Plantation Mayor Nick Sortal is promoting what he calls the city’s first property tax cut in seven years — a slight drop in the millage rate from 5.8 to 5.7, projected to be the lowest since 2014. On its face, that’s progress: any reduction in the tax rate is better than none. As Sortal puts it, “affordability is a significant challenge” and the city can “maintain the high quality of services” while collecting slightly less revenue.
There is only one problem with this tax cut: It’s not a tax cut.
This a rate cut, not a real cut. Because Plantation’s property values are rising, lowering the millage doesn’t necessarily translate to lower bills for homeowners. In many cases, residents will see their tax obligations stay steady — or even climb.
Millage Rate ≠ Real Tax Relief
To see why, let’s break down how Florida property taxes are calculated. Your taxable value is your home’s assessed value (often capped annually under “Save Our Homes”), minus any exemptions like homestead. That value is then divided by 1,000 and multiplied by the millage rate.
Example:
- Assessed (taxable) value: $200,000
- Millage: 5.8 → 200 × 5.8 = $1,160 annual tax
- New Millage: 5.7 → 200 × 5.7 = $1,140 annual tax
Seems like $20 saved. Nice. But if the assessed value increases — say it climbs to $210,000 due to market trends — even at 5.7 mills, your tax bill rises to $1,197. That’s a net increase of $37, despite the rate cut.
Real Relief Means Real Cuts
Plantation’s seemingly heroic rate reduction is mostly symbolic as long as rising property values outpace that cut. What residents truly need is a deep enough rate slash to counteract value gains — one that actually lowers their annual bill, not just the rate technically.
Imagine if Sortal had dropped the millage to, say, 5.0 mills. In our example:
- 5.0 × 210 = $1,050 tax — that’s real savings and a signal that affordability matters.
Instead, lowering from 5.8 to 5.7 feels like rearranging lounge chairs on the Titanic.
Context Matters — But So Do Outcomes
Our homes are our biggest investments, and for many Plantation residents, even modest tax hikes can pressure budgets. Florida, on average, has seen property tax bills surge — as much as 35% in five years — far outpacing inflation.
So, while cutting the mill rate is technically better than holding firm, real affordability requires a rate cut substantial enough to offset increasing home values — a Mount Rushmore–level boldness, not a cameo appearance.
Bottom line: Plantation’s “tax cut” is more symbolic than substantive. Residents need actual tax relief, not just rate maintenance. If the council is serious about affordability, they should be checking the arithmetic, not just the optics.