Senate Joint Resolution 6 would amend the state’s constitution to allow the legislature to reduce or eliminate the ad valorem tax on automobiles and all other personal property, while calling on future legislatures to somehow replace the lