Your Property Tax Bill in 2030
See how much three major policy changes could cost you and your family

In the years leading up to 2010, property taxes in Wisconsin were on a steady upward trajectory, with residents paying roughly 20 to 30 percent more than the national average. Those trends put Wisconsin near the top nationally in property tax burden.  

That trajectory began to shift in 2011. Reforms such as Act 10 and tighter limits on local spending were enacted to slow the growth of major cost drivers affecting local governments and school districts and ultimately reduce pressure on property taxpayers. 

For more than a decade, those reforms delivered results. Property tax growth stabilized, and Wisconsin moved closer to the national average on a per capita basis. The figure below demonstrates that progress. Wisconsin still ranks 10th nationally in property taxes as a share of home value, so there is still work to be done. But the trend shows that we’ve made meaningful progress over time. 

But that progress is now at risk. 

Several major policy changes on the horizon could cause the state to reverse course. If enacted, they would push Wisconsin back toward its previous position as one of the highest property tax states in the country. 

So what are the policy changes on the horizon? We’ll get into each in more detail below, but here is each policy under consideration that could have an impact on your property tax bill.  

• Repeal of Act 10 
• 400 Year Veto 
• Increase in Revenue Limits  

The tool above shows the potential impact on your property taxes by 2030, if each of these three policies become reality.  

Potential Policy Changes on Horizon  

Act 10 

Last year, a lawsuit was filed challenging the constitutionality of key provisions of Act 10. While the case is still pending before the Court of Appeals, the plaintiffs are seeking to overturn the law, which has played a central role in controlling costs and limiting pressure on property taxpayers. Furthermore, a number of candidates for governor have pledged to repeal Act 10 should they be elected.  

WILL has done extensive work on the potential costs of a repeal of Act 10. A restoration of collective bargaining rights would have unions demanding similar compensation and benefits as they enjoyed prior to the passage of the law. Using data from DPI’s All Staff files, total compensation on average in school districts would need to increase by about $17,000 after adjusting for inflation to equal the levels that were paid out in 2010-11.  

Our estimates show that repealing Act 10 would result in approximately $1.6 billion in new costs for school districts alone, not including an additional $500 million from other local governments.  

As noted in our earlier work, these costs won’t take immediate effect. Instead, they will be a product of new collective bargaining agreements over several years. But, given the composition of the state Supreme Court and existing legal challenges, it seems likely that by 2030 much of the taxpayer consequence may be felt. 

400-Year Veto 

Governor Evers’ 400-Year veto was recently upheld by the State Supreme Court, and the Governor has rejected an effort by the legislature to repeal it. The most important ‘feature’ of the veto is that it compounds over time: granting increasing authority for school districts to raise property taxes each year for the next 400 years. The figure below shows how much the per pupil revenue limit authority will grow over the first 10-years of implementation. By 2030, it will grow to an additional $2,600 per student in every district around the state. 

Revenue Limit Changes 

This spring, a group of school districts, teachers unions, and individuals filed a lawsuit challenging Wisconsin’s school funding system and seeking significant increases in allowable spending. 

One of the central claims in the case is that revenue limits have not kept up with inflation. 

While this is true, it overlooks an important shift in how schools are funded. A much larger share of state support now comes through categorical aids that exist outside the revenue limit formula, as discussed in our recent FAQ on the case. 

In other words, focusing on revenue limits alone does not capture the full picture of school funding. 

Based on our analysis, matching revenue limits to their 2010–11 levels would require an average increase of approximately $3,190 per student across districts in the state. 

The Calculator – Methodology 

Our calculator attempts to account for all of these factors.to paint for taxpayers of where their property taxes might be in four years’ time if all of these goals come to fruition.  For each district in the state, we estimate: 

1. The increase in total district employee compensation needed to match 2010-11 levels. 

1. The set amount of the 400-year veto per student in 2030 using current enrollment counts. 

1. The increase in revenue limit authority that would be needed to match 2010-11 levels.  

To ensure that we are making as conservative estimates as possible, we recognize the possibility that revenue limit increases and veto authority could be used to increase compensation. Thus, we only include the compensation adjustment when it exceeds the combined impact of the other two factors.  

As you look at each district, you can tell if compensation played a role by looking at the “Act 10 Driven?” question under the interactive portion. Compensation played a role in that district if it says “Yes.” 

We also include two estimates: 

• One assumes no additional state aid, meaning the full cost is reflected in local property taxes. 

• The second assumes the state increases aid at current rates, reducing the direct impact on property taxes. In this case, the existing funding mix is preserved. For example, if a district is funded 60 percent by the state, 30 percent by local property taxes, and 10 percent by the federal government, those proportions would remain unchanged. 

Even in the second scenario, taxpayers still bear the cost through other taxes.  Our calculator brings these policy changes together to estimate what they could mean for property taxpayers over the next several years if they are fully implemented. 

What it Means  

In the end, there truly is no such thing as a free lunch when it comes to Wisconsin’s education funding. The combined effect of repealing Act 10, preserving the 400-year veto, and dramatically expanding revenue limits would represent the largest property tax increases in state history.  

By 2030, many Wisconsin taxpayers could face thousands in new taxes, with costs falling heaviest on local taxpayers even under the most optimistic assumptions about new state aid. The interactive calculator above makes these impacts concrete. Wisconsin families deserve honest transparency about these proposals: they are not “investments” that come at no cost — they are a direct transfer from taxpayers’ wallets to government spending. Policymakers and voters should carefully weigh whether this path truly serves students and communities or simply expands government at the expense of hardworking Wisconsin families.