Constitutional Amendment 2 — Ban statewide property tax
Lean: Yes Close call Prudential judgment November 3, 2026Plain summary
Yes. Bars the Legislature from levying, authorizing, or otherwise permitting any state tax on real, personal, or mixed property. The change moves that one power away from the state Legislature. Local property taxes stay. Tennessee has collected no state property tax since 1949, per the legislature's fiscal notes, so the practical stakes are small.
No. Leaves the Legislature able to enact a state property tax by ordinary law. That power has gone unused since 1949. No is current law, not a neutral abstention.
Stated facts
Senate Joint Resolution 1 amends the first sentence of Article II, Section 28 so the Legislature shall not levy, authorize, or otherwise permit any state tax upon real, personal, or mixed property. The official sentence does not abolish local property taxes and states no revenue figure. The General Assembly Fiscal Review Committee note on Senate Joint Resolution 3 of the 111th General Assembly says Public Chapter 90 of 1949 repealed the last levied state property tax and that the state does not currently collect state property taxes, though it would forgo any future revenue from levying one. The fiscal note on Senate Joint Resolution 1 of the 114th General Assembly, dated December 20, 2024, lists a one-time local publishing cost of $9,400 and no change to state revenue. The Department of Revenue says it does not collect property tax. County and city bodies set and collect it. Restoring a state property tax after a Yes would take the Article XI, Section 3 amendment process, not an ordinary statute.
Lane table
| Lane | Yes | No (current law) | Scripture |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lawful tribute and the government's ability to meet its duties Scripture command Tribute stays lawful through other taxes and through local property taxes. Scripture does not rank one instrument above another. | Not violated | Keeps every instrument | ; |
| Restraint of civil authority on taxing power Prudential judgment 1 Samuel 8:11-18 is a prudential illustration of oppressive taking, always paired with Romans 13:6-7. It is not a command to ban this tax. The lean moves this power away from the state Legislature. | Stronger | Dormant power | ; |
| Restraint of civil authority Prudential judgment The five tests run on both options. Deuteronomy 17:18-20 is the general principle that rulers are under written law. It is not a warrant for this tax limit. Deuteronomy 17:16-17 is left out. 1 Samuel 8 stays an illustration, paired with Romans 13:6-7. | Stronger | Dormant power | ; ; |
| Test: Legitimate purpose Scripture command Limiting this tax and keeping it are both lawful. Scripture does not rank the instruments. | Legitimate | Legitimate | ; |
| Test: Justice to the individual Scripture command | Not implicated | Not implicated | |
| Test: Proportion Scripture command | Not implicated | Not implicated | |
| Test: Fit Prudential judgment Prudential. The bar is a state tax only. Local property taxes stay. Not a least-restrictive-means test. | Fitted to the wrong | Dormant power | |
| Test: Accountability Scripture command Deuteronomy 17:18-20 supports rulers under written law in general. It does not tell which tax limits are good. | Stronger | Dormant power | ; |
Lanes in tension: Lawful tribute and the government's ability to meet its duties versus Restraint of civil authority on taxing power.
Counted gaps
Protections the text omits. They count against the measure and do not change the lean into a condition.
- The text has no emergency or exception clause. A future state need could not use a state property tax without another amendment. That is a prudential cost, not a command breach.
Watch notes
These notes do not change the lean.
- How "authorize, or otherwise permit any state tax" is read against a state-mandated or state-administered local levy. The text does not settle that legal question.
- Whether the change shifts pressure toward other state taxes. That question is prudential and is not graded.
Lean and why
Lean: Yes. Prudential judgment Prudential judgment. Scripture doesn't settle it; Christians may vote either way. Scripture treats tribute as lawful and does not rank one kind of tax above another. On this close call the same tiebreaker, applied the same way as on the bail amendment, prefers the option that adds less unchecked power. Yes moves one taxing power away from the state Legislature and adds none. Tennessee has collected no state property tax since 1949, per the legislature's fiscal notes, so the practical stakes are small. The under-protection cost of Yes is that a future state need could not use this tax without another amendment. No keeps a dormant power that an ordinary statute can revive. Scripture: ; ; ;
Overreach check
Yes removes one state taxing power and grants none. Local property taxes and the clause that property is subject to taxation stay in the text. No command is broken on either side.
Caveats
In Tennessee, a blank on an amendment works like a No for anyone voting for governor (Tennessee Constitution, Article XI, Section 3; Tennessee Secretary of State). This is the counting rule. It is not a request to vote. 1 Samuel 8 is an illustration only. Deuteronomy 17:16-17 is not used. Westminster Confession of Faith 20 is not the warrant for the tiebreaker.