logo
California Residents Most Impacted by Montana's Property Tax Change

California Residents Most Impacted by Montana's Property Tax Change

Newsweek21-05-2025

Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources.
Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content.
Californians who own properties in Montana stand to shoulder a heavier tax burden as a result of a new bill which will increase property taxes on second homes in the state, while offering relief to primary residence's owners and long-term rentals.
Why It Matters
The mass influx of wealthy Californians buying property in nearby states during the pandemic boom, including in Arizona and Colorado, has been pointed at as one of the main reasons behind the massive surge in home prices in these markets.
In Montana, the median sale price of a home was $529,000 last month, according to Redfin data, up nearly 58 percent from April 2020, when it was a much more modest $303,900.
A significant part of this surge was driven by out-of-state buyers, especially from coastal areas like California, who bought second homes in scenic parts of the state. In 2021, second-home purchases accounted for up to 20 percent of all home sales statewide, Realtor.com data show.
New homes sit waiting to be moved to a new location just north of Culbertson, Montana, on September 19, 2013.
New homes sit waiting to be moved to a new location just north of Culbertson, Montana, on September 19, 2013.
Ken Cedeno/Corbis via Getty Images
While Californians collectively own the equivalent of more than 5 percent of Montana's taxable real estate market—for a total of over $9.5 billion in Montana residential property—they are currently responsible for only 3.54 percent of the state's property tax revenue, Realtor.com reported. Montana residents, on the other hand, own around 77 percent of the state's taxable residential real estate, but pay 84 percent of total property taxes.
The new bill is likely to correct this mismatch, forcing owners of second homes in the state to pay higher taxes.
What To Know
Earlier this month, Montana lawmakers passed a two-bill package which significantly cut property taxes for homeowners on their primary residences, shifting the burden on owners of second homes in the state. The bills had the strong backing of Republican Governor Greg Gianforte, who has made it a point to deliver property tax relief to Montanans struggling with the rising cost of homeownership.
State Representative Llew Jones, a Republican of Conrad who developed the Gianforte-backed package, said that the legislation will translate to significant property tax cuts for owner-occupied homes and long-term rentals, with a home valued at $360,000 paying an average $719 less in taxes next year.
While supporters say that the bills will bring back balance to the Montana property tax system, critics are concerned that the measures will hit business properties and resident-owned second homes who are already struggling with higher costs. The package already includes lower rates for lower-value commercial properties to help protect small businesses in the state.
With the new changes, the tax rate for primary residences and long-term rentals valued at or below the state's median home price (which is around $340,000) will drop to 0.76 percent.
Primary residences and long-term rentals worth more will be taxed 0.76 percent of their full value on the first $340,000 and up to 1.9 percent on any value over four times the median.
All residential properties that are not considered primary residences or long-term rentals—second homes and short-term rentals like Airbnb, for example—will face higher property taxes this year.
For Californians who own second homes in Montana, this could mean much higher property tax bills. Their properties, under the new legislation, will be taxed at a flat 1.9 percent on their full value.
What People Are Saying
Governor Greg Gianforte wrote on X, formerly Twitter, in late April after the approval of the package: "In the last election, Montanans spoke loud and clear: property taxes are too high and must be reined in. I'd like to thank the hardworking members of the Montana State Legislature who voted for meaningful and permanent property tax relief this session."
Montana Republican Senator Greg Hertz said of the two-bill package in a statement to KGVO.com: "We did finally pass House Bill 231, and it works in conjunction with Senate Bill 542. I did not support either one of those. I don't believe what we've done with property taxes is a fix. It's merely a shift from having one taxpayer pay more to provide relief to another taxpayer."
Montana Democratic Representative Mark Thane told KGVO.com: "I think people will be very pleased to see again, in year one, a significant reduction on their property tax bill and a $400 rebate on top of that."
He added: "I think in year two, if you're an individual that owns a second home, part of the rate reduction that will be experienced by those Montanans that have a single home for primary residence is funded by the higher tax rates that you'll find on second homes, but the vast majority of Montana will see significant property tax relief for their residential properties."
Manish Bhatt, senior policy analyst at the Tax Foundation, told Realtor.com: "Tax shifts are not tax reform. They're just moving the pot of money that you're taking from one pocket to the other."
He added a warning, saying luxury neighborhoods might end up benefiting the most from these changes, seeing revenues for local governments increase while they might fall in less wealthy areas: "What ends up happening here is, as property values surge, it could be a real windfall for local governments. But shifting the burden from certain classes of property to others could have a real distortionary effect in the market."
What Happens Next
Montana's groundbreaking measure is likely to offer significant relief to full-time residents, but comes with some risk—including weakening demand in the state's second-home market. The package's full impact on the state will only become clear in the long term.
Are you a Californian who owns a second home in Montana? We'd like to hear from you. Contact g.carbonaro@newsweek.com.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Trump-Musk feud: Are electric vehicles and Tesla at the heart of the breakup?
Trump-Musk feud: Are electric vehicles and Tesla at the heart of the breakup?

