Miami Beach, Florida

HJR 1 Homestead-Exemption Tax-Base Exposure

Miami-Dade County . 2025 final assessment roll

Snapshot

HJR 1 exposure at full $250,000 phase-in (2028)	4.1%
Exposure at the $150,000 step (2027)	2.3%
Exposure band	Very low exposure
Total parcels	53,001
Total residential housing units	64,893
Owner-occupied (homestead) units	22.7%
Out-of-state owned units	20.6%
Florida-owned non-homestead units	56.8%
Archetype	Renter-Heavy

The Miami Beach read

Miami Beach fits the Renter-Heavy archetype. A majority of the residential housing is not owner-occupied: 55% or more of units are rentals or second homes, and most of the non-owner stock is owned by Floridians — in-state landlords and second-home owners — making this a local-ownership rental market rather than an absentee one. Owner-occupancy is a minority of the housing. At full $250,000 phase-in in 2028, HJR 1 exposure sits at 4.1%, with the 2027 step landing at 2.3%. Exposure runs lower than a homeowner town because the amendment only helps homestead owners and most units here are non-homestead; the insulation is real, but it reflects a community where most residents rent rather than own.

Of 64,893 residential housing units, 22.7% are owner-occupied, 20.6% are owned by out-of-state owners, and 56.8% are non-homestead but Florida-owned. Miami Beach ranks 388 of 404 cities by exposure statewide — meaning it sits among the least-exposed cities in Florida. That low rank is not a fiscal achievement; it is a structural signal about who owns the city.

Land-use composition

Share of taxable value by category, Miami Beach, 2025 roll:

Land-use category	Share of value	% of parcels out-of-state	% of value out-of-state
Residential	74.9%	19.8%	17.7%
Commercial	13.0%	20.3%	30.9%
Multifamily	5.0%	14.4%	27.1%
Other/Vacant	3.9%	5.4%	18.6%
Govt/Public	2.6%	0.8%	0.3%
Institutional	0.5%	5.4%	11.5%
Industrial	0.2%	33.3%	23.3%
Agricultural	0.0%	6.2%	1.1%

What the exposure band means

Band: Very low exposure. The amendment barely registers. Usually because the base is owned by out-of-state owners or commercially deep. The risk here is not the amendment; it is whatever made exposure this low — often that residents do not own their own town.

Looking ahead

Neither of the following changes the exposure figure above; both shape how Miami Beach grows its base after the amendment takes effect.

First, beginning January 1, 2027, the annual assessment-increase cap on non-homestead property drops from 10% to 5%, covering commercial and industrial real property and small residential rentals of nine units or fewer. Because capped values can only rise 5% a year, the main path to growing taxable value in these categories is transactions: a sale or change of control resets assessed value to market. Transaction velocity matters more to non-homestead base growth than it did under the old 10% cap.

Second, new Florida residents who did not maintain a Florida permanent residence as of December 31, 2026 phase into the larger exemption over five years rather than receiving it all at once. This cannot be read from the roll, so the figures above assume full application of the exemption to every homestead. Near-term exposure could run slightly lower than modeled in places with many recent arrivals still inside their five-year window.

Where the opportunity is

These recommendations are based solely on the tax roll’s land-use composition. They do not account for whether local land development regulations and zoning permit the uses described, whether there is local obstruction, or the political dynamics that usually decide what actually gets approved. This is a starting point for a conversation, not a development plan.

Miami Beach’s low exposure is a housing-and-ownership signal, not a fiscal win. Most residents do not own where they live, and the base rests heavily on rental housing and a commercial layer that, at 13.0% of value, is meaningful but not dominant. The first priority is growing taxable commercial, light-industrial, and employment value so the base does not rest mainly on rental housing; existing commercial corridors and the commercial core are the natural target for that deepening.
Rental housing is already the dominant tenure and is non-homestead, so well-managed rental and missing-middle housing adds taxable base without displacing residents; supporting deed-restricted and professionally managed rental supply is consistent with both fiscal and affordability goals.
Where resident stability and ownership are community goals, any owner-occupied housing push should be paired with anti-displacement measures; new owner-occupied homestead housing is the one category the amendment exempts, so it is a community-values decision, not a tax-base move.

Watch-out: Renter-heavy with mostly Florida landlords is a local rental market, not absentee ownership — do not describe it as outside-owned. High rental share at modest values still usually signals an affordability and local-wealth issue, not a tax-base achievement.

Source and scope

All figures are drawn from the Florida Department of Revenue 2025 final assessment roll, the most recent certified roll in the state’s possession. The roll is used as a structural proxy for tax-base composition, not as a dollar forecast for any specific budget year. HJR 1 / CS-HJR 1F is on the November 2026 ballot; the 2026 roll is the assessment roll in place when voters decide. If the amendment passes, the first roll actually affected is the 2027 roll (the $150,000 step), with full $250,000 phase-in on the 2028 roll. When the 2026 and later rolls are certified, the analysis re-runs on the new data.

Ownership shares are measured on a residential-unit basis; “out-of-state” is a mailing-address proxy that undercounts true outside ownership and does not prove where an owner lives. This is a land-use-composition starting point, not a full fiscal, economic, or legal plan.