SB 284 — Property taxation: change in ownership: family homes and farms.
Last action — Set, final hearing. Held in committee and under submission.
-
✓Introduced
-
✓In Committee
-
3Passed Senate
-
4Passed Assembly
-
5To Executive
-
6Enacted
This bill has passed the Senate. Introduced February 05, 2025. It now moves to the second chamber.
Next likely step: consideration and a floor vote in the Assembly.
Odds of enactment
High chanceBased on the sponsor, cosponsors, and committee posture, this bill has a high chance of becoming law.
Upgrade to see the exact probability and what's driving it.
A statistical estimate from our own model of past outcomes — an insight, not a guarantee. Policymaking is volatile.
Prognosis
-
Passed Senate
Current position in the legislative process.
-
1 sponsor
1 primary, 0 co-sponsors signed on.
-
Single-party support
Sponsorship is currently within one party (1 R).
-
Cleared a recorded vote
Passed 4 recorded votes so far.
Based on stage, sponsorship breadth, committee status, recorded votes, and cross-state momentum — a description of the observable signals, not a prediction.
Summary
The California Constitution limits the amount of ad valorem taxes on real property to 1% of the full cash value of that property, defined as the county assessor's valuation of real property as shown on the 1975–76 tax bill and, thereafter, the appraised value of the real property when purchased, newly constructed, or a change in ownership occurs after the 1975 assessment, subject to an annual inflation adjustment not to exceed 2%. Pursuant to constitutional authorization, existing property tax law, on and after February 16, 2021, excludes from classification as a change in ownership the purchase or transfer of a family home or family farm, as those terms are defined, of the transferor in the case of a transfer between parents and their children, or between grandparents and their grandchildren if all the parents of those grandchildren are deceased, if the property continues as the family home or family farm of the transferee, as specified. For purposes of the transfer of a family home, that law requires the transfer to be of a principal residence of the transferor and to become the principal residence of the transferee within one year of the transfer. That law also requires the transferee to file for the homeowners' or disabled veterans' exemption within a year of the transfer, as described. This bill would expand the above-described exclusion to include, in the case of the purchase or transfer of a family home or a family farm, as applicable, a purchase or transfer of that family home or family farm between eligible transferees, as specified. The bill would also specify that, in the event of a transfer by certain judicial decrees, the transfer commencing either of the above-described one-year periods shall be deemed to occur as of the effective date of the final judicial decree, as specified. The bill would require a transferee to notify the assessor of the county in which the property is located of their intention to claim the exclusion, as specified. By expanding the duties of local tax officials, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above. Existing law requires the state to reimburse local agencies annually for certain property tax revenues lost as a result of any exemption or classification of property for purposes of ad valorem property taxation. This bill would provide that, notwithstanding those provisions, no appropriation is made and the state shall not reimburse local agencies for property tax revenues lost by them pursuant to the bill. This bill would take effect immediately as a tax levy.
Bill Text
- Amended 06/25/25 - Amended Assembly Current pdf June 25, 2025
- Amended 05/07/25 - Amended Senate pdf May 07, 2025
- Amended 03/10/25 - Amended Senate pdf March 10, 2025
- Introduced 02/05/25 - Introduced pdf February 05, 2025
- SB284 View text html
Action History
-
Set, final hearing. Held in committee and under submission.
-
July 7 set for second hearing. Placed on APPR. suspense file.
-
From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on REV. & TAX.
-
June 23 set for first hearing canceled at the request of author.
-
Referred to Com. on REV. & TAX.
-
In Assembly. Read first time. Held at Desk.
-
Read third time. Passed. (Ayes 38. Noes 0. Page 1324.) Ordered to the Assembly.
-
Ordered to special consent calendar.
-
From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 6. Noes 0. Page 1194.) (May 23).
-
Read second time. Ordered to third reading.
-
Set for hearing May 23.
-
May 19 hearing: Placed on APPR. suspense file.
-
Set for hearing May 19.
-
From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 5. Noes 0. Page 1082.) (May 14). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
-
From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on REV. & TAX.
-
Set for hearing May 14.
-
Re-referred to Com. on REV. & TAX.
-
From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on RLS.
-
Referred to Com. on RLS.
-
From printer. May be acted upon on or after March 8.
-
Introduced. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment. To print.
Sponsors
- Kelly Seyarto · Primary
Sponsorship breakdown
Export CSV (upgrade) →1 sponsors · 0 co-sponsors · 121 not signed on
Sponsors (1)
- Seyarto, Kelly Republican
Co-sponsors (0)
None.
