • City cap: 3.50% (includes schools + special districts) → $121.4B

Cities determine their own rate within their 3.50% cap. A city that manages its obligations efficiently can set a rate below the cap — returning the difference to residents through lower prices on every transaction. This gives citizens direct, visible leverage over their city’s fiscal decisions in a way that property taxes never did.

Internal Waterfall (State 0.75%)

  • $14.6B → State Operations (general government)
  • $5.7B → Texas DPS (public safety & border security)
  • $5.7B → Rainy Day Fund (Economic Stabilization Fund)
  • The $40.2B state education budget shifts to the local 3.50% tier

What Changes for Texas Households

For renters, this plan delivers what no current proposal does: actual relief. Because property taxes are embedded in rent (landlords pass them through), the elimination of the property tax creates downward pressure on rents. The 5% flat tax on all transactions means renters pay proportionally — but they were already paying property taxes through their rent, invisibly.

All five income quintiles save money:

  • Q1 (lowest): $3,928/yr savings
  • Q2: $4,047/yr savings
  • Q3: $4,208/yr savings
  • Q4: $4,148/yr savings
  • Q5 (highest): $3,679/yr savings

Regressivity ratio improves from 11.1x to 2.8x — a 75% improvement.

Impact on Renters

Approximately 38% of Texas households are renters (Every Texan, 2024). They currently pay $2,973 per year in invisible property taxes through rent (U.S. Census Bureau, 2024). Under the 5% plan, competitive rental markets adjust rents downward as landlord property tax obligations disappear. Renters move from an invisible, regressive tax they cannot challenge to a visible, equal tax they can manage by adjusting their own spending.

Impact on Seniors

Seniors on fixed incomes are often described as “house rich, cash poor.” They own homes whose values have appreciated, pushing up property tax bills they struggle to pay. Under the 5% plan, their property tax bill goes to zero. A senior spending $40,000 per year would pay $2,000 in sales tax — far less than the $5,000+ property tax bill on a modestly valued home.

Impact on Businesses

Every Texas business that owns property pays property taxes. Every business with more than $2.47 million in revenue also pays franchise tax (Texas Comptroller, 2025a). The 5% plan eliminates both. The 253 Central Appraisal Districts and their associated protest industry — an entire bureaucratic ecosystem that produces nothing of value — are dissolved (TNRIS, n.d.).

Realigning City Incentives

The replacement of property taxes with a consumption tax does more than change how revenue is collected — it changes who cities serve. A 2016 Brookings Institution study compared property-tax-dependent Columbia, South Carolina with sales-tax-dependent Oklahoma City and found that Columbia’s officials explicitly described the city’s need to “protect and enhance its revenue flows” as its “rationale for investing city resources in land development projects,” while Oklahoma City pursued “retail projects near borders and vibrant downtown development to generate sales-tax revenues” (Pagano et al., 2016). The pattern is structural: property-tax cities chase assessed value growth by courting developers; sales-tax cities chase economic activity by attracting businesses and jobs that serve their residents. In Texas, this developer dependence is codified in law — Chapter 311 TIRZs, Chapter 312 property tax abatements, Chapter 380/381 agreements — an entire statutory infrastructure designed to redirect public revenue toward private development interests (Texas Comptroller, n.d.).

Under the 5% plan, these incentives reverse. A city’s revenue grows when its residents earn more, spend more, and participate in a thriving local economy — not when a developer secures a TIRZ designation or a council votes a 90% property tax abatement. The question cities ask shifts from What can we build? to How can we help our residents and businesses prosper? With each city setting its own rate within its 3.50% cap, the citizens of Cedar Hill — not developers, not Austin — decide how their community invests in itself.

5
Recommendation & Impact Dashboard

5% Rate Allocation

State Cap

0.75%

$26.0B

County Cap

0.75%

$26.0B

5.00%
Total Rate
Below 8.25% constitutional cap
$173.4B
Total Revenue
5% × $3,468.3B (Q3 2025)
$30.6B
Annual Surplus
21.4% structural buffer

State Tier Waterfall (0.75% → $26.0B)

AllocationAmountPurpose
State Operations$14.6BGeneral state government
Texas DPS$5.7BPublic safety & border security
Rainy Day Fund$5.7BEconomic Stabilization Fund
State Tier Total$26.0B
Waterfall Derivation

The $14.6 billion state operations need is derived from total state expenditures ($181.7B) minus education ($40.2B, shifted to local tier), minus non-tax revenue ($98.8B from federal funds, fees, licenses, lottery, and investment income), minus retained taxes ($28.1B from motor fuels, insurance, natural gas, and other non-sales/franchise taxes) (Texas ACFR, 2025; Texas Comptroller, 2025a). The $11.4B remainder ($26.0B − $14.6B) is split 50/50 between Texas DPS ($5.7B) and the Rainy Day Fund ($5.7B).

Local Tier Waterfall (3.50% → $121.4B)

AllocationAmountReplaces
School PT Replacement$41.7BSchool district property taxes
State Education (Shifted)$40.2BState education budget
City PT Replacement$15.7BCity property taxes
Special District PT Replacement$13.5BMUDs, hospital, etc.
Local Surplus$10.3BGrowth buffer & infrastructure
Local Tier Total$121.4B
5% Rate Revenue Allocation

Impact on Average Texas Household

-$4,326
PT Eliminated
Blended avg all HH
+$300
Net ST Increase
$2,722 new vs $2,422 current
$4,026
Net Annual Savings
Per household
ItemAmount/Year
Current property tax burden (avg all HH)$4,326
Current franchise tax (embedded in prices)~$660
Total current burden eliminated$6,160
Current sales tax per HH (~8.25% on narrow base)$2,422
New 5% sales tax per HH (full base)$2,722
Net sales tax increase~$300
Net Annual Savings$4,026

Savings by Income Quintile

$3,928
Q1 (Lowest)
Annual savings
$4,047
Q2
Annual savings
$4,208
Q3 (Middle)
Annual savings
$4,148
Q4
Annual savings
$3,679
Q5 (Highest)
Annual savings
QuintileAvg IncomePT EliminatedNew Sales TaxNet SavingsSavings as % Income
Q1 (Lowest 20%)$16,490$3,723$1,071$3,92823.8%
Q2$40,287$4,029$1,684$4,04710.0%
Q3 (Middle)$64,184$4,373$2,278$4,2086.6%
Q4$103,361$4,583$3,164$4,1484.0%
Q5 (Highest 20%)$235,584$4,803$5,414$3,6791.6%
Net Annual Savings by Income Quintile
Regressivity Analysis
  • Current system regressivity ratio: 11.1x (lowest quintile pays 11.1x the effective rate of the highest)
  • Under 5% plan: 2.8x ratio
  • 75% improvement in tax fairness
  • All five quintiles save money — this is a net tax cut across the board

