The burden of Florida's property taxes would likely shift away from first-time homebuyers, developers, snowbirds and landlords and weigh down the state's existing homeowners under a ballot measure approved last year by state lawmakers and pushed this year by Florida's real-estate industry.

  

The biggest benefactors of constitutional Amendment 4, which will appear on the November ballot, would be first-time homebuyers, who would initially pay property taxes as if their houses were worth about half the typical home price in the county where they live.

  

But any property-tax reductions for new homeowners or nonhomeowners would likely involve existing homeowners having to take up at least some of the slack.

 

"It obviously has a lot of implications for homeowners — who are going to end up paying for it in some form — and also for people who will benefit from it," said Christopher McCarty, director of the University of Florida's Bureau of Economic and Business Research.

  

One thing that could partly offset the tax burden shifting to existing homeowners would be the addition of new buildings and houses to the tax rolls, Orange County Property Appraiser Bill Donegan said. But even with extra taxes from such construction, Amendment 4 would likely leave longtime homeowners paying part of the tax break for first-time buyers, he added.

"The homeowners are going to pick up the tab," Donegan said recently. "Look out."

  

Similar to the multilayered tax proposals that have won public support by including politically popular school improvements, Amendment 4 is being sold by Florida Realtors largely as a way to boost the state's housing market. What ad campaigns don't always tout is that Amendment 4 would also carve out larger tax breaks for owners of commercial property.

  

A recent survey by the UF research bureau indicates that Floridians largely support the proposed tax break for first-time homebuyers. In its most recent survey on the amendment, the center reported that 59 percent of those polled favored relief for that group of homebuyers.

 

What does not garner as much support are the tax savings proposed for owners of business property and vacation homes. The ballot measure — crafted by state Rep. Chris Dorworth, R-Lake Mary, a real-estate consultant and a future House speaker — would benefit developers and other owners of nonhomesteaded property by granting them a more-attractive cap on their property-tax increases.

  

Only about one-third of those responding to the UF survey favored giving added breaks to business properties and resort homes. Backers of constitutional amendments in Florida need at least 60 percent voter approval for any measure to pass.

  

Supporters of Amendment 4 — primarily Florida Realtors, the state's largest trade group, with 115,000 members — say lower property taxes would lead to more home sales. Florida TaxWatch has projected that the amendment would result in the creation of about 20,000 jobs and boost home sales by more than 320,000 properties during 10 years.

  

Opponents of the measure say it would reduce property-tax receipts needed by local governments. Of course, local elected officials could always offset any lost revenue by voting to raise their local tax rates, but these days such votes are considered political poison.

 

Several of the state's elected county property appraisers have cautioned that Amendment 4 ultimately would create an uneven playing field that rewards commercial-property owners who hang on to their buildings and land — just as the state's Save Our Homes amendment, passed by voters in 1992, has benefited longtime homeowners by limiting increases in their taxable-property values to no more than 3 percent a year.

  

To further sweeten Amendment 4 for the voting public, the Legislature decided that it would not affect funding for schools. Because local education funds would not be affected, the Florida School Boards Association has not taken a position on Amendment 4.

 

The school organization's neutral position on the tax amendment does not necessarily mean the measure is good for the state, said Wayne Blanton, the association's executive director. Speaking personally, he said, Florida's constitution has been assailed enough without further complicating it with new tax proposals.

  

"As a general rule," Blanton said, "I think we've over-amended our constitution. Voters have had enough of amendments that are confusing, and they're not clear, and it's hard to say what they'll do five or 10 years down the road."

 

Florida's property-tax structure has been in increasing upheaval since voters approved the Save Our Homes constitutional amendment two decades ago. In the years since passage of that measure, landlords and other groups of property owners have shouldered a disproportionate amount of the state's property-tax burden. Politicians have responded by pushing amendments aimed at smoothing out the inequities.