How California’s Proposition 15 Would Have Impacted Commercial Real Estate

 December 4, 2020

By  Guy Gray

One proposition that didn’t receive as much coverage as others during the 2020 election was the proposal of Proposition 15 in California. This proposition is particularly interesting for commercial real estate (CRE) professionals, as it would have rolled back property tax increase restrictions for the first time in more than four decades. 

It was rejected.

It begs the question, though: how would this have impacted commercial real estate lease taxes? Let’s take a look to see what could have been (and what may be possible in the future).

Revised Proposition 13

For starters, Proposition 15 would have revised part of Proposition 13, which was passed in California in 1978. According to the California government, Proposition 13 “provides three very important functions in property tax assessments in California. Under Prop 13, all real property has established base year values, a restricted rate of increase on assessments of no greater than 2% each year, and a limit on property taxes to 1% of the assessed value (plus additional voter-approved taxes).” Since the proposal was rejected, Proposition 13 will remain the same.

Increased Taxes for $3M+ Properties

Proposition 15 would also have increased taxes for properties valued at $3 million or more. It wouldn’t have affected private properties or small businesses, which would still be taxed based on their purchase price. For commercial properties that qualify for tax increases under Proposition 15, they would have been taxed based on their market value (aka a “split roll.”) With the rejection of Proposition 15, CRE properties will continue to be taxed based on the purchase price of the property.

More Revenues for the State

California officials have been trying to figure out a way to increase tax revenues for some time now—without causing a taxpayer uprising. It’s estimated that Proposition 15 would have increased tax revenue by $8-12 billion annually for the state, with most of the money going to schools and local governments. Now, the state will have to find a new source of revenue.

Raised Cost of Living

It’s easy to see how Proposition 15 also would have possibly contributed to a higher cost of living for California residents. CRE landlords would be forced to charge higher rent for small businesses to offset the cost, which would then be passed along directly to consumers. Instead, the resulting effect of no tax increase on these commercial real estate properties should have the same net effect on the end consumer – no increased cost of living.

Quarem can help you stay updated about all of the latest market news and insights in your area. To see the CRE software for yourself, request a demo today.

You Might Also Like:

6 Strategies for Expanding Your Commercial Real Estate Portfolio
The Secret to FASB and ASC 842 Compliance

About the author 

Guy Gray

Guy Gray serves as Chief Operating Officer overseeing our technology and client services teams. He is responsible for guiding Quarem application development, networking and security, as well as new client implementations.

{"email":"Email address invalid","url":"Website address invalid","required":"Required field missing"}

Get Started With Quarem

Less headaches. More Control.  A better way to manage your leases.

See Quarem in action.  Get a Demo >