Not signed on (121)
121 members have not signed on to this bill.
Show all 121 →"Not signed on" means a member has not sponsored or co-sponsored this bill — it does not imply opposition. Members flagged Voted No have a recorded No vote on this bill.
Votes
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Democratic | 28 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| Republican | 10 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 38 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| % of votes cast | 95% | 0% | 0% | 5% |
How each member voted (40)
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Democratic | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Republican | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Total | 6 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| % of votes cast | 86% | 0% | 0% | 14% |
How each member voted (7)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Cabaldon, Christopher | Democratic | Yea |
| Caballero, Anna M. | Democratic | Yea |
| Grayson, Timothy S. | Democratic | Yea |
| Richardson, Laura | Democratic | Yea |
| Wahab, Aisha | Democratic | Yea |
| Dahle, Megan | Republican | Not Voting |
| Seyarto, Kelly | Republican | Yea |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Democratic | 4 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Republican | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Total | 5 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| % of votes cast | 71% | 0% | 0% | 29% |
How each member voted (7)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Cabaldon, Christopher | Democratic | Not Voting |
| Caballero, Anna M. | Democratic | Yea |
| Grayson, Timothy S. | Democratic | Yea |
| Richardson, Laura | Democratic | Yea |
| Wahab, Aisha | Democratic | Yea |
| Dahle, Megan | Republican | Not Voting |
| Seyarto, Kelly | Republican | Yea |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Democratic | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Republican | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| % of votes cast | 100% | 0% | 0% | 0% |
How each member voted (5)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Ashby, Angelique V. | Democratic | Yea |
| Grayson, Timothy S. | Democratic | Yea |
| McNerney, Jerry | Democratic | Yea |
| Umberg, Thomas J. | Democratic | Yea |
| Valladares, Suzette Martinez | Republican | Yea |
Subjects
Frequently asked questions
- What does SB 284 do?
- The California Constitution limits the amount of ad valorem taxes on real property to 1% of the full cash value of that property, defined as the county assessor's valuation of real property as shown on the 1975–76 tax bill and, thereafter, the appraised value of the real property when purchased, newly constructed, or a change in ownership occurs after the 1975 assessment, subject to an annual inflation adjustment not to exceed 2%. Pursuant to constitutional authorization, existing property tax law, on and after February 16, 2021, excludes from classification as a change in ownership the purchase or transfer of a family home or family farm, as those terms are defined, of the transferor in the case of a transfer between parents and their children, or between grandparents and their grandchildren if all the parents of those grandchildren are deceased, if the property continues as the family home or family farm of the transferee, as specified. For purposes of the transfer of a family home, that law requires the transfer to be of a principal residence of the transferor and to become the principal residence of the transferee within one year of the transfer. That law also requires the transferee to file for the homeowners' or disabled veterans' exemption within a year of the transfer, as described. This bill would expand the above-described exclusion to include, in the case of the purchase or transfer of a family home or a family farm, as applicable, a purchase or transfer of that family home or family farm between eligible transferees, as specified. The bill would also specify that, in the event of a transfer by certain judicial decrees, the transfer commencing either of the above-described one-year periods shall be deemed to occur as of the effective date of the final judicial decree, as specified. The bill would require a transferee to notify the assessor of the county in which the property is located of their intention to claim the exclusion, as specified. By expanding the duties of local tax officials, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above. Existing law requires the state to reimburse local agencies annually for certain property tax revenues lost as a result of any exemption or classification of property for purposes of ad valorem property taxation. This bill would provide that, notwithstanding those provisions, no appropriation is made and the state shall not reimburse local agencies for property tax revenues lost by them pursuant to the bill. This bill would take effect immediately as a tax levy.
- Who sponsors SB 284?
- SB 284 is sponsored by Seyarto, Kelly (Republican).
- What is the current status of SB 284?
- This bill has passed the Senate. Introduced February 05, 2025. It now moves to the second chamber.
- Where can I track SB 284?
- Track SB 284 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.
Make your voice heard on SB 284
Find the representatives who decide this bill and tell them where you stand — for yourself, or mobilize your whole list in one click with One Click Politics advocacy software.
Stay ahead of SB 284
Last checked for changes 3 months ago · updated continuously
One Click Politics tracks every bill in Congress and all 50 states.
Track this bill →