Florida Budget Proposals in Brief (FY 2025-26): Tax and Revenue

Introduction

The Legislature is at a standstill, with two seemingly competing visions for the future of taxes in Florida. On the one hand, the House of Representatives advanced House Bill (HB) 7033 with various changes to the state’s general sales tax, as well as changes to local tourist development taxes. On the other hand, the Senate’s omnibus tax bill, Senate Bill 7034, resembles previous tax packages since it includes a slew of sales tax holidays; however, the legislation also offers permanent tax exemptions for consumers. The House’s tax package would cost Floridians nearly $5.5 billion, whereas the Senate’s plan would cost almost $2.1 billion. The size and scope of these proposals would impact the state’s ability to invest in programs and services; Consequently, the chambers’ disagreement also extends to their respective budget recommendations. The House’s budget proposal for FY 2025-26 (HB 5001) totals $113 billion, while the Senate’s budget totals $117.4 billion (Senate Bill 2500).[1],[2]

Due to the differences between the House and Senate, lawmakers will adjourn on May 2 — the last day of Florida’s 2025 regular session — without having passed the final budget. The goal of this brief is to highlight key general sales tax provisions in the tax packages that are at the heart of ongoing disputes and negotiations.

When it Comes to Tax Cuts, Context Matters

According to the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy (ITEP), Florida has the most regressive tax code in the nation, as the 20 percent of Florida taxpayers with the lowest income bear an effective state and local tax rate that is nearly five times that of the top 1 percent of households.[3] This is a result of a state government that relies on consumption taxes for over 75 percent of its general revenue.[4]

Tax reform is long overdue, to ease the tax burden of over 4 million households currently struggling to make ends meet,[5] and to balance the state budget so that Floridians have recurring (or permanent) access to programs and services that improve their quality of life and help those who need it the most. At the same time, any attempt to reform Florida’s tax code cannot ignore the realities of the current moment:

  1. Florida law requires policymakers to pass a balanced budget annually. This means that any tax reduction must be balanced with budget cuts, higher taxes, or a combination of both.
  2. The federal government currently finances roughly 32 percent of Florida’s budget.[6] In light of ongoing uncertainty about the scope of federal budget cuts, especially for basic needs programs and Medicaid, any state-level reduction could become more costly if policymakers are put in a position where they must decide whether to let millions of Floridians lose access to essential services due to federal budget slashing.
  3. The state government could be facing a deficit of nearly $3 billion -$7 billion by FY 2027-28.[7] According to the latest Long-Range Financial Outlook, if policymakers continue spending as they have over the past three fiscal years, spending will inevitably surpass revenue collections, leading to substantial budget cuts.
  4. Nearly eight out of 10 flexible spending dollars come from consumption taxes, which are sensitive to economic disruptions.[8] While there is uncertainty about the chances of a widespread economic recession, a downturn would disrupt sales tax revenue, making it difficult to balance the state budget.

While Floridians need tax reform, they deserve good quality public services as well. Without a plan to raise revenue — whether it is to prevent a multibillion-dollar deficit, safeguard access to service due to drastic federal changes, or prepare for a recession — significant tax cuts will offer little relief and prevent lawmakers from tackling ongoing budget challenges.

In terms of urgent budget challenges: nearly 50 percent of households in Florida cannot afford necessities like housing, child care, food, transportation, and health care.[9] Three-quarters of Florida prisons lack A/C;[10] over 2.5 million Floridians are without health coverage;[11] and thousands of homebound adults and individuals with disabilities are stuck on long waitlists for home- and community-based care.[12] Yet, state and local funding for public services has trailed behind most of the country, as 44 other states and D.C. invest more on a per capita basis.[13]

While Floridians need tax reform, they deserve good quality public services as well. Without a plan to raise revenue — whether it is to prevent a multibillion-dollar deficit, safeguard access to service due to drastic federal changes, or prepare for a recession — significant tax cuts will offer little relief and prevent lawmakers from tackling ongoing budget challenges.

Neither the House nor the Senate raise revenue to pay for proposed tax cuts in their respective tax packages (HB 7033 and SB 7034). Consequently, since both bills include permanent changes, Floridians will pay for “relief” at the expense of other area of the state budget on a recurring basis.