Impact on HD 109 Households

$5,100+
Homeowner Savings
$300K home
$2,500+
Renter Savings
Via reduced rent
$0
New PT Bill
Eliminated permanently
ScenarioCurrent PTNew Sales TaxNet Savings
Homeowner, $200K home$4,800$1,300$3,500
Homeowner, $250K home$6,000$1,350$4,650
Homeowner, $300K home$7,200$1,400$5,800
Homeowner, $350K home$8,400$1,500$6,900
Renter, avg apartment$3,600*$1,100$2,500
Senior, $200K paid-off home$4,800$900$3,900

*Renter PT is estimated pass-through embedded in rent.

Broader Economic Effects

Positive Economic Impacts
  • Elimination of 253 County Appraisal Districts — $500M+ annual compliance savings
  • Simplified business environment — one tax, one rate, one collection point
  • Housing market stabilization — no appraisal-driven price distortions
  • Renter relief — downward pressure on rents statewide
  • Senior security — no more rising bills on fixed incomes
  • Business recruitment advantage — no property tax, no franchise tax, no income tax
  • $30.6B annual surplus — available for infrastructure, reserves, or additional relief
Franchise Tax Elimination

The 5% plan also eliminates the $7.08B Texas franchise tax (the "margins tax"), which is widely criticized as complex, anti-growth, and punitive to small businesses. This elimination is fully funded within the 5% rate.

Economic MetricCurrent SystemUnder 5% Plan
Tax types (state + local)Sales + Property + Franchise + MV + Fuels + Insurance + HotelOne 5% sales tax
Appraisal districts253 CADs0 (eliminated)
Annual compliance cost$500M+~$0 marginal
Tax simplicity rankComplexSimplest in U.S.
Renter reliefNoneFull (via rent reduction)
Business property tax$15B+/year$0

After analyzing both approaches across multiple revenue scenarios, the recommendation is clear: a 5% flat sales tax on all transactions, with no exemptions, no exclusions, and no special carve-outs.

The 5% rate generates $30.6 billion more per year than needed (a 21.4% structural buffer) — a surplus directed to infrastructure, property tax transition relief, education funding stabilization, or debt reduction.

Rate Split (caps): State cap 0.75% ($26.0B), County cap 0.75% ($26.0B), City cap 3.50% — cities absorb schools + special districts ($121.4B). Each level of government sets its own rate within its cap.

State Tier Waterfall: $14.6B → State Operations, $5.7B → Texas DPS, $5.7B → Rainy Day Fund. The $40.2B state education budget shifts to the local 3.50% tier.

Local 3.50% Tier ($121.4B) covers: School PT replacement $41.7B, City PT replacement $15.7B, Special district PT replacement $13.5B, State education budget (shifted) $40.2B, Local surplus ~$10.3B.

For renters, this plan delivers what no current proposal does: actual relief. All five income quintiles save money: Q1 $3,928, Q2 $4,047, Q3 $4,208, Q4 $4,148, Q5 $3,679. Regressivity ratio improves from 11.1x to 2.8x — a 75% improvement.

The Plan vs. Every Alternative

vs. Governor Abbott's 2026 Five-Point Plan

Governor Abbott announced a five-point property tax reform platform in February 2026 (O'Connor, 2026): (1) local spending limits, (2) two-thirds voter approval for tax increases, (3) rollback elections, (4) a 3% appraisal cap, and (5) elimination of school M&O property taxes for homeowners only (Abbott, 2026).

The plan has four fundamental problems. First, it does not eliminate property taxes — it reduces them for homeowners only. Renters, businesses, apartment owners, and commercial property continue to pay. Second, the 3% appraisal cap replicates the worst features of California’s Proposition 13, which the NBER has documented creates a “lock-in effect” that reduces housing mobility and shifts tax burden to new buyers (NBER, 2005). Third, eliminating school M&O for homeowners costs approximately $20 billion per year with no specified funding mechanism beyond current surpluses — which the Tax Policy Center warns are insufficient and temporary (Tax Policy Center, 2026).

Fourth — and perhaps most critically — Abbott’s plan strips power from local cities and their citizens. His local spending limits, two-thirds voter-approval mandates, and state-imposed appraisal caps all flow in one direction: from local communities to Austin. Under the Abbott framework, the state tells cities how much they can raise, how much they can spend, and how fast their tax base can grow. Citizens of Cedar Hill, Sugar Land, or El Paso lose the ability to make their own fiscal decisions. The property tax system already took that power from them by tying municipal revenue to appraised values set by unelected appraisal boards — Abbott’s plan compounds the problem by adding state-level controls on top of that broken system.

The 5% plan advantage: A complete end — and a restoration of local self-governance. Under the 5% plan, each city sets its own sales tax rate within its 3.50% cap, absorbing responsibility for schools and special districts. Citizens choose their own tax rate, fund their own priorities, and hold their own city council accountable. No appraisal districts. No annual envelope-opening anxiety. No carve-outs that favor long-term property holders over new buyers. No mandates from Austin. Every Texan — homeowner, renter, business — benefits equally, and every city governs itself.

vs. TTARA's "19% Claim"

TTARA and Senator Paul Bettencourt's team have publicly stated that replacing property taxes would require "more than doubling" the current sales tax rate — to roughly 19% (TTARA, 2025; Texas Tribune, 2024).

This claim is mathematically correct for the wrong base. TTARA's calculation uses the current narrow taxable sales base — approximately $750 billion annually — and divides $142.8 billion in replacement need by that figure. The result is approximately 19.0%.

But this plan does not propose raising the rate on the current base. It proposes eliminating exemptions and applying the rate to the full $3.47 trillion gross sales base. On that base, the replacement rate is 4.12% — and 5% generates an $30.6 billion annual surplus.

vs. Every Texan's Regressivity Argument

Every Texan and ITEP argue that sales taxes are “more regressive” than property taxes (ITEP, 2024; Jefferson, 2025). This is true under the current narrow sales tax base, where luxury services, financial transactions, and B2B commerce are exempt. Under a broad-base flat tax, luxury goods, professional services, financial services, and high-end consumption are all taxed equally.

