North Dakota could soon make history by becoming the first U.S. state to eliminate property taxes — a bold move that supporters argue will ease the financial burden on homeowners and open doors for first-time buyers.

However, critics warn this sweeping change could leave local communities struggling to fund essential services, forcing them to depend on an uncertain state solution.

Don't miss

• Commercial real estate has beaten the stock market for 25 years — but only the super rich could buy in. Here's how even ordinary investors can become the landlord of Walmart, Whole Foods or Kroger

• Nervous about November? Use these 3 ‘shockproof assets’ to protect your retirement nest egg in 2025 — no matter who takes the White Houses

• Protect your retirement savings with these 5 essential money moves — most of which you can complete in just minutes

Growing frustration with rising property taxes has fueled support for the measure, with advocates claiming it will provide long-needed relief and help make real estate more affordable.

The ballot question is straightforward, yet it carries serious implications: should North Dakota scrap property taxes altogether, fundamentally altering how local governments are funded?

By shifting this responsibility to the state, the measure would dismantle a primary revenue stream for counties and municipalities, raising concerns about how — and if — these services would continue unaffected.

Measure faces a long road

With the election right around the corner, voters in the traditionally conservative state are trending towards a no vote. North Dakota voters rejected a similar proposal in 2012, and the 2024 edition is facing similar voter headwinds.

A North Dakota Monitor poll from late September indicated that 40% of voters plan to vote against it, with 28% in favor — while a significant one-third remain undecided.

Opponents, including Republican Governor Doug Burgum, argue that property taxes are crucial for funding schools, emergency services, infrastructure, and other public services.

Removing this dependable revenue stream would destabilize budgets across counties and cities, potentially putting essential services at risk.

“It's complete misinformation to say that if you vote for that thing, that somehow that you're ending property taxes, you're stopping property taxes; you won't,” Burgum said at a recent gathering in the North Dakota town of Watford City.

“What you will do, is, you will cause someone else to pick up the tab, that's what this whole thing is about. It's about who's going to pay for it, it doesn't lower the cost of delivering anything in our state, it just shifts the burden to somebody else."