Permanent Sales Tax Policy Changes

The flagship policy in the House’s tax plan (HB 7033) is a 0.75 percentage-point reduction to the state’s 6 percent general sales tax, intended to offer about $5 billion in annual savings to consumers.[14] Moreover, HB 7033 includes a 0.75 percentage-point reduction to the sales tax businesses pay on commercial leases, plus several other sales tax cuts (electricity, new mobile homes, coin-operated amusement machines, and select vending machines).[15] The Senate’s tax package (SB 7034) includes a permanent sales tax exemption on clothing and shoes with a sales price of $75 or less per item, which, per the state’s Revenue Estimating Conference, will cost between $963 million to $1.1 billion annually.[16] (See Table 1.)

Although these proposals aim to provide tax relief, HB 7033’s permanent, one-size-fits-all sales tax reduction, like SB 7034’s clothing and shoes sales tax exemption, will benefit all consumers, including tourists and wealthy residents.

Temporary Sales Tax Policy Changes

Since 2000,[17] policymakers have opted for temporary, ineffective solutions like sales tax holidays,[18] while permanently collecting more sales taxes on online purchases to lower taxes for businesses.[19] Due to the House’s push for a general sales tax reduction, HB 7033 does not include one-time sales tax holidays. In contrast, SB 7034 includes five different holidays with an estimated combined one-time cost of $315 million in FY 2025-26. (See Table 2.)

Sales tax holidays are poorly targeted and too temporary to offer meaningful relief. Specifically:

  • These holidays primarily shift the timing of purchases rather than increase overall economic activity.[20]
  • Wealthier households gain more from sales tax holidays, while lower-income families often cannot take advantage due to limited disposable income.[21]
  • Out-of-state tourists and shoppers from neighboring states can take advantage of the holidays, diluting benefits meant for residents.[22]
  • These tax-free periods deliver less fairness compared to targeted policies like state-level Earned Income Tax Credits.[23],[24]
  • State and local governments lose critical tax revenue needed for public services.
  • Retailers and tax agencies face added complexity and costs to comply with and manage temporary tax suspensions.

The Opportunity Costs of Not Raising Revenue

Combined Reporting: A $2.4 Billion Omission

To date, the proposed tax packages do not include any revenue raisers, meaning that tax relief would come at the expense of programs and services. The Florida House rejected an amendment to include combined reporting in its tax package, which would have raised $2.4 billion annually. [25],[26]

According to ITEP, under combined reporting, the incomes and losses of all entities linked to a corporation (those under common ownership) are consolidated into a single taxable entity. This approach is widely considered the most significant corporate tax reform available to state lawmakers because it eliminates the benefit of shifting profits to subsidiaries in lower-tax jurisdictions.[27] With combined reporting, the income is instead brought back into the taxable base. If any part of the corporation has a sufficient connection (nexus) to a state, that state can calculate and apportion a share of the corporation’s total income for taxation purposes.[28]

Combined reporting would only impact a small percentage of businesses — specifically, the largest and wealthiest multi-state and multi-national corporations in Florida who use loopholes to lower their corporate income tax (CIT) bill. By voting to exclude combined reporting from its tax package, the House offers no way to pay for its $5.5 billion tax proposal, and instead looks to recurring budget cuts. Likewise, the Senate offers no way to raise revenue, leaving budget cuts as the only option on the table.

Working Floridians Tax Rebate: A Way to Offer Common-Sense Tax Relief For Floridians Who Need It the Most

As noted, not only do the Florida House and Senate fail to include options to raise revenue to avoid budget cuts — they also choose one-size-fits-all sales tax reductions (whether it is a rate change or a new exemption) instead of more targeted policies. Consequently, portions of the chambers’ multibillion-dollar tax relief will go to wealthy residents, tourists, and businesses who are already receiving state subsidies.[29] Although the tax packages may help Floridians who are struggling to afford the basics — a questionable outcome considering possible public program and service cuts — it will also benefit individuals who are already well-resourced.

Under legislation creating the Working Floridians Tax Rebate (WFTR) program, HB 1331 and SB 1158, nearly 100 percent of the benefit (just over $1 billion) would have gone to families earning less than 75,000 annually. This program would offer lawmakers a way to target Florida families and households struggling the most by boosting their Earned Income Tax Credits (EITCs).[30]

What’s Next in the Budget Process?