The data demonstrates that the current property tax is far more regressive: 22.59% of income for the bottom quintile versus 2.04% for the top (ITEP, 2024). Under the 5% plan, all five quintiles save money — the bottom quintile saves $3,928/yr and even the top quintile saves $3,679/yr. The regressivity ratio improves from 11.1x to 2.8x — a 75% improvement (BLS, 2025; Texas Policy Research, 2025).

vs. The 89th Legislature's Incremental Approach

The 89th Legislature committed approximately $51 billion in property tax relief over the 2025–27 biennium, including raising the business personal property exemption to $125,000 (HB 9), increasing the homestead exemption to $140,000 ($150,000 for seniors) via SB 4/SJR 2, and attempting (but failing) to cap city/county revenue growth with SB 10 (Ballotpedia, 2025; Patrick, 2025).

The average homeowner savings from the increased homestead exemption is $496.57 per year (Patrick, 2025). Under the 5% plan, the average household saves $4,026 per year — eight times more.

North Dakota and Nebraska: Why They Failed

North Dakota voters rejected property tax elimination with 63.46% voting “No” in November 2024 (Ballotpedia, 2024a). Nebraska's swap attempt also failed (Jefferson, 2025). However, neither state had a plan that generated a surplus. Both proposed swaps that would strain budgets. Texas's position is unique: a $3.47 trillion gross sales base, the 8th-largest economy in the world, and a structural surplus even at a 5% rate (Texas Comptroller, 2025b; TPPF, 2022).

6
Competing Proposals Comparison
$86.6B+
5% Plan Replaces
All property taxes + franchise
$18–22B
Abbott Plan Replaces
Partial: school M&O only
$3–5B
89th Leg Relief
Per biennium, incremental
0
Others Help Renters
Only 5% plan covers renters
Why the 5% Plan Is Different
  • Scale: Replaces all $86.6B in property taxes — not partial, not incremental
  • Scope: Covers homeowners, renters, businesses, seniors — everyone
  • Simplicity: One tax, one rate, no exemptions, no appraisals
  • Sustainability: Grows with the economy; $30.6B+ surplus

Governor Abbott's 2026 Property Tax Platform

ComponentDescriptionLimitation
3% Appraisal CapLimit annual value growth to 3% for all propertyMimics CA Prop 13; shifts burden to new buyers
School M&O EliminationPhase out school M&O tax for homeownersHomeowners only; renters get nothing
Voter-Approval LimitsTighter rate caps for local governmentsDoesn't reduce existing rates
Homestead ExemptionIncrease homestead exemption amountOnly benefits homeowners
BPP ReliefTargeted business personal property exemptionsNarrow; doesn't address real property
ITEP Analysis

The Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy warns that Abbott's 3% appraisal cap mimics California's Proposition 13, which over decades shifted tax burdens dramatically onto younger buyers and new businesses while shielding long-term property holders. The result: generational inequity and reduced local revenue capacity (ITEP, 2025).

89th Legislature (2025) Property Tax Actions

BillActionEst. ReliefScope
HB 9Business Personal Property exemption increase$1.5BBusinesses only
SB 9Voter-approval rate cap: 3.5% → 2.5%$1.0BFuture increases only
Homestead Ex.Various increases to homestead exemption$1.5BHomeowners only
Total 89th Leg Relief$3–5B/biennium
Perspective

$3–5B in biennial relief against an $86.6B annual levy = less than 6% total relief. At this pace, it would take decades to meaningfully address the property tax burden — and values keep rising every year.

Think Tank Positions

OrganizationPositionKey ClaimError
TTARAReplacement impractical"Would require 19% rate"Uses narrow base ($750B vs $3,468B)
TPPFSupports property tax reductionFavors incremental approachInsufficient scale
Every TexanRegressivity concern"Hurts low-income families"Ignores PT regressivity (11.1x ratio)
The Denominator Problem

TTARA's 19% claim: $142.8B ÷ $750B (narrow base) = 19.0%. The Campbell plan: $142.8B ÷ $3,468.3B (full gross base) = 4.12%. Same numerator. Different denominator. The difference is whether you keep the exemptions or remove them.

Debunking the "Double-Digit" Rate Myth

TTARA Calculation

~19%

$142.8B ÷ $750B (narrow base)

Keeps all exemptions intact

The Math Is Simple
  • Current narrow taxable base: ~$801.6B (23.1% of economy)
  • Full gross sales base: $3,468.3B (100% of economy)
  • Same replacement need: $142.8B
  • Narrow base rate: $142.8B ÷ $750B = 19.0%
  • Full base rate: $142.8B ÷ $3,468.3B = 4.12%
  • No credible analyst has disputed the Comptroller's gross sales figures

Who Benefits Under Each Plan?

Group5% PlanAbbott Plan89th Legislature
HomeownersFull relief ($4,326+/yr)Partial relief (~$2,000/yr)Minimal (~$500/yr)
Renters (3.99M HH)Full relief (via rent)No reliefNo relief
Seniors (fixed income)Full relief + stabilityPartial (cap helps)Minimal
Small businessesFull: PT + franchise goneBPP exemption onlyBPP exemption only
New home buyersEqual treatmentDisadvantaged (Prop 13 effect)No change
Commercial propertyFull reliefCap only (still taxed)Minimal
City self-governanceCities set own rate & prioritiesState imposes limits on citiesState imposes caps on cities

Addressing Criticisms

"Sales taxes are regressive"

Correct in isolation. But the relevant comparison is the 5% plan vs. the current system. The current property tax system has a regressivity ratio of 11.1x. The 5% plan reduces it to 2.8x. All five quintiles save money. The net effect is progressive, not regressive.

More fundamentally, a sales tax ties the tax burden directly to individual spending choices — making “regressivity” a function of behavior, not circumstance. Consider an HD 109 household earning $45,000 per year:

  • If that family spends $35,000, they pay $1,750 in sales tax — 3.9% of income.
  • If that same family spends $25,000, they pay $1,250 in sales tax — 2.8% of income.

The family controls its own tax burden by controlling its own spending. Under property taxes, that same family has no such choice — the appraisal district sets the bill, the taxing entities set the rate, and the household pays regardless of income, spending, or financial circumstance. Regressivity is a meaningful concern when the taxpayer has no agency over the amount owed. A consumption tax returns that agency to the citizen.

"Taxing groceries hurts poor families"

At 5%, the additional cost on groceries for a low-income family is approximately $260/year ($5,200 × 5%). The property tax savings for that same family is $3,928–$4,200/year. The net benefit is $3,668–$3,940/year.

