SB 723 — Property taxation: exemption: low-value properties.
Last action — Set, second 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 21, 2025. It now moves to the second chamber.
Next likely step: consideration and a floor vote in the Assembly.
Prognosis
Where this bill stands today.
Odds of enactment
HighHow often bills like it became law.
-
Passed Senate
Current position in the legislative process.
-
2 sponsors
1 primary, 1 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.
Prognosis reads this bill's own signals — stage, sponsorship breadth, committee status, recorded votes and cross-state momentum. Odds come from a model trained on which bills have become law.
Summary
The California Constitution authorizes the Legislature, with the approval of 23 of the membership of each legislative house, to allow a county board of supervisors to exempt from property taxation those properties having a full value too low to justify the costs of assessment and collection. Existing property tax law implementing this authority generally limits any exemption granted under this constitutional provision by a county board of supervisors to real property with a total base year value, as adjusted annually for inflation as provided, or personal property with a full value, not exceeding $10,000. Existing property tax law also limits any exemption for new construction to situations where the new total base year value of the property, as adjusted for inflation, including the new construction, is $10,000 or less. This bill would raise these maximum exemption amounts from $10,000 to $20,000 for lien dates occurring on or after January 1, 2026, and before January 1, 2031. Existing law requires any bill authorizing a new tax expenditure to contain, among other things, specific goals, purposes, and objectives that the tax exemption will achieve, detailed performance indicators, and data collection requirements. This bill would make specified findings detailing the goal, purpose, and objective of the above-described expansion of a tax exemption, performance indicators for determining whether the expanded exemption meets that goal, purpose, and objective, and data collection requirements. 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 07/01/25 - Amended Assembly Current pdf July 01, 2025
- Amended 05/07/25 - Amended Senate pdf May 07, 2025
- Introduced 02/21/25 - Introduced pdf February 21, 2025
- SB723 View text html
Action History
-
Set, second hearing. Held in committee and under submission.
-
From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on REV. & TAX.
-
June 23 set for first hearing. Placed on REV. & TAX. suspense file.
-
Referred to Com. on REV. & TAX.
-
In Assembly. Read first time. Held at Desk.
-
Read third time. Passed. (Ayes 38. Noes 0. Page 1328.) Ordered to the Assembly.
-
Ordered to special consent calendar.
-
Read second time. Ordered to third reading.
-
From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 6. Noes 0. Page 1211.) (May 23).
-
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 1083.) (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.
-
Referred to Com. on REV. & TAX.
-
Read first time.
-
From printer. May be acted upon on or after March 24.
-
Introduced. To Com. on RLS. for assignment. To print.
Sponsors
- Steven S. Choi · Primary
- Jim Patterson · Cosponsor
Sponsorship breakdown
Export CSV (upgrade) →1 sponsors · 1 co-sponsors · 120 not signed on
Sponsors (1)
- Choi, Steven S. Republican
Co-sponsors (1)
Not signed on (120)
120 members have not signed on to this bill.
Show all 120 →"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 723 do?
- The California Constitution authorizes the Legislature, with the approval of 23 of the membership of each legislative house, to allow a county board of supervisors to exempt from property taxation those properties having a full value too low to justify the costs of assessment and collection. Existing property tax law implementing this authority generally limits any exemption granted under this constitutional provision by a county board of supervisors to real property with a total base year value, as adjusted annually for inflation as provided, or personal property with a full value, not exceeding $10,000. Existing property tax law also limits any exemption for new construction to situations where the new total base year value of the property, as adjusted for inflation, including the new construction, is $10,000 or less. This bill would raise these maximum exemption amounts from $10,000 to $20,000 for lien dates occurring on or after January 1, 2026, and before January 1, 2031. Existing law requires any bill authorizing a new tax expenditure to contain, among other things, specific goals, purposes, and objectives that the tax exemption will achieve, detailed performance indicators, and data collection requirements. This bill would make specified findings detailing the goal, purpose, and objective of the above-described expansion of a tax exemption, performance indicators for determining whether the expanded exemption meets that goal, purpose, and objective, and data collection requirements. 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 723?
- SB 723 is sponsored by Choi, Steven S. (Republican) and Jim Patterson.
- What is the current status of SB 723?
- This bill has passed the Senate. Introduced February 21, 2025. It now moves to the second chamber.
- Where can I track SB 723?
- Track SB 723 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.
Make your voice heard on SB 723
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 723
Last checked for changes 3 months ago · updated continuously
One Click Politics tracks every bill in Congress and all 50 states.
Track this bill →