Has any state successfully eliminated property taxes?

1. The short answer: no state has abolished property taxes

Across multiple industry guides and tax-data summaries, the plain conclusion is the same: there are no U.S. states without property tax on real estate; some states simply have much lower effective rates or heavy exemptions ^[1][2][3]. Even outlets aimed at investors and landlords restate that property tax is nearly universal because local governments rely on it to fund basic services ^[2][5].

2. Why abolition hasn’t happened in practice

Property taxes are the primary local revenue tool for schools, police, fire, roads and other services, which makes wholesale elimination politically and fiscally fraught—localities would face big funding gaps without replacement revenues ^[5]. State-level proposals that promise to eliminate property taxes generally require either shifting costs to the state budget, raising sales or income taxes, or cutting services, tradeoffs that complicate actual implementation ^[6][7].

3. Low rates and exemptions create the illusion of “no tax”

Several states consistently rank at the bottom for effective property-tax rates—Hawaii, Alabama, Colorado and Louisiana are often cited for low averages—but low rates do not equal abolition, and high property values or assessment rules can still raise bills for owners ^[3][4]. Numerous pieces aimed at buyers and investors explain that generous homestead exemptions, assessment caps, or different assessment ratios make taxes light for many homeowners even while the state keeps a tax structure in place ^[4][8].

4. Political pushes and pilot proposals: active debates, few real-world eliminations

There is an active political movement in some states to cut or eliminate property taxes, particularly among Republican lawmakers and constituents frustrated by rising bills, and legislators have introduced measures and constitutional amendments to this end ^[6]. Reporting shows bills and ballot proposals often propose replacing property-tax revenue with state-level funds or other taxes, but those are proposals and planning exercises rather than evidence of a successful, implemented state-level abolition ^[6].

5. Fiscal tradeoffs and real-world consequences

Analyses of low-property-tax states emphasize tradeoffs: lower local tax burdens can come with constrained public services, different revenue mixes, or policy limits that shift costs elsewhere, and observers warn that long-term infrastructure and school funding may suffer without stable local property tax bases ^[7][5]. Outlets that counsel investors repeatedly flag that apparent savings can be offset by other taxes, higher home prices, or weaker local public goods ^[1][9].

6. What the record of data sources shows—and what it doesn’t

Comprehensive tax-data projects and state-by-state rankings confirm that property taxes remain virtually universal and that effective rates are the useful comparison metric, not absolute existence or absence of a tax ^[3][5]. The available reporting documents proposals to abolish or dramatically reduce property tax in some states, but it does not show any state that has completed a sustained, statewide abolition of property taxes and maintained comparable public services without replacing the revenue ^[6][7].

7. Bottom line for readers following the debate

The debate over property taxes is active and politically charged, with genuine low-tax jurisdictions and serious legislative proposals, but the factual record assembled by tax researchers, state guides, and reporting is unambiguous: no state has succeeded in fully eliminating property tax on real estate; the conversation is instead about how low to make rates, who gets exemptions, and how to replace the revenue if taxes are cut ^[1][2][5].