"Taxing B2B transactions creates cascading"

The NCSL estimates that B2B taxation creates an effective rate approximately 25% above the stated rate (NCSL, 2005). At 5%, that means an effective rate of approximately 6.25% after cascading. Compare that to what consumers and businesses pay today:

  • Current system: Taxed items carry an 8.25% combined rate at the register. Property taxes add another invisible layer — every business that owns property passes that cost forward in prices, every landlord includes it in rent, every manufacturer embeds it in cost of goods. The cascading already exists; it is simply invisible.
  • 5% flat system: Even with 25% B2B pyramiding, the effective rate is approximately 6.25% — still 2.0 percentage points below the current 8.25% rate consumers already pay on taxed items.

In other words, a consumer buying a television today pays 8.25% in sales tax. Under the 5% plan, even after accounting for the worst-case cascading estimate, the effective embedded tax on that same television falls to approximately 6.25%. The rate goes down, not up. Meanwhile, items currently exempt (groceries, services, B2B inputs) enter the tax base at 5% — but every business and household simultaneously sheds its entire property tax obligation. The net cost to the economy is lower, not higher, because the tax being eliminated (property tax at 2.0–2.6% of real property value, recurring annually) is more economically destructive than the tax being introduced (a visible, flat 5% on transactions).

"Revenue volatility"

The claim that sales tax revenue is volatile does not survive contact with the actual data. Texas Comptroller records show state sales tax collections have increased in six of the last seven fiscal years, including through the worst public health and economic disruption in a century:

Fiscal YearSales Tax RevenueYoY Change
FY 2019$34.0B
FY 2020 (COVID)$33.4B−2.0%
FY 2021$38.2B+14.5%
FY 2022$43.1B+12.8%
FY 2023$45.3B+5.2%
FY 2024$47.2B+4.1%
FY 2025$49.1B+4.0%

The worst disruption in modern history — a global pandemic that shut down entire sectors of the economy — produced a sales tax revenue decline of just 2.0% in a single year, followed by an immediate 14.5% recovery. Over the full seven-year period, cumulative growth was 44.2% (Texas Comptroller, 2025a; Texas Comptroller, 2025b). Acting Comptroller Kelly Hancock confirmed in January 2026 that collections were growing “well above the rate of general price inflation,” reflecting “a Texas economy that continues to expand at a moderate pace” (Texas Comptroller, 2026).

Under the 5% plan, the base expands from $750 billion (narrow, retail-heavy) to $3.47 trillion (all economic activity) — making it inherently less volatile, because essential spending categories (groceries, healthcare, utilities, professional services) are highly inelastic. The $30.6B annual surplus and dedicated Rainy Day Fund allocation ($5.7B/year) provide additional structural buffers that the current property tax system does not offer to homeowners facing annual appraisal-driven bill increases regardless of economic conditions.

Long-Term Sustainability

Factor5% PlanCurrent System
Revenue growth driverEconomic activity (GDP)Appraisal values (housing market)
VulnerabilityConsumer spending dipsHousing market crashes
Built-in buffer$30.6B annual surplus + $5.7B/yr to Rainy DayNo automatic buffer
Political sustainabilityBroad base = stable politicsAnnual complaints; constant reform pressure
Population growth effectMore transactions = more revenueMore homes = more appraisal burden
Inflation adjustmentAutomatic (prices rise = tax rises)Lag (appraisals trail market)

Comprehensive Side-by-Side Comparison

Dimension5% PlanAbbott 202689th Legislature
PT replaced$86.6B (all)~$18–22B (partial)$3–5B/biennium
Rate5% flat, all transactionsN/A (caps only)N/A (exemptions only)
ExemptionsNoneCurrent keptCurrent kept
Homeowner reliefFull ($5,500+/yr)Partial (~$2,000/yr)Minimal (~$500/yr)
Renter reliefYes (via rent)NoNo
Appraisal districtsEliminated (253)Kept (limited)Kept
Franchise taxEliminated ($7.08B)KeptKept
Revenue surplus$30.6B+/yearDeficit riskNeutral
Regressivity improvement11.1x → 2.8x (75%)Worsens for rentersNo change
Constitutional changeYes (Art. VIII)Yes (appraisal cap)No
Local controlCities set own rate within capState imposes caps & limitsState imposes caps
Property Tax Replacement Scale (Billions)

Section 6 Sources

Texas Tribune. (2025, December 11). Greg Abbott wants to cap home values. Experts warn it's risky. Texas Tribune. https://www.texastribune.org/2025/12/11/greg-abbott-property-tax-appraisal-plan-election-2026/

Texas Tribune. (2024, September 4). Texas would need about $81.5 billion a year to end property taxes, Senate committee told. Texas Tribune. https://www.texastribune.org/2024/09/04/texas-eliminate-property-tax-cost/

Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy. (2025, December 18). Texas property tax plan mimics California's damaging Prop 13. ITEP. https://itep.org/texas-property-tax-california-prop-13/

Texas Taxpayers and Research Association. (2025). Reducing taxes on personal property. TTARA. https://ttara.org/eliminating-taxes-on-personal-property-a-sigh-of-relief-for-texas-businesses/

Texas Legislature Online. (2025b). HB 9, 89th Legislature. https://legiscan.com/TX/text/HB9/id/3241192

Texas Policy Research. (2025). SB 9 — 89th Legislature 1st Special Session. https://www.texaspolicyresearch.com/bills/89th-legislature-1st-special-session-sb-9/

vs. Governor Abbott's 2026 Platform: Abbott's plan has five components but does not end property taxes. It reduces them for homeowners, but commercial property owners, renters, and future buyers still face the appraisal-driven system. ITEP notes the 3% cap mimics California's Proposition 13 (ITEP, 2025). Crucially, Abbott’s plan strips power from local cities by imposing state-level spending limits and voter-approval mandates — centralizing control in Austin rather than returning it to the citizens of each community. The 5% plan does the opposite: each city sets its own rate within its cap and governs its own priorities.

vs. TTARA's "19% Claim": TTARA uses the current narrow taxable sales base (~$750B). The Campbell plan uses the full $3.47 trillion gross base. Same numerator ($142.8B), different denominator. Result: 4.12%, not 19% (TTARA, 2024; Texas Comptroller, 2025b).

vs. Every Texan's Regressivity Argument: Valid for a rate increase on the narrow base, but this plan is different. The current PT system has an 11.1x regressivity ratio; the 5% plan reduces it to 2.8x. Moreover, a sales tax ties the burden to spending choices, not circumstances outside the taxpayer’s control — making regressivity a function of behavior, not a fixed structural outcome.

vs. 89th Legislature: HB 9, SB 9, and homestead increases provide $3–5B biennial relief against $86.6B annual levy — less than 6% relief (Texas Legislature Online, 2025b; Texas Policy Research, 2025).