Yahoo

time31 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Trump-Musk feud: Are electric vehicles and Tesla at the heart of the breakup?

The President of the United States of America and one of the world's most influential billionaires are at odds after months of collaboration. The confrontation escalated Thursday with Elon Musk saying Trump would have lost the election without him in a post on X. President Donald Trump in turn referred to his former senior advisor as "the man who lost his mind" in a Friday morning ABC News phone interview. Republican Trump allies are now also speaking out against Musk. Musk's breakup with the administration has been public and is well-documented, with Trump and the Tesla CEO trading calculated jabs like pro boxers. The underlying reason behind the sudden intense feud is a serious cause of concern for some American car buyers. "Clean Coal" has been a popular buzzword for not one but two presidential campaigns for Donald Trump. So, Elon Musk's initial choice to stand beside a global warming skeptic as the CEO of a clean energy and automotive company was puzzling to say the least. At first, Musk's involvement with the administration was seen by many as mutually beneficial, since the CEO could potentially reap the benefits of government contracts for Tesla and SpaceX. The general public quickly soured to the idea of the eccentric CEO playing a key role in the administration. By April 8, Tesla stock had nosedived 41.50% from its January 2 share price. Tesla dealers have been attacked and vandalized while other Americans have staged peaceful protests against Musk's involvement in government and role at the Department of Government Efficiency. So, why would a guy who once wore a "Trump Was Right About Everything" hat suddenly publicly oppose his new bill? The short answer is, the two don't see eye to eye on the automotive industry's most controversial powertrain option. The One, Big, Beautiful Bill could decimate Tesla. President Donald Trump's stance and actions against EV adoption in America includes: Supporting the One, Big, Beautiful Bill, which suggests phasing out a federal EV tax credit that would benefit thousands of Tesla buyers Claiming former President Joe Biden's EV mandate "would kill 40% of the auto industry's jobs", according to Ordering the shut down of many federal electric vehicle chargers and pausing massive federal EV fleet purchases, according to Elon Musk (and Tesla's) stance and actions for EV adoption in America: Elon Musk bio says "Tesla's mission has been to accelerate the world's transition to sustainable energy" Musk claimed "the world does need electric cars" during a 60 Minutes interview and factory tour, asserting that Tesla has a crucial role in the future of EVs Tesla has collaborated with Ford, GM, Stellantis, Rivian, Volkswagen, Honda, Acura, Hyundai, Kia, Toyota and more to provide Tesla Supercharger access to EVs, making them easier to charge for American drivers Tesla stock recently plummeted in response to the feud between Trump and Musk. The President has also threatened Musk's government contracts amidst the dispute. The bill appears to be the focal point of the rift, but the two clearly have different ideas on what America's future should be. President Donald Trump and Elon Musk may have been able to join forces over their mutual stances on certain conservative points and a hatred of bureaucracy, but their White House tag team was short-lived. The One, Big, Beautiful Bill directly undermines some of the actions Musk and the Department of Government Efficiency have taken since the two united. Trump is 78 years old and expresses a desire to bring America back to a golden age of manufacturing before globalism outsourced American jobs and created a reliance on foreign trade. He also speaks about returning the country to an age where mining and drilling for fossil fuel production were prioritized over environmental concerns. Musk, on the other hand, is a 53-year-old futurist who strives to make humans a multi-planetary species and has made a fortune from innovation and technological disruption. At a glance, the issue seems to be about the One, Big, Beautiful Bill attacking Tesla's bottom line but the two polarizing figures are fundamentally different in terms of future aspirations. Based on Trump's falling out with several former members of the first Trump administration and Musk's known adversarial nature in the private sector, this could be the end for, arguably, the most fascinating duo of 2025. This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: Donald Trump vs Elon Musk: Could Tesla, EVs be at the art of the feud?