While it is still unclear what will be included in the final tax package, lawmakers have indicated their intent to make changes to Florida’s sales tax code.[31] Regardless of their preferred policy, so far, neither chamber has seriously considered raising revenue to pay for relief. Ultimately, when the dust settles and lawmakers come to an agreement, it is likely that Floridians will pay for tax relief with an underfunded budget.

 

Notes

[1] Florida House of Representatives, HB 5001 - General Appropriation Act, April 2, 2025, https://housedocs.myfloridahouse.gov/Sections/Bills/billsdetail.aspx?BillId=82443.

[2] The Florida Senate, SB 2500: Appropriations, April 3, 2025, https://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2025/2500/?Tab=BillText.

[3] Carl Davis et al., Who Pays? A Distributional Analysis of the Tax systems in All 50 States (7th ed.), Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy (ITEP), January 2024, https://itep.org/whopays-7th-edition/?mc_cid=c39eb2e005&mc_eid=6cb16947ac.

[4] The Florida Legislature, Fiscal Analysis in Brief: 2024 Legislative Session, EDR, August 2024, https://edr.state.fl.us/Content/revenues/reports/fiscal-analysis-in-brief/FiscalAnalysisinBrief2024.pdf.

[5] United Way of Florida, ALICE in the Crosscurrents: 2024 Update on Financial Hardship in Florida, May 2024, https://www.uwof.org/sites/uwof/files/2024-ALICE-Update-FL-FINAL.pdf.

[6] The Florida Legislature, Fiscal Analysis in Brief: 2024 Legislative Session, EDR, August 2024.

[7] The Senate Committee on Appropriations, The House Appropriations Committee, and The Legislative Office of Economic and Demographic Research, State of Florida: Long-Range Financial Outlook - Fiscal Years 2025-26 Through 2027-28, EDR, September 6, 2024, https://edr.state.fl.us/Content/long-range-financial-outlook/3-Year-Plan_Fall-2024_2026-2028.pdf.

[8] The Florida Legislature, Fiscal Analysis in Brief: 2024 Legislative Session, EDR, August 2024.

[9] United Way of Florida, ALICE in the Crosscurrents: 2024 Update on Financial Hardship in Florida, May 2024.

[10] Siena Duncan, “‘Cooking Someone to Death’: Southern States Resist Calls to Add Air Conditioning to Prisons,” Politico, June 5, 2024, https://www.politico.com/news/2024/06/05/prison-heat-air-conditioning-00160676#:~:text=The%20end%20result:%20The%20vast%20majority%20of%20facilities%20remain%20without.

[11] Florida Department of Health, “Population Uninsured (Aged 0-64 Years) (Census ACS),” FLHealthCharts, April 17, 2025, https://www.flhealthcharts.gov/ChartsDashboards/rdPage.aspx?rdReport=NonVitalIndNoGrpCounts.Dataviewer&cid=8733.

[12] Florida Council on Aging, “Department of Elder Affairs - Waitlist/Priority List for Services,” February 2025, https://fcoa.starchapter.com/images/waitlistreport_02252025__002_.pdf.

[13] U.S. Census Bureau, Annual Survey of State and Local Government Finances, 1977-2020. Compiled by the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center, “State and Local General Expenditures, Per Capita,” July 10, 2023, https://taxpolicycenter.org/statistics/state-and-local-general-expenditures-capita.

[14] Daniel Perez (Speaker), “Florida House Proposes Largest Tax Cut in State History,” Florida House of Representatives, March 26, 2025, https://flhouse.gov/api/document/house?listName=Press%20Releases&itemId=915

[15] Revenue Estimating Impact Conference, “Sales Tax Rate Reductions,” EDR, April 4, 2025, https://edr.state.fl.us/Content/conferences/revenueimpact/archives/2025/_pdf/page249-264.pdf.

[16] Revenue Estimating Impact Conference, “Clothing and Shoes Sales Tax Exemption – Permanent,” EDR, April 18, 2025, https://edr.state.fl.us/Content/conferences/revenueimpact/archives/2025/_pdf/page326-331.pdf.

[17] Esteban Leonardo Santis, “Sales Tax Holidays Provide Little Relief to Floridians,” Florida Policy Institute, May 4, 2021, https://www.floridapolicy.org/posts/sales-tax-holidays-provide-little-relief-to-floridians.