B2B Cascading: The NCSL estimates B2B taxation adds ~25% to the effective rate (NCSL, 2005). At 5%, that produces an effective rate of approximately 6.25% after cascading — still 2.0 percentage points below the current 8.25% rate consumers already pay on taxed items. Property taxes already cascade invisibly through every business’s pricing; the 5% plan replaces an invisible, uncontrollable cascading tax with a visible, lower-rate one.

Revenue Volatility: Texas Comptroller data shows state sales tax collections grew from $34.0B (FY 2019) to $49.1B (FY 2025) — a 44.2% cumulative increase. Even during the COVID pandemic, revenue dropped only 2.0% in a single year before recovering 14.5% the next (Texas Comptroller, 2025a; Texas Comptroller, 2026). Under the 5% plan, the base expands from $750B to $3.47T, making it inherently less volatile. The $30.6B surplus and $5.7B/year Rainy Day Fund allocation provide additional structural buffers.

Legislative Path: Laws and Changes Required

Constitutional Requirements

A constitutional amendment — not merely a statute — is required because home rule cities (those over 5,000 population) derive their taxing authority directly from Art. XI, §5 of the Texas Constitution, not from legislative statute. Only a constitutional amendment can supersede this authority (Proctor v. Andrews, 972 S.W.2d 729, Tex. 1998). Texas has successfully used this path before: the state-level property tax was abolished by amendment in 1968 (Art. VIII, §1-e). Texas voters have approved 530 of 714 proposed amendments since 1876 — a 74.5% approval rate — including all 17 proposed in November 2025, with five property-tax-related measures passing at 65–89% support.

The amendment establishes rate caps for each level of government while retaining the existing 8.25% overall maximum for future flexibility. Critically, the amendment does not ban local taxation — it replaces the mechanism. Cities gain the authority to set their own sales tax rate within their cap, absorbing responsibility for schools and special districts within their jurisdiction. Citizens of each city, not Austin, decide how to allocate their local resources. The majority of the plan — franchise tax repeal, sales tax restructuring, revenue redistribution — can begin immediately by statute without waiting for the amendment (Tax Code Ch. 151, 171, 321).

#ProvisionRequired Change
1TX Constitution, Art. VIII, §1-eAuthorize unified consumption tax; establish tier caps (state 0.75%, county 0.75%, city 3.50%); supersede Art. XI, §5 home rule ad valorem authority
2TX Constitution, Art. VIII (8.25% cap)Retain overall 8.25% maximum to provide flexibility for future adjustments
3TX Constitution, Art. VIII (new section)Prohibit new local ad valorem tax levies; constitutional guarantee for existing bond obligations — sales tax revenue and Rainy Day Fund backstop existing GO bond debt service (~$20–25B/year) until maturity
4TX Constitution, Art. VIII, §21Authorize cities to absorb school district and special district taxing authority within their cap

Statutory Requirements (Texas Tax Code)

#Code SectionRequired Change
4Tax Code §151 (Sales Tax)Repeal entire exemption structure (§151.301–151.350)
5Tax Code §151.051 (Rate)Modify to reflect new 5% unified rate
6Tax Code Ch. 23 & 26 (Appraisal/Assessment)Repealed in full
7Tax Code Ch. 6 (Appraisal Districts)Dissolved; 253 CADs eliminated
8Tax Code Ch. 403, §221–225, Ch. 162Folded into unified 5% tax
9Tax Code Ch. 171 (Franchise Tax)Repealed in full

Education Finance Requirements

#Code SectionRequired Change
10Education Code Ch. 48 (FSP)Replace property-value formulas with sales-tax-revenue distribution
11Education Code §45.001 (Bonds)School district bond obligations (~$11.6B annual debt service) guaranteed by constitutional provision; payments funded from city 3.50% cap allocation and state Rainy Day Fund backstop

Bond Obligations

Texas local governments carry approximately $330.9 billion in outstanding debt, with general-obligation bonds pledged against property tax revenues and ~$20–25 billion in annual debt service. This is a legal covenant issue, not a funding issue — the plan’s $121.4B in local revenue exceeds total annual debt service by nearly 6x.

The recommended approach (detailed in Home Rule and the Constitutional Path to Ending Property Taxes in Texas) is Immediate Elimination with Constitutional Guarantee: the constitutional amendment prohibits all new property tax levies while including a constitutional guarantee — backed by the full faith and credit of the state, funded by the new sales tax revenue stream and the Rainy Day Fund allocation — ensuring existing bondholders continue to receive full debt service payments until maturity. Property taxes go to true zero for every homeowner on day one. Bondholders are protected by a constitutional guarantee that is legally stronger than the current ad valorem pledge, because it is backed by a $3.47 trillion economic base rather than local property assessments. No new general obligation bonds may be backed by property taxes from the effective date — future debt uses sales-tax revenue bonds, an established instrument with broad, diversified backing.

Precedents: California (Prop 13, 1978) restructured its tax system by constitutional amendment without impairing existing bonds. Michigan (Proposal A, 1994) eliminated school M&O property taxes and replaced them with sales tax revenue. Kansas (SB 488, 2026) provides the most detailed contemporary legislative template for a revenue replacement grant mechanism.

Local Government Requirements

#Code SectionRequired Change
12Local Government Code §140 et seq.Revise city/county budgeting to sales-tax revenue model; authorize cities to set rates within cap
13Special District enabling statutesTransition special district functions and funding authority to the cities they serve; cities absorb these obligations within their 3.50% cap
14Education Code / Local Government CodeTransfer school district funding authority to cities; cities fund schools from their 3.50% cap allocation per local budget priorities

Two-Track Implementation Timeline

The plan follows a two-track approach: the majority of the restructuring is statutory and can begin immediately, while the final prohibition on property tax levies requires a constitutional amendment. This means Texans begin seeing relief before the amendment is even on the ballot.

