Rep. Gann: Greater reforms needed to deliver true property-tax relief

Rep. Gann: Greater Reforms Needed to Deliver True Property-Tax Relief

INOLA, OK (Sept. 28) – State Rep. Tom Gann today said State Question 847 may slow future increases in taxable property values, but Oklahoma cannot deliver true property-tax relief without reforming the corporate exemptions, reimbursements and tax increment financing districts that shift public costs onto homeowners and other taxpayers.

Beginning in 2027, SQ 847 would reduce the maximum annual increase in taxable value from 3% to 1.75% for homestead and agricultural property and from 5% to 4% for most other real property. It also would establish lower, income-based valuation caps for certain homeowners age 65 and older.

“SQ 847 may slow the property-tax escalator, but it does not turn it off,” Gann said. “It will not reduce anyone’s current tax bill, cap millage rates or prevent new bond levies. More importantly, it does not address the preferential tax treatment government provides to selected businesses.”

Gann said recent warnings that SQ 847 could reduce local bonding capacity or place pressure on schools, counties and municipalities raise legitimate concerns.

However, those warnings disregard the effect of existing economic-development incentives on the same tax base.

Oklahoma provides qualifying manufacturers and certain other businesses with a five-year ad valorem tax exemption. The state reimburses affected schools, counties and other local entities for the revenue those businesses do not pay.

The Oklahoma Incentive Evaluation Commission estimated that the exemption cost $110.3 million in 2024. The commission also reported that the dedicated funding source—1% of state income-tax collections—covered an average of only 30.5% of reimbursement payments from fiscal years 2019 through 2024. Additional legislative appropriations were needed to cover the difference.

“When government excuses a favored company from paying property taxes and then uses state revenue to reimburse the local governments, the cost has not disappeared,” Gann said. “It has been transferred to other taxpayers. That is not tax elimination. It is tax shifting.”

Gann also called for greater scrutiny of tax increment financing districts. Under Oklahoma law, a TIF may capture and redirect property-tax and other revenue growth for as long as 25 years.

A business within a TIF generally still pays property taxes. However, some or all of the revenue generated above the district’s original tax base may be redirected toward infrastructure, financing and other development costs instead of going to the schools, counties and other entities that traditionally receive it.

Oklahoma law also allows qualifying manufacturers to postpone their five-year ad valorem exemption until after a TIF exemption, abatement or other district incentive expires.

“This means a favored development may receive up to 25 years in which its property-tax growth is captured and redirected, followed by a five-year exemption for qualifying property,” Gann said. “That is potentially 30 years of preferential property-tax treatment unavailable to an ordinary homeowner, farmer or existing small business.”

The 1889 Institute previously warned that TIF districts can shift public resources toward favored developments, place continuing service costs on taxpayers outside the district and redistribute economic activity instead of creating genuinely new statewide growth.

Gann said meaningful property-tax relief requires a broader reform package that includes:

Ending or phasing out state reimbursement of corporate ad valorem exemptions;

• Prohibiting the stacking of TIF benefits with the five-year manufacturing exemption;
• Requiring voter approval before property-tax increments are redirected;
• Limiting TIF expenditures to genuine public infrastructure and remediation of actual blight;
• Preventing one government entity from capturing another taxing entity’s revenue without express consent;
• Establishing firm limits on the duration and geographic size of TIF districts;
• Requiring public disclosure of every recipient, exemption, reimbursement, contract and projected return;
• Requiring independently verified proof that a subsidized project would not occur without public assistance; and
• Directing savings from discontinued corporate subsidies toward homeowner relief and essential local services.

“Government cannot tell homeowners that meaningful tax relief would endanger schools and public services while simultaneously diverting or replacing the property taxes owed by favored corporations,” Gann said.

“If property taxes are necessary to support local services, then every property owner should be treated equally. If Oklahoma can afford decades of preferential treatment for large corporations and private developments, it can afford meaningful relief for the citizens who live here, work here and built these communities.”

Gann said SQ 847 should be viewed as one component of property-tax reform—not as the final solution.

“True property-tax relief will require the courage to confront the entire system,” Gann said. “Until Oklahoma ends these corporate giveaways and restores equal treatment under the tax laws, homeowners will continue carrying a burden government has chosen to remove from politically favored businesses.”

Key Sources

• Oklahoma State Election Board final ballot title for SQ 847;
• Steve Lewis, “Legislative Interim Study Highlights Risks of SQ 847 (Capitol Update),” Oklahoma Policy Institute, September 21, 2026; supplied as 9-27-2026_Risks_of_SQ_847_Oklahoma Policy Institute.pdf.
• Oklahoma Incentive Evaluation Commission’s 2024 Five-Year Ad Valorem Property Tax Exemption evaluation;
• Oklahoma Local Development Act, 62 O.S. §§850–869; 68 O.S. §§2902 and 2902.5; and Byron Schlomach’s Tax Increment Finance and Suggestions for Reform, 1889 Institute, August 2016.