San Diego voters rejecting measure that would heavily tax second homes

[Zorro]

A highly divisive measure that would impose a hefty tax on the owners of second homes that lack a full-time resident was failing to garner majority support from San Diego voters as of Wednesday morning.

While thousands of votes remained to be counted, it appeared that the well-funded campaign to defeat San Diego’s Measure A may have resonated with an electorate that was told that the tax would do nothing to address the city’s affordable housing woes. The latest numbers from the San Diego County Registrar of Voters showed the measure still trailing by a wide margin.

“The unofficial results show that there is a hefty rebuke from the taxpayers of San Diego that they don’t want another tax,” said Shane Harris, the No on Measure A spokesperson. “It was not backed by fact. It was not backed by data. And it’s evident now that taxpayers do not want another tax. And this is a very clear rebuke, very strong rebuke in unofficial results that the trend shows that we’re going to win this outright, very strongly tonight.”

Known formally as the non-primary homes tax, the measure seeks to impose an initial annual tax of $8,000 on second homes deemed unoccupied for more than 182 days in a single year. In subsequent years, the tax would rise to $10,000. For corporate-owned housing, there would be an initial surcharge of $4,000 that would increase to $5,000 thereafter.

https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/2026/06/02/san-diego-measure-that-would-heavily-tax-owners-of-second-homes-trailing-in-early-returns/?share=twasi2arnodoor0ddien

[bucolic_frolic]

1. lol, yeah see some problems with that measure

That tax would raise the cost of owning a second home, so renting it out or selling it out, the owner would want more money. Plus BONUS! The tax is less for corporate-owned homes, a break for private equity! Not a lot to like there, for taxpaying voters anyway.

[dickthegrouch]

2. EMPTY second homes would have been taxed

If I understood the news reports this was supposed to reduce empty house hoarding.
Characterizing the measure incorrectly is probably one of the things that helped sink it.
However the extra money from the tax would just have gone into the general fund and not a special fund to help the homeless, that was my principal objection to it.

[LogDog75]

3. I live next to San Diego but if I could have voted I would have voted against it

For the record, I own only one home and that's the one I live in full-time. I don't see the measure as having an impact on providing more housing in the area which was one of the major arguments the measure made. The homes are already sujbect to a property tax and imposing an additional tax on a second home wouldn't, IMO, encourage the homeowners to rent or sell their second home because if they can afford not renting a second home they could easily afford to pay the tax. Also, the amount raised, while in the millions, would only have a minor impact in raising revenue for the city.

[Jacson6]

4. This was a poor idea. Just use property taxes at one rate for every property owner.

What? Were they going to camp outside of a home to see if they were living in them 182 days each year? Sheesh