Help us improve in just 2 minutes—share your thoughts in our reader survey.
San Francisco, California, Proposition I, Real Estate Transfer Tax (November 2020)
| San Francisco Proposition I | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Election date November 3, 2020 | |
| Topic Local sales tax and City tax | |
Status Approved | |
| Type Referral | Origin Lawmakers |
San Francisco Proposition I was on the ballot as a referral in San Francisco on November 3, 2020. It was approved.
A “yes” vote supported authorizing an increase to the transfer tax rate on real estate sales and leases of 35 years or more, to 5.5% on transactions of $10 million to $25 million and to 6% on transactions of $25 million or more, generating an estimated $196 million per year. |
A “no” vote opposed authorizing an increase to the transfer tax rate on real estate sales and leases of 35 years or more, to 5.5% on transactions of $10 million to $25 million and to 6% on transactions of $25 million or more, generating an estimated $196 million per year. |
A simple majority was required for the approval of Proposition I.
Election results
|
San Francisco Proposition I |
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Result | Votes | Percentage | ||
|
|
235,884 | 57.55% | ||
| No | 173,984 | 42.45% | ||
Text of measure
Ballot question
The ballot question was as follows:[1]
| “ | Shall the City permanently increase the transfer tax rate on sales and leases of 35 years or more of real estate, to 5.50% on those transactions of $10 million to $25 million, and to 6.00% on those transactions of $25 million or more, for an estimated average revenue of $196 million a year?[2] | ” |
Ballot simplification digest
The following summary of the measure was prepared by the office of the Ballot Simplification Committee:
| “ | The Way It Is Now: The City collects a transfer tax on certain sales as well as leases of 35 years or more of residential and commercial real estate in San Francisco. The tax rate usually depends on the real estate’s sale price. The current transfer tax rates are:
If property is sold to the City, the transfer tax does not apply. If property is sold to qualified affordable housing nonprofits, the transfer tax rate is no greater than 0.75%. State law limits the amount of revenue, including tax revenue, the City can spend each year. State law authorizes San Francisco voters to approve increases to this limit for a maximum of four years. The money collected from this tax goes into the City’s General Fund. The Proposal: Proposition I would increase the transfer tax rate on certain sales as well as leases of 35 years or more of real estate with a price of at least $10 million. For property with a sale price of less than $10 million, the current tax rate would not change. The proposed tax rates are:
The transfer tax rate increase would not apply if property is sold to the City or to qualified affordable housing nonprofits. Proposition I would also increase the state’s limit on the City’s annual tax revenue spending by the amount of additional taxes collected under the proposed rate increases. The increased limit would last for four years. A 'YES' Vote Means: If you vote 'yes,' you want to increase the transfer tax rate on sales as well as leases of 35 years or more of real estate with a price of at least $10 million. A 'NO' Vote Means: If you vote 'no,' you do not want to make these changes.[2] |
” |
_chart2.png)
_chart_1.png)
Full text
The full text of the measure is available here.
Support
Yes on I led the campaign in support of Proposition I. Click here for a full list of endorsements for the campaign.[3]
Supporters
Individuals
|
Organizations
|
Official arguments
The official arguments in support of Proposition I were authored by the Yes on I campaign:[1]
| “ | Prop I is a simple proposition. It asks those who are selling properties valued at $10 million or more—primarily large corporations or real estate trusts—to pay a higher tax when they sell their property. The revenue will help those who have suffered most during the pandemic.
There is no change to this transfer tax for the average homeowner or property owner because taxes on properties sold for less than $10 million will remain the same. At a time when San Francisco faces a $1.7 billion projected deficit over the next two years, this progressive tax measure will generate much-needed emergency funds. Prop I is also an important step to prevent a wave of evictions that will increase homelessness due to renters being unable to make rent payments because of the pandemic. In August, the Board of Supervisors unanimously passed a resolution making emergency rent relief and permanently affordable housing a top priority for new revenue. This will help renters who have lost jobs and income, and will also help small landlords who depend on rental income to live. Billionaires like Jeff Bezos, whose net worth increased over $73 billion during the pandemic, are doing great. But working San Franciscans are struggling with disease and unemployment. It's time to ask those selling buildings worth more than $10 million to pay a little more to help those in need. Please join us and Vote Yes on I.[2] |
” |
Opposition
Opponents
- San Francisco Apartment Association[1]
- The Committee for San Francisco Economic Recovery[1]
- San Francisco Housing Coalition[1]
- San Francisco Association of Realtors[1]
- Chinese Real Estate Association of America[1]
- Coalition Against Unfair Housing Legislation[1]
- Coalition for Better Housing[1]
- San Francisco Taxpayers Association[1]
- Libertarian Party of San Francisco[5]
Official arguments
The official arguments in opposition to Proposition I were authored by Gwen Kaplan, Rodney Fong, Larry Mazzola Jr., and Mary Jung:[1]
| “ | Vote NO on Proposition I to protect small neighborhood businesses and affordable housing.