[18] Marco Guzman, Sales Tax Holidays: An Ineffective Alternative to Real Sales Tax Reform, ITEP, August 2, 2023, https://itep.org/sales-tax-holiday-2023-ineffective-alternative-to-real-sales-tax-reform/.

[19] In 2021, policymakers passed Chapter 2021-2 (https://laws.flrules.org/files/Ch_2021-002.pdf) to require sales taxes on all online purchases with the revenue being earmarked to lower businesses taxes.

[20] Joseph Johns and Benjamin Patrick, “Sales Tax Holidays by State, 2024,” Tax Foundation, July 23, 2024, https://taxfoundation.org/data/all/state/sales-tax-holidays-2024/

[21] Marco Guzman, “Sales Tax Holidays: An Ineffective Alternative to Real Sales Tax Reform,” ITEP, August 2, 2023, https://itep.org/sales-tax-holiday-2023-ineffective-alternative-to-real-sales-tax-reform/

[22] Marco Guzman, “Sales Tax Holidays: An Ineffective Alternative to Real Sales Tax Reform,” ITEP, August 2, 2023.

[23] Marco Guzman, “Sales Tax Holidays: An Ineffective Alternative to Real Sales Tax Reform,” ITEP, August 2, 2023.

[24] Samantha Waxman and Iris Hinh, “States Can Enact or Expand Child Tax Credits and Earned Income Tax Credits to Build Equitable, Inclusive Communities and Economies,” CBPP, March 3, 2023, https://www.cbpp.org/research/state-budget-and-tax/states-can-enact-or-expand-child-tax-credits-and-earned-income-tax.

[25] House Amendment 604289 (Eskamani), “Amendment to Bill No. CS/HB 7033 (2025),” April 23, 2025, https://static-s3.lobbytools.com/bills/2025/pdf/7033C1604289.pdf.

[26] Carl Davis, Matthew Gardner, and Michael Mazerov, “A Revenue Analysis of Worldwide Combined Reporting in the States,” ITEP, February 20, 2025, https://itep.org/worldwide-combined-reporting-state-corporate-taxes/

[27] Michael Mazerov, “Policy Brief: States Can Fight Corporate Tax Avoidance by Requiring Worldwide Combined Reporting,” CBPP, March 29, 2024, https://www.cbpp.org/research/state-budget-and-tax/states-can-fight-corporate-tax-avoidance-by-requiring-worldwide.

[28] Currently, the Florida Department of Revenue imposes a corporate income tax (CIT) on corporations doing business in the state. However, the state exempts: (1) the first $50,000 of net income, (2) Limited Liability Companies (LLCs), and (3) S Corporations or pass-through businesses that have no more than 100 shareholders and whose profits flow through to shareholders’ income. Since Florida does not have a personal income tax, these profits are not taxed in the state. As a result, most businesses in Florida do not pay CITs. Even among the businesses that are not exempt, only 1 out of 10 owes a CIT. See Esteban Leonardo Santis, “3 Reasons Why Florida Lawmakers Should Fix the Corporate Income Tax,” October 4, 2021, Florida Policy Institute, https://www.floridapolicy.org/posts/3-reasons-why-florida-lawmakers-should-fix-the-corporate-income-tax.

[29]. According to estimates from the 2024 Tax Handbook, in FY 2025-26, Florida will spend $3.5 billion in subsidies (e.g., corporate income tax exemptions, credits, and refunds) for corporations. As the Tax Handbook specifies, this is in addition to $2.1 billion the state forfeits by not taxing S-Corporations and LLCs (see previous footnote). See Office of Economic and Demographic Research, Florida Tax Handbook 2024, EDR, October 2024, page 32, https://edr.state.fl.us/content/revenues/reports/tax-handbook/.

[30] For more information, see https://workingfloridiansrebate.org/.

[31] Relatedly, outside the Legislature, Governor DeSantis has urged legislators to focus on property tax relief by announcing his idea to offer $1,000 rebates to homeowners of homesteaded properties as part of his “long-term goal of eliminating property taxes through a constitutional amendment.” Like the House’s plan, the Governor’s rebate proposal would provide $5 billion in relief. The Governor has also advocated for a new round of sales tax holidays, similar to those found in the Senate’s tax package.

Downloadable Resources

There are no attachments currently.
No items found.