PhaseTimelineKey Actions
Phase 1: Statutory ActionsMonths 1–6Repeal franchise tax (Tax Code Ch. 171 — purely statutory). Restructure sales tax to 5% flat rate on all transactions (Tax Code Ch. 151 — purely statutory). Establish local sales tax redistribution framework (Tax Code Ch. 321). Begin revenue distributions to cities and counties under new formula. Repeal Tax Code §151 exemptions (§151.301–§151.350). POS system updates with grace period. No constitutional amendment required for any of these actions.
Phase 2: Constitutional AmendmentMonths 1–18File constitutional amendment to Art. VIII: establish tier caps (state 0.75%, county 0.75%, city 3.50%); retain 8.25% overall maximum; supersede Art. XI, §5 home rule ad valorem authority; prohibit new local property tax levies; include constitutional guarantee for existing bond obligations. Authorize cities to absorb school district and special district functions within their cap. Requires two-thirds vote of both chambers + voter ratification (Art. XVII, §1). Runs in parallel with Phase 1.
Phase 3: Full TransitionUpon ratificationAll property tax levies cease — property taxes go to true zero for every homeowner on day one of the effective date. Constitutional guarantee activates for existing bond debt service (~$20–25B/year). 253 CADs begin orderly wind-down. School funding fully transitions to city 3.50% cap allocation. Monthly sales tax distributions replace all former property tax revenue streams.
Phase 4: StabilizationYears 2–5+All 253 CADs complete dissolution. Existing bonds mature and sunset (10–20 year horizon). Future debt issued as sales-tax revenue bonds. Reserve fund established from $30.6B annual surplus. Annual review mechanism for rate adjustment. Rainy Day Fund ($24.8B+) provides structural buffer (Texas Comptroller, 2025c).

Answering Every Objection

The following are the nine most common objections to property tax elimination through sales tax replacement. Each is addressed with data. Click each objection to read the full response.

The regressivity argument applies to the wrong comparison. The relevant comparison is "5% flat sales tax vs. the current property tax system." Renters already pay property taxes through rent. Fixed-income seniors face rising bills on paid-off homes. The broad base changes the math when high-end financial transactions and B2B sales are included.

The numbers: Current system regressivity ratio is 11.1x (lowest quintile pays 11.1x the effective rate of the highest). Under the 5% plan, the ratio falls to 2.8x — a 75% improvement. All five income quintiles save money: Q1 saves $3,928/yr, Q2 saves $4,047/yr, Q3 saves $4,208/yr, Q4 saves $4,148/yr, Q5 saves $3,679/yr.

TTARA uses the wrong denominator. Their calculation: $142.8B ÷ $750B (narrow taxable base) = 19.0%. The Campbell plan: $142.8B ÷ $3,468.3B (full gross base) = 4.12%.

The difference is whether you keep the exemptions or remove them. No credible analysis has disputed the Comptroller's gross sales figures. The Q3 2025 data shows $867.1B in total gross sales — annualized to $3,468.3B. Each percentage point on this base yields roughly $34.7 billion. TTARA's analysis is mathematically correct for the wrong base; it is irrelevant to a plan that eliminates exemptions (Texas Comptroller, 2025b; TTARA, 2024).

The unified 5% rate is below 8.25%. The plan retains the 8.25% constitutional maximum specifically to provide room for future adjustments as the system is tested in practice. The constitutional amendment establishes tier caps — state 0.75%, county 0.75%, city 3.50% — while preserving the overall ceiling. The 5% rate is 39% below that maximum, leaving 3.25 percentage points of headroom for future legislatures to adjust if needed.

The amendment is about scope and governance: extending the sales tax to all transactions, establishing cap allocations, and authorizing cities to absorb school and special district funding within their cap. Cities — not Austin — determine their own rates and priorities within their allocation. Texas abolished the state-level property tax through exactly this process in 1968 (Art. VIII, §1-e), and the majority of the 5% plan — franchise tax repeal, sales tax restructuring, revenue redistribution — can begin immediately by statute without waiting for the amendment.

The 5% plan generates $173.4B annually — more than enough to fully fund the $81.9B combined education need (state $40.2B + school district PT $41.7B). Under this plan, cities absorb responsibility for the school districts they serve within their 3.50% cap. Schools receive guaranteed, stable funding from the city’s sales tax allocation — eliminating the dependency on local property values that creates funding inequality between wealthy and poor districts. Citizens hold their city council accountable for education funding decisions, rather than navigating a fragmented system of overlapping taxing entities none of which they directly control.

Existing school district bond obligations (~$11.6B in annual debt service) are protected by a constitutional guarantee backed by the new sales tax revenue stream and the Rainy Day Fund allocation — ensuring no bondholder is impaired and no school faces a funding gap during transition. Michigan successfully executed this exact model in 1994 (Proposal A), eliminating school M&O property taxes and replacing them with sales tax revenue.

The gross sales base ($3.47T) is dramatically less volatile than the narrow base ($750B) because it includes every economic sector, not just retail. Consumer spending on essentials (groceries, healthcare, utilities) is highly inelastic. The $30.6B surplus builds a dedicated reserve fund ($10B/year to Rainy Day Fund). Property taxes create their own cyclical instability — for households, they create annual affordability crises every time appraisals rise.

The 253 County Appraisal Districts employ an estimated 6,000–8,000 people statewide. Expanded Comptroller capacity to administer the unified sales tax creates offsetting employment. The net economic gain from eliminating compliance costs ($500M+ annually in business time, legal fees, and administrative overhead) far exceeds transition costs. A 3–5 year transition period with retraining provisions addresses workforce concerns.

No state has fully replaced property taxes with a consumption tax. But several states demonstrate the viability of the components: South Dakota, Wyoming, and Nevada operate without income taxes and with low property tax burdens. Alaska has no sales or income tax. Texas already has the infrastructure (Comptroller collection system), the political culture (no income tax), and the unique economic base ($3.47T gross sales) to be the first. Being first is not an argument against sound math — it is an argument for leadership.

Tax cascading (or “pyramiding”) occurs when a tax is applied at multiple stages of production, compounding through the supply chain. The NCSL estimates that B2B taxation creates an effective rate approximately 25% above the stated rate (NCSL, 2005).

Two responses. First, the rate is 5%, not 19%. Even with 25% pyramiding, the effective rate would be approximately 6.25% — the same as the current state sales tax rate. Second, property taxes already cascade. Every business that owns property passes that cost forward in prices. Every landlord includes property tax in rent. Every manufacturer includes property tax in cost of goods. The cascading is simply invisible. Replacing an invisible cascading tax with a visible, lower-rate consumption tax is a net improvement in transparency and efficiency.