COVID-19 has thrown San Francisco into our deepest economic downturn in over 20 years: over 175,000 unemployment claims and 50% of all storefront businesses closed indefinitely. This immediate tax increase will devastate small businesses by taxing neighborhood stores, restaurants, bars, and nail salons. It will deepen our recession and push more small businesses into bankruptcy because:
The heart and soul of our City - mom and pop businesses - are already facing an impossible situation. They're making incredibly difficult choices about what to do with their spaces, and Proposition I will only give them a heavier burden. Proposition I will also cost us thousands of new housing units, including hundreds of affordable housing units, and hundreds of union construction jobs. These are desperately-needed homes, and Proposition I will make housing more expensive in San Francisco. Even worse, Proposition I has no controls on how the money can be spent. City Hall doesn't need more money; it needs to do better with the money it already has. The City's budget has doubled in the last 10 years - while homelessness has skyrocketed and essential services have been cut. Proposition I hurts the many neighborhood stores, restaurants, bars, and nail salons who are struggling just to stay afloat during the COVID-19 crisis. Stop this effort to raise taxes on struggling small businesses at the most devastating economic time in history. Vote NO on Proposition I.[2] |
” |
Media editorials
- See also: 2020 ballot measure media endorsements
Support
- San Francisco Bay Guardian: “There aren’t a lot of ways that San Francisco can legally tax the rich; state law, for example, bars a city income tax. But taxing high-end real-state sales is one step in that direction. Prop. I would increases taxes on properties that sell for more than $10 million. It would impact almost no residential property (and anyone who sells a house for $10 million can afford to pay a few thousand more in taxes). Vote yes."[6]
- Bay Area Reporter: "The revenue will help those who have suffered the most during the pandemic, he explained, by providing much needed revenue to the city. (There is no change to the transfer tax for the average homeowner or property owner.) The progressive tax measure will generate much-needed emergency funds, especially with San Francisco facing a deficit of $1.7 billion due to the pandemic. Vote YES on Prop I."[7]
Opposition
- San Francisco Chronicle: “Its prime advocate, Supervisor Dean Preston, argues that large businesses are poised to scoop up recession-hit properties and the measure would act as a brake on speculation. But it’s also a business tax at an economic low point. It could chill land sales needed to build housing, in fact. It also sets the table for a future argument: Should City Hall use the proceeds to get in the housing development business? Vote No.”[8]
Background
Real estate transfer tax rates in Bay Area cities
Real estate transfer taxes are a percent of a property's sale price and vary from fixed to graduated rates by local jurisdictions.
The table below shows the combined city and county real estate transfer tax for property sold in other large Bay Area cities:[9]
| City | Combined city and county transfer tax rate (2020) |
|---|---|
| San Jose | 0.86%–1.61% |
| San Francisco | 0.50%–3.00% |
| Oakland | 1.11%–2.61% |
| Fremont | 0.165% |
| Santa Rosa | 0.31% |
Real estate transfer tax rates in other large California cities
The table below shows the combined city and county real estate transfer tax for property sold in other large California cities:[9]
| City | Combined city and county transfer tax rate (2020) |
|---|---|
| Los Angeles | 0.56% |
| San Diego | 0.11% |
| San Jose | 0.86%–1.61% |
| San Francisco | 0.50%–3.00% |
| Fresno | 0.11% |
| Sacramento | 0.385% |
| Long Beach | 0.11% |
| Oakland | 1.11%–2.61% |
| Bakersfield | 0.11% |
| Anaheim | 0.11% |
Path to the ballot
This measure was put on the ballot through a proposed ordinance by Supervisors Gordon Mar, Dean Preston, Matt Haney, Hillary Ronen, and Shamann Walton submitted on June 12, 2020.[1]
See also
External links
Support |
OppositionSubmit links to editor@ballotpedia.org. |
Footnotes
- ↑ 1.00 1.01 1.02 1.03 1.04 1.05 1.06 1.07 1.08 1.09 1.10 1.11 1.12 1.13 1.14 1.15 1.16 1.17 1.18 1.19 1.20 1.21 1.22 1.23 1.24 1.25 San Francisco Elections Office, "Qualified Local and District Measures," accessed October 12, 2020
- ↑ 2.0 2.1 2.2 2.3 Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributable to the original source.
- ↑ Yes on I, "Home," accessed October 14, 2020
- ↑ 4.0 4.1 4.2 4.3 California Choices, "San Francisco Ballot Endorsements," accessed October 20, 2020
- ↑ California Choices, "San Francisco Ballot Endorsements," accessed October 20, 2020
- ↑ San Francisco Bay Guardian, "Endorsements Fall 2020," October 1, 2020
- ↑ Bay Area Reporter, "Editorial: Vote yes on all SF props," September 23, 2020
- ↑ San Francisco Chronicle, “Editorial: San Francisco ballot recommendations cover taxes, housekeeping and social change.,” October 6, 2020
- ↑ 9.0 9.1 SPUR, "Proposition I," accessed October 15, 2020
 |
State of California Sacramento (capital) |
|---|---|
| Elections |
What's on my ballot? | Elections in 2025 | How to vote | How to run for office | Ballot measures |
| Government |
Who represents me? | U.S. President | U.S. Congress | Federal courts | State executives | State legislature | State and local courts | Counties | Cities | School districts | Public policy |
