‘Jackass Legislation’: Inside Missouri’s Property Tax Revolt—and What It Means for Homeowners

The sixth and final public hearing of the Missouri House committee on property tax reform played out less like a legislative session and more like the pilot of a reality show. But the real spectacle, according to St. Charles County Collector Michelle McBride, was the relief measures being discussed.

“It’s 'Jackass' legislation, pardon my French,” McBride testified, in remarks first reported by the Missouri Independent. “Done on the dare, done to look good, to sound good, to capture votes, to put on a show, just like some kid on a trail bike lining up the barrels and trying to jump over them.”

A mere five years ago, her comments might have seemed hyperbolic. Today, they echo across statehouses nationwide, as lawmakers confront ballooning property tax bills and the political pressure to respond.

McBride’s sharp critique lays bare a growing frustration with short-term tax gimmicks that steal headlines while failing to deliver meaningful, lasting relief, critics argue. In fact, they say, some may make the system worse.

And her warning to lawmakers was blunt: “It ain’t going to work out. We’re going to hit the fence.”

The boomerang effect of tax freezes

One of the most controversial tools under scrutiny is Missouri’s senior tax freeze law. It was passed in 2023 and went into effect in 2024,  and was originally intended to protect older homeowners on fixed incomes from being priced out of their homes. 

“No senior should be taxed out of their homes due to rising real estate taxes,” the bill’s author, state Sen. Tony Luetkemeyer said. “Under this new legislation, all seniors are protected.”

But as the policy rolls out county by county, officials like McBride say it's creating unintended tax breaks for wealthy homeowners who happen to be seniors.

The freeze holds the portion of an eligible homeowner’s city levy steady. It can be a powerful savings tool, but it can also create significant revenue shortfalls for local governments if applied too liberally, as McBride says it currently is. 

She pointed to 115 properties in St. Charles County worth more than $1 million that were covered by the senior tax freeze, including new construction homes that typically have the highest tax rates applied—one worth a staggering $4 million.

But there are structural concerns as well. By freezing taxes for a select group of homeowners, counties risk hollowing out their tax base and shifting the burden to younger buyers, first-time homeowners, and those in less expensive properties. And once in place, these freezes are difficult to unwind.

“When you create a carve out for one entity,” Steve Hobbs, the executive director of the Missouri Association of Counties explained, “you shift the tax burden to others.”

That’s why McBride urged caution and common sense. “We need you to be the adults in the room,” she implored lawmakers.

The assessment shock

For Jennifer Phanton, her 2023 property tax bill didn’t feel like a surprise so much as a mistake. Her home assessment had more than doubled in a single year after listing improvements she hadn’t made, and comparable sales that weren’t actually comparable.

She appealed the assessment and won, but it was a telling process, she says: “It’s just a lot because the onus is on us, it is not on the county, to prove the valuation.”

Under Missouri law, county assessors are required to reassess property values every two years, and those values must fall within 90% to 100% of market value. The goal is to ensure adequate revenue for local services like schools and emergency response. But some counties are pushing back, after receiving mandates from the Missouri State Tax Commission to increase residential property assessments by 12% to 15%—without conducting in-person inspection.

Why Missouri’s system is under fire

After decades of patchwork reforms, lawmakers are now confronting the same structural flaws that triggered a statewide court-mandated reassessment in the 1980s.

“We’re headed back to the same situation,” state Rep. Rodger Reedy said during the first of six hearings the committee held, as reported by the Missouri Independent. “Two houses are very similar, assessed a lot different amounts, and we will have another lawsuit in the state of Missouri that’s going to cost us millions of dollars if we don’t get our boots on the ground and actually be looking at those properties and knowing what’s there.”

In looking for a cause, all signs point back to the inconsistent application of reassessment across Missouri’s 114 counties. Some counties have hiked values as instructed by the state’s Tax Commission—up to 15% every two years—while others lag behind, fearing backlash or budget instability. 

A 1982 constitutional amendment, dubbed “the Hancock Amendment,” was supposed to keep homeowners’ property taxes steady, even with assessment spikes, by rolling back tax rates accordingly. 

But it hasn’t worked as originally envisioned, as different property classes (like residential vs. commercial) have appreciated at different speeds. Another complication: Missouri is a nondisclosure state, meaning that real estate sales prices are kept private when property changes hands. That can lead to incomplete datasets for assessors, who have to make do with what they have.

Commercial properties have proven to be the biggest blind spots. “There’s no place that you can go to get (commercial) sales prices,” Tracy Baldwin, the Clay County assessor told Beacon News. “Some of the data centers, those are a little more difficult to value, or extra-large commercial buildings.” 

That creates hidden distortions in who pays how much—and fuels a growing number of legal and legislative challenges.

What lawmakers are considering now

Among the most talked-about reforms is a proposal that would separate tax rates for residential, commercial, agricultural, and personal property. Supporters argue this could help prevent the very spikes in one property class that are distorting rollback calculations for others.

Another proposal would require a certificate of value at the time of sale, which would give assessors more transparent market data to work with, and mimic similar reforms in New Mexico, which moved from a nondisclosure to a partial nondisclosure state in 2004. But privacy advocates and real estate professionals remain divided on the idea.

A simpler and potentially game-changing reform championed by McBride: expanding Missouri’s Circuit Breaker program, which offers targeted relief for low-income seniors and disabled homeowners.

What happens next

With the final public hearing concluded, the House committee will now turn its attention to drafting legislation. The volume of testimony—ranging from data-rich assessments to fiery personal accounts—left lawmakers with no shortage of material to sift through.

“It’s a big old bucket of stuff we have to digest,” said Rep. Brad Taylor, who chairs the committee.

The next step is expected during Missouri’s upcoming special session on redistricting, where the committee is likely to reconvene and begin shaping a formal legislative package. Whether meaningful reform will emerge—or be watered down in the process—remains to be seen. But one thing is clear: The pressure on lawmakers isn’t going away.