Under the current system, most groceries are exempt from sales tax. Under the 5% plan, groceries would be taxed at 5%. For a family spending $8,000 per year on groceries, that is $400 per year in new grocery tax.

The same family is currently paying $3,723–$5,124 per year in property taxes (directly or through rent) (Texas Comptroller, 2024; U.S. Census Bureau, 2024). The exchange is $400 in new grocery tax versus $3,700+ in eliminated property tax. Net savings: $3,300+. The grocery tax objection isolates one cost without acknowledging the far larger savings. It is the equivalent of protesting a $400 charge while ignoring a $3,700 refund.

Full APA 7th Edition Annotated Bibliography

[1] Abbott, G. (2026, January 27). Governor Abbott discusses property tax relief with Joe Pags [Video]. Texas for Abbott Facebook. https://www.facebook.com/TexansForAbbott/videos/governor-abbott-discusses-property-tax-relief-with-joe-pags/1607183347391061/ Video interview in which Governor Abbott describes the “envelope” problem and outlines his five-point property tax reform plan.

[2] O’Connor Property Tax Reduction Experts. (2026, February 16). Texas Governor eyes eliminating school property taxes entirely with five-point reform plan. https://www.poconnor.com/texas-governor-eyes-eliminating-school-property-taxes-entirely-with-five-point-reform-plan/ Summary of Abbott’s five-point plan including local spending limits, two-thirds voter approval, rollback elections, 3% appraisal cap, and school M&O elimination for homeowners.

[3] Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts. (2025). State sales and use tax analysis quarterly report — Q3 2025, all industries by county. https://comptroller.texas.gov/transparency/local/quarterly-report/stxqtr01.php Primary data source for Q3 2025 gross sales ($867.1B), taxable sales ($200.4B), and the 23.1% taxable share.

[4] Texas Policy Research. (2025). Texas property tax levies 1998–2024. https://www.texaspolicyresearch.com/texas-property-tax-levies-1998-2024/ Comprehensive compilation of Texas Comptroller levy data showing total property tax levies by entity type from 1998 to 2024. The 2024 total of $86,596,765,086 was confirmed against Comptroller source files.

[5] Tax Foundation. (2025). State individual income tax rates and brackets. https://taxfoundation.org/data/all/state/state-income-tax-rates-2025/ Annual reference listing Texas among nine states with no personal income tax.

[6] Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts. (2025, September 3). Acting Texas Comptroller Kelly Hancock announces state revenue for fiscal 2025 [Press release]. https://comptroller.texas.gov/about/media-center/news/20250903-acting-texas-comptroller-kelly-hancock-announces-state-revenue-for-fiscal-2025-august-state-sales-tax-collections-1756843079560 Official announcement of FY2025 All Funds revenue ($183.05B), tax collections ($84.2B), sales tax ($49.06B), and franchise tax ($7.08B).

[7] Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts. (2025). 2025 state of Texas annual cash report [PDF]. https://comptroller.texas.gov/transparency/reports/cash-report/2025/96-368.pdf Detailed fiscal year 2025 financial statements. Confirms $183.0B total revenue, $84.2B tax collections, $49.06B sales tax, and $24.8B Rainy Day Fund balance.

[8] Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts. (n.d.). Franchise tax overview. https://comptroller.texas.gov/taxes/franchise/ Reference page for Texas franchise (margin) tax rates: 0.375% retail/wholesale, 0.75% all other, with $2.47M no-tax-due threshold.

[9] Texas Education Agency. (2025, December). Public education state funding transparency report [PDF]. https://tea.texas.gov/about-tea/government-relations-and-legal/government-relations/public-education-state-funding-transparency-dec-2025-final.pdf TEA report showing state-only FSP revenue of $30.40B in FY2025.

[10] U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2025). Consumer expenditure survey: Texas state table, 2022–2023. https://www.bls.gov/cex/tables/geographic/mean/2023/cu-state-tx-income-quintiles-before-taxes-2-year-average-2023.htm Texas-specific state table: income before taxes $91,099, annual expenditures $69,802, 11.39 million consumer units.

[11] U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2026). Consumer expenditures for the Dallas–Fort Worth metropolitan area, 2023–2024. https://www.bls.gov/regions/southwest/news-release/consumerexpenditures_dallasfortworth.htm DFW-specific data: income $117,340, spending $81,954. Houston: income $105,805, spending $85,377.

[12] Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts. (2024). Property tax levy data [Custom analysis]. Shows property tax burden as percentage of income: 22.59% for lowest quintile, 10.00% for second, 6.81% for third, 4.43% for fourth, and 2.04% for highest quintile.

[13] Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy. (2024, January 9). Texas: Who pays? 7th edition. https://itep.org/texas-who-pays-7th-edition/ ITEP analysis ranking Texas as the 7th most regressive state tax system.

[14] U.S. Census Bureau. (2024). QuickFacts: Texas. https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/TX/PST040224 Provides 10,747,240 households, 2.70 persons per household, and $76,292 median household income. Used to derive per-household property tax burden calculations.

[15] Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts. (2024). Property tax rates by taxing unit — Dallas County. https://comptroller.texas.gov/taxes/property-tax/rates/ Detailed tax rate data for all taxing units in Dallas County. Combined rates in HD 109 communities range from 2.2% to 2.6% of assessed value.

[16] Halbrook, S. (2024, November 7). Testimony to Senate Local Government Committee on property tax cuts [PDF]. Every Texan. https://everytexan.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/Halbrook-Testimony-on-Property-Taxes_Nov-7.pdf Testimony noting that 38% of Texas households are renters.

[17] Texas Taxpayers and Research Association. (2024, August). Should we eliminate local property taxes? [Research report PDF]. https://ttara.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/Research_Report_Eliminating_Local_Taxes.pdf TTARA’s definitive analysis concluding that replacing all property taxes requires a 19.27% combined sales tax rate on the current narrow base.

[18] Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts. (2025). State sales and use tax analysis quarterly report — Q1 2025, all industries by MSA. https://comptroller.texas.gov/transparency/local/quarterly-report/stxqtr04.php Q1 2025 data: gross sales $799.7B, taxable sales $186.4B (23.3%).

[19] Texas Geographic Information Office. (n.d.). Land parcels — Central Appraisal Districts. https://tnris.org/stratmap/land-parcels.html Confirms 253 Central Appraisal Districts in Texas.

