by Ben Kinsley

As a property taxpayer, I was relieved to see that the December 1^st letter from the Tax Commissioner did not warn of another double-digit tax increase. However, as a public policy advocate, that relief dissipated as I dug into the details. 

While education spending is not projected to increase as steeply as it did last year, there is still $115M¹ in new education spending predicted from school districts. On top of that, there is $69M² in one-time funds that the legislature used last year that will fall to property taxpayers this year. In total, that means $184M in new pressure on taxes (an 8% increase). When compared to last year’s increase of $182M³ in new spending, we realize there is no meaningful change. Yes, new spending is down this year, but the total increased liability for taxpayers is indistinguishable.

So, if the increase in total tax liability is the same. Why are property taxes not up double digits again? Well, there are a couple factors, but it mostly has to do with economic drivers. First, there is a $33M surplus that is projected from FY2025 (revenues from current taxes are higher than expected). The second reason is that projected consumption tax revenues are up $21.9M for FY2026⁴. Finally, a hefty 14.7% increase in property values that are not evenly distributed around the state will also help mitigate the increased tax burden on some households (unless you are one of the unlucky ones at the high end of the increasing grand list values). Additionally, new tax sources like the short-term rental surcharge and the cloud tax are part of the calculation this year that were not a factor last year. Again, artificially decreasing pressure on property taxes despite the appetite for spending.

While it is tempting to consider, in the context of last year, a 5.9% increase in Vermonter’s property tax bills a victory, when we reframe the context around what that actually means for the household budgets of our friends and neighbors, the story changes. The US inflation rate for Q4 of this year was 2.3% and looking ahead to Q3 of 2025 (when the FY2026 property taxes would go into effect), it is projected to be the same⁵. This means that the increased tax burden is 2.6x higher than inflation. A strong indicator that incomes will not keep pace with this tax increase.

The average property tax bill in Vermont is $4,697 annually⁶, which translates to another $277 that taxpayers can expect to shell out for the 2025/26 school year. That is more than a full week’s worth of groceries for a typical Vermont family. It’s also more than two months’ worth of electricity⁷. For a family that is not income-sensitized, the increase is even more pronounced. On a $500k home in South Burlington, for example, a family paying based on their property value instead of income could expect to see a $534 increase in their property tax bill next year⁸.

As pointed out by Tom Pelham earlier this year⁹, the reason we are in this mess to begin with is that we have consistently seen annual increases in education spending (school budgets) in the double digits over the last five years (a total spending increase of 30% from FY2019-24). Federal funds and the growth in sales taxes have largely masked this skyrocketing spending, but it’s now catching up with us in the form of higher property taxes. Fixing this propensity for spending requires structural reform that introduces more accountability and transparency into our education funding system. We spend the second most per student out of any state in the country, yet our results are far from second best.¹⁰ 

What we have is a distribution of resources problem. The resources we have are not making it to the right places to improve (or even maintain) outcomes for students. Educators, administrators, and policymakers have been constantly distracted by new shiny objects. The good news is that this is fixable if policymakers set a laser-focus on the common outcomes we all want (improved test scores, post-secondary readiness, college placement, etc.) and create the incentives to hit them and empower folks on the ground to strive for greatness. Today, too many of the incentives are misplaced – leading to disproportionately high spending and declining outcomes. I hope legislators are up to the task.

Ben Kinsley has over a decade of public policy experience in Vermont. Working for non-profit organizations, he has shaped public policy in areas such as education, elections, and ethics. He currently serves as the Interim Executive Director for Campaign for Vermont, a non-partisan advocacy group seeking to grow the state’s middle class.

1. See second paragraph under “Key Considerations…” in Tax Commissioner’s letter. ↩︎
2. See second paragraph under “Key Considerations…” in Tax Commissioner’s letter. ↩︎
3. See the increase in education payments (to school districts) from FY2024-25 in the December 2024 Education Fund Outlook. ↩︎
4. Combined increases in $16.2M for Sales & Use Tax, $1.7M for Purchase & Use Tax, and $4M for the Meals & Rooms Tax based on the December 2024 Education Fund Outlook. ↩︎
5. See https://tradingeconomics.com/forecast/inflation-rate?continent=america ↩︎
6. See https://smartasset.com/taxes/vermont-property-tax-calculator ↩︎
7. See https://www.consumeraffairs.com/movers/vermont-cost-of-living.html ↩︎
8. Calculated using the smartasset Vermont property tax calculator. ↩︎
9. See “Are we Headed for Another Fiscal Cliff” by former Tax Commissioner Tom Pelham. ↩︎
10.  See my commentary from July: https://www.campaignforvermont.org/what_s_really_going_on_with_education ↩︎