Which U.S. states have the lowest effective property tax rates and why?
This fact-check may be outdated. Consider refreshing it to get the most current information.
Executive summary
The states consistently identified as having the lowest effective property tax rates in 2025 include Hawaii, Alabama, Louisiana, Colorado, and South Carolina, a pattern visible across multiple compilations and datasets; those low rates are driven not by a single cause but a mix of high home values in places like Hawaii, low assessment ratios or homestead exemptions in states such as Louisiana and Alabama, and statutory caps or assessment rules in Colorado and other Western states [1] [2] [3] [4]. Any state-level ranking hides substantial local variation because property taxes are levied almost entirely at the county and municipal level, and different reporters use different methods and datasets to compute “effective” rates [5] [6].
1. Which states sit at the bottom of the list — and how sure is that ranking?
Most mainstream 2025 rankings put Hawaii at the very bottom with an effective rate near 0.27–0.32%, followed by Alabama (around 0.39–0.41%), Louisiana (~0.50–0.56%), Colorado (~0.49–0.50%), and South Carolina (~0.51–0.52%), with small differences depending on whether the compiler used ATTOM, U.S. Census median values, or its own county-weighted averages [1] [3] [2] [7]. Caveats matter: some outlets express rates as percentages of median home value, others as median bills divided by median values, and local millages vary widely inside each state — so rankings are indicative rather than absolute [8] [5].
2. Why Hawaii’s headline rate looks tiny — and why that can be misleading
Hawaii’s effective property tax rate is low in percentage terms because Hawaii relies more on other revenue sources (tourism-related taxes and excise taxes) and its assessed values or millage structure produce a low average rate; yet the state’s very high median home values mean homeowners often still pay meaningful dollar amounts despite the low percentage, a point emphasized by PropertyShark and WorldPopulationReview [1] [8] [2]. In short, low percentage ≠ low bill for expensive markets.
3. Low assessed values, exemptions and statutory caps: the policy levers that depress rates
States near the bottom often pair low effective rates with policy tools that reduce the taxable base: Alabama’s low assessments and widespread exemptions, Louisiana’s generous homestead deductions, and Colorado’s historic constitutional rules (e.g., Gallagher-style balancing that favors residential valuations) all reduce effective rates reported at the state level [1] [4] [9]. Those rules shift the burden or constrain growth in taxable value, but they can also force higher millages if local revenue needs rise.
4. The local-budget reality — where property taxes are the go-to tool
Property taxes remain the primary funding mechanism for local government services such as schools and public safety, so low state averages often reflect either alternative state revenue streams, lower service levels, or stronger caps on assessment growth; conversely, states with high property tax rates (New Jersey, Illinois, Connecticut) rely more on local property levies to finance extensive local services [5] [10]. This trade-off is the hidden political calculus: low property taxes can mean more reliance on sales, income, or state-level transfers.
5. Data sources, incentives and the reader’s takeaway
Most lists cited (Rocket Mortgage, Kiplinger/ATTOM, Tax Foundation, WalletHub, PropertyShark) draw on Census or ATTOM datasets but differ in methodology; consumer-facing outlets may emphasize low-rate states to attract relocation-minded readers, while policy shops stress the limits of state-level comparisons because millages and assessments aren’t comparable across jurisdictions [10] [3] [5] [6]. The practical conclusion: Hawaii, Alabama, Louisiana, Colorado and South Carolina regularly show up as the lowest-effective-rate states, but homebuyers and policymakers must look at median home values, local mill rates, exemptions, and reassessment rules to understand what a “low” rate actually means in dollars and services [2] [4] [9].