[20] National Bureau of Economic Research. (2005, April). The lock-in effect of California’s Proposition 13. NBER Digest. https://www.nber.org/digest/apr05/lock-effect-californias-proposition-13 NBER research documenting that Prop 13’s assessment caps caused a 10% increase in homeowner tenure and 19% increase in renter tenure.

[21] Tax Policy Center. (2026, February 2). Eliminating school property taxes for Texas homeowners could backfire sooner rather than later. https://taxpolicycenter.org/taxvox/eliminating-school-property-taxes-texas-homeowners-could-backfire-sooner-rather-later Analysis warning that Abbott’s school M&O homeowner exemption creates a ~$20B annual gap.

[22] Jefferson, R. (2025, January 14). Policymakers unwisely propose cutting property taxes in favor of sales taxes. ITEP. https://itep.org/policymakers-unwisely-propose-cutting-property-taxes-in-favor-of-sales-taxes/ ITEP critique of property-to-sales-tax swaps. Notes Nebraska’s $2.6B plan failed.

[23] Ballotpedia. (2025). Texas Proposition 9, Authorize $125,000 Tax Exemption. https://ballotpedia.org/Texas_Proposition_9,_Authorize_$125,000_Tax_Exemption_for_Tangible_Property_Used_for_Income_Production_Amendment_(2025) Details of HB 9 raising business personal property exemption to $125,000.

[24] Patrick, D. (2025, February 13). Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick: Statement on passage of SB 4 and SJR 2 [Press release]. https://www.ltgov.texas.gov/2025/02/13/lt-gov-dan-patrick-statement-on-the-unanimous-passage-of-senate-bill-4-and-senate-joint-resolution-2-increasing-the-homestead-exemption-to-140000-and-150000-for-seniors/ SB 4/SJR 2 raising homestead exemption to $140,000 ($150,000 for seniors), savings of $496.57 per year.

[25] Texas Public Policy Foundation. (2022, January). Lower taxes, better Texas: Eliminating property taxes [PDF, updated]. https://www.texaspolicy.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/2021-07-RR-Ginn-Quintero-Antoni-RTT-Eliminating-Property-Taxes-updated-1-22.pdf TPPF’s proposal for property tax elimination via a broader sales tax base at 10%.

[26] Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts. (2025, November 5). Acting Texas Comptroller Kelly Hancock releases state of Texas annual cash report [Press release]. https://comptroller.texas.gov/about/media-center/news/20251105-acting-texas-comptroller-kelly-hancock-releases-state-of-texas-annual-cash-report-1762292140209 Confirms Rainy Day Fund at record $24.8 billion.

[27] Texas Constitution, Article VIII — Taxation and Revenue. https://statutes.capitol.texas.gov/Docs/CN/htm/CN.8.htm Full text of Article VIII governing all Texas taxation.

[28] Ballotpedia. (2024). North Dakota Initiated Measure 4, Prohibit Taxes on Assessed Value of Real Property Initiative (2024). https://ballotpedia.org/North_Dakota_Initiated_Measure_4,_Prohibit_Taxes_on_Assessed_Value_of_Real_Property_Initiative_(2024) North Dakota voters rejected property tax elimination 63.46%–36.54% in November 2024.

[29] Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts. (2025). Rainy Day Fund reaches its cap. Fiscal Notes. https://comptroller.texas.gov/economy/fiscal-notes/government/2025/esf-info/ ESF balance projections: $24.28B (FY2025), $27.43B (FY2026 projected). Texas GSP exceeds $2.7 trillion.

[30] National Conference of State Legislatures. (2005, January 25). Sales taxation of business inputs [PDF]. https://documents.ncsl.org/wwwncsl/Task-Forces/SALT/Business-Inputs-Study.pdf NCSL study finding B2B taxation creates effective tax rates ~25% above the stated rate.

[31] Fechter, J. (2025, December 9). Will Abbott’s plan to end property taxes for schools work? The Texas Tribune. https://www.texastribune.org/2025/12/09/greg-abbott-schools-property-tax-cut-election-2026/ Texas Tribune analysis of Abbott’s school property tax elimination plan.

[32] TPR Texas Public Radio. (2025, December 11). Gov. Greg Abbott wants a tighter lid on home values. https://www.tpr.org/news/2025-12-11/gov-greg-abbott-wants-a-tighter-lid-on-home-values-tax-policy-experts-warn-thats-a-bad-idea Expert criticism of Abbott’s 3% appraisal cap.

[33] U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2025, December 19). Consumer expenditure survey, 2024 annual report [PDF]. https://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/cesan.pdf National 2024 averages: income $104,207, expenditures $78,535.

[34] Texas Tribune. (2025, September 3). Proposal limiting Texas city, county property taxes dies in the legislature. https://www.texastribune.org/2025/09/03/texas-city-county-property-tax-cap/ SB 10 (city/county revenue cap) died in conference committee.

[35] Texas Tribune. (2026, January 27). Texas population 2025 Census. https://www.texastribune.org/2026/01/27/texas-population-2025-census/ Texas population reached 31.7 million as of July 2025.

[36] Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts. (2025). State of Texas ACFR, fiscal year 2025: Statistical section — expenditures by function. https://comptroller.texas.gov/transparency/reports/cash-report/2025/ FY 2025 totals: $181.7B total expenditures, including $40.2B education, $84.8B Health & Human Services.

[37] Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts. (2025, January). Biennial Revenue Estimate 2026–27: Sales taxes and total tax collections [Infographic]. https://comptroller.texas.gov/about/media-center/infographics/2025/bre26-27/collections.php Official Comptroller historical table showing annual state sales tax revenue from FY 2019 ($34.024B) through FY 2024 ($47.160B). Used to establish the historical trend of steady sales tax revenue growth, including only a 2.0% decline during the COVID year (FY 2020) with immediate 14.5% recovery in FY 2021.

[38] Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts. (2026, February 2). State sales tax revenue totaled $4.6 billion in January [Press release]. https://comptroller.texas.gov/about/media-center/news/20260202-state-sales-tax-revenue-totaled-46-billion-in-january-1770057894882 Official monthly revenue announcement: $4.6 billion in January 2026, up 7.1% year-over-year. Acting Comptroller Kelly Hancock stated collections were growing “well above the rate of general price inflation.”

© 2026 Wilson Campbell. All data sourced from official Texas Comptroller, U.S. Census Bureau, and U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics publications.

Previous
Previous

Safeguarding Truth and Identity in the Digital Age: The Protecting Truth and Identity Act