Ohio budget moves closer to doing away with elected county coroners
Ohio budget moves closer to doing away with elected county coroners

Yahoo

time39 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Ohio budget moves closer to doing away with elected county coroners

Jun. 6—For now, the Ohio Senate is going along on an Ohio House plan to make county coroners appointed by county commissioners instead of being elected by county voters. But, while the Senate didn't change the House's proposal in its initial draft of the state's two-year operating budget, Senate President Rob McColley, R-Napoleon, told reporters that there's still a chance the Senate could eliminate the House's proposal when it amends the budget next week. McColley said he put a request out for those in his caucus with strong feelings on the matter to weigh in. "If members feel strongly that it should go back to the way that it is under current law, then there's a possibility to see an amendment here in the omnibus," McColley told this news outlet. "We didn't see a lot of members — we saw some — but we didn't see a lot of members asking for it to be changed back." The Senate is expected to make those amendments on Wednesday or Thursday of next week. The change could be consequential in counties where county commissioners and the coroner are different political parties. In Montgomery County, for example, the elected coroner is a Republican while Democrats hold two of the three seats on the county commission. The House's primary advocate for the change, county commissioner-turned-lawmaker Rep. Brian Stewart, R-Ashville, has framed the change as necessary to solve a scarcity issue. "It's really hard to find folks that want to serve as a coroner at all, it's even harder to find folks who are willing to be the coroner and want to run a political campaign to do so," Stewart said in April. But the proposed change is opposed by Ohio State Coroners Association, whose Executive Director David Corey told this outlet that he's still hopeful that former coroners in the Ohio Senate, like Sen. Matt Huffman, R-Tipp City, will help the Senate reverse course. "Commissioners already have the authority to appoint a physician to be coroner if no one runs," Corey said. "So they already have this authority — so why subject this as a blanket on everyone?" Corey noted that commissioners also already have the authority to contract out with different county coroner offices if there's no elected coroner and the commission cannot find an in-county physician that wants to be appointed. "We don't really know what (problem) the House is trying and the Senate are trying to fix ... other than chipping away at other elected officials," Corey said. Corey said the idea is "wrought with potential problems," and speculated that coroners appointed by commissioners might be more beholden to those officials than they are to the public. He said appointees could also be fired at will, which would make it harder for a coroner to stand up to the commission in budget negotiations or other high-stakes situations. "We just think it's a horrible precedent," Corey said. Senate Minority Leader Nickie Antonio, D-Lakewood, whose home county of Cuyahoga is one of two counties in the state where the position is already appointed following a local vote, told this outlet that she didn't like the sound of applying the idea to every coroner in the state. "You want the coroner to feel like they can have a lot of pressure on them," Antonio said. "If they're appointed, then it's almost like they have an affiliation to the person that appointed them." She said this could lead to undue influence. "I think we, probably in the long run, would be better off continuing to have them be elected," Antonio said. ------ For more stories like this, sign up for our Ohio Politics newsletter. It's free, curated, and delivered straight to your inbox every Thursday evening. Avery Kreemer can be reached at 614-981-1422, on X, via email, or you can drop him a comment/tip with the survey below.

Some Republicans hope Trump, Musk mend fences after blistering breakup
Some Republicans hope Trump, Musk mend fences after blistering breakup

Yahoo

timean hour ago

  • Yahoo

Some Republicans hope Trump, Musk mend fences after blistering breakup

Some Republicans are holding out hope that President Trump and Elon Musk will mend fences after Thursday's blistering breakup of the bromance, which captivated Washington and left the party's 'big, beautiful bill' hanging in the balance. The longing for harmony comes amid a Republican sprint on Capitol Hill to finalize the Trump megabill — which Musk trashed — and as the party looks ahead to the 2026 midterm elections, which the billionaire is threatening to shake up by suggesting he may go after lawmakers who support the package. 'I was with the president in the Oval Office yesterday afternoon as some of this was unfolding, and I can tell you, as he said in his own words, he was just, he was disappointed, and I was surprised by Elon's sudden opposition,' Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) told reporters Friday when asked if Trump has any interest in mending fences. 'I hope they reconcile,' he added. 'I believe in redemption. That's part of my worldview, and I think it's good for the party and the country if all that's worked out.' Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) — a loyal Trump ally who also chairs the House's Subcommittee on Delivering on Government Efficiency, named similar to Musk's brainchild Department of Government Efficiency — said the two should bury the hatchet in private rather than on public channels. 'I don't think lashing out on the internet is the way to handle any kind of disagreement, especially when you have each other's cell phones. So I hope this gets worked out,' Greene said. 'But I will tell you right now that people are going to be focused on making sure that we get the agenda that we voted for, and that's President Trump's agenda.' The optimism is not limited to the House: Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) called on his 70-year marriage to find advice for the two. 'I just heard Barbara Grassley say this disagreement and arguments btwn musk and Trump must end I know she loves both musk and Pres Trump. I'd advise u to follow her advice,' he wrote on social platform X. The simmering tensions between Trump and Musk blew up Thursday, solidifying the split between the world's most powerful man and the richest person on the planet. The back-and-forth began about the sprawling package — with Musk calling it 'a disgusting abomination' and Trump defending it — before spiraling into personal attacks, headlined by Musk alleging Trump is named in the Jeffrey Epstein files and the president calling the billionaire 'crazy.' 'Elon and I had a great relationship; I don't know if we will anymore,' Trump said in the Oval Office Thursday. The blowup sapped Musk of much of his clout among Republicans on Capitol Hill, with several GOP lawmakers siding with the president over the billionaire. 'I've had a lot of love and respect for you for what you've done for this country over the last several months, but you've lost your damn mind,' Rep. Troy Nehls (R-Texas), a close Trump ally, told reporters of Musk. 'You've lost your mind. Enough is enough, stop this. I don't think it's healthy.' As of now, it does not appear that the president is interested in smoothing things over. After reports surfaced overnight of a potential phone call between Trump and Musk, the president told ABC News that he was 'not particularly' interested in talking to the former special government employee, whom he called 'the man who has lost his mind.' 'I won't be speaking to him for a while I guess, but I wish him well,' Trump said to CNN. While officials close to the White House did not dismiss the idea of a conversation between the two at some point, aides indicated this week that they wanted to turn the page on the drama and remain squarely focused on getting the megabill through Congress. Musk, for his part, opened the door to some sort of reconciliation: After Bill Ackman, the CEO of Pershing Square and an ally of both Trump and Musk, urged the pair on X to 'make peace for the benefit of our great country,' adding, 'We are much stronger together than apart,' Musk responded: 'You're not wrong.' Some Trump allies, however, think peace is possible — and likely. Rep. Max Miller (R-Ohio), who worked in the first Trump White House and retains a close relationship with the president, when asked if there's any chance of reconciling the relationship between Trump and Musk said: 'I do very much.' He compared the situation to a strategy utilized by World Wrestling Entertainment (WWE) — founded by Vince McMahon and his wife, Education Secretary Linda McMahon — of getting rid of revered wrestlers only to bring them back into the fold later on, generating excitement. 'He set up this entire company to create heroes within the entire country of adult wrestling, and then he would fire that person, he would get rid of them, and then he would bring them back, and what would happen when he would bring them back?' Miller asked. 'When he would bring them back, the WWE stock price would shoot through the roof and the rating would shoot through the roof because everyone knows that that's where the excitement really is, is the reunification of these individuals.' 'So I do believe he's going to come back, I do believe we're going to sort this thing out,' he added. 'I do believe that at the end of the day this was really a bunch of nothing, and that you have a president of the United States and now a private civilian who are disagreeing with each other.' Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store