In a primetime address to the nation before Christmas, President Donald Trump attempted to reassure Americans that the economy was turning a corner and that “greater prosperity” would reemerge. Hopefully, the President’s economic optimism comes to fruition. In the meantime, however, many Iowans remain apprehensive about the economy. A significant source of that concern is the growing pressure property taxes are placing on household budgets. Affordability is a top issue for many families, and while property tax reform can help lessen the burden of rising taxes, meaningful reform must also protect the property rights of Iowans.
In 2026, the United States will commemorate the 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence. At the heart of the American Revolution—and within the principles articulated in the Declaration—is the sanctity of property rights. Matthew Spalding, a constitutional scholar and author of the recently released The Making of the American Mind: The Story of Our Declaration of Independence, wrote that in many ways the right to property was the first principle at issue in the American Revolution.
“When the British began levying the first direct taxes on America, the colonists immediately considered it an unjust seizure of their property,” Spalding wrote. James Otis posed a similar question in 1763: “Can there be any liberty, where property is taken without consent?”
“As the Founders saw it, the right to property was not simply an economic concept and was much more than owning a bit of land. It was a first principle of liberty,” Spalding argues. Property is not limited to land or a home; it also includes financial assets.
The late Senator Barry M. Goldwater echoed this understanding, noting that an individual’s earnings are as much their property as their land or home. “Property and freedom are inseparable: to the extent government takes the one in the form of taxes, it intrudes on the other,” Goldwater wrote.
Goldwater also warned against viewing taxation solely as a matter of public finance. “We have been led to look upon taxation as merely a problem of public financing: How much money does the government need? We have been led to discount, and often forget altogether, the bearing of taxation on the problem of individual freedom.”
Government does not have an unlimited claim on the wealth of its citizens. Every dollar taken in taxes reduces a family’s or business’s ability to save, invest, or give.
For decades, property taxes in Iowa have continued to rise as local governments benefited from increasing property valuations. Property taxes function as a form of “wealth tax,” yet local governments often fail to recognize that a higher assessed value does not mean taxpayers have additional cash on hand to pay a growing bill.
Today, Iowans across political and economic lines are calling for property tax relief. Taxpayers understand that government requires revenue to fund essential services, but they also recognize there must be limits. That burden has only worsened as inflation has eroded household budgets, even as local governments have enjoyed windfalls in property tax revenue.
Iowa taxpayers need reforms that protect their property—land, homes, and income alike. That is why any serious property tax reform must include a fiscal rule or spending limitation. A 2 percent property tax cap, for example, would begin to restrain the growth of property tax collections and force local governments to better control spending.
Property tax caps are not a radical idea. Progressive states such as Massachusetts and New York have adopted them. Both are high-tax states, and without their respective caps, taxpayers would be in far worse shape.
“Truth is, New York’s situation would be even worse without a 2010 state law that caps annual local property-tax increases to 2% (or the rate of inflation) unless voters override it,” argues Betsy McCaughey, a former lieutenant governor of New York.
The same is true in Massachusetts. George King, an at-large member of the Framingham City Council, asserts that Proposition 2½ “has proven highly effective.” “Whether by luck or foresight, the 2.5 percent cap has kept property tax growth in check, ensuring communities can fund essential services without overburdening homeowners,” King noted.
The property tax debate in Iowa must shift toward solutions rather than getting bogged down in system complexity or assessment mechanics. As economist and fiscal policy expert Barry Poulson wrote, “The question for homeowners is not only how to protect themselves from inflationary increases in property taxes, but also how to cap local revenues and spending.”
Implementing stronger tax and spending limits on local governments would help control property tax growth in Iowa. Such limits have proven effective in restraining both government expansion and tax burdens. Governor Kim Reynolds and the legislature have an opportunity to make the 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence especially meaningful by restoring balance between taxpayers and their local governments. By limiting spending, Iowa can protect the property rights that lie at the very foundation of American liberty.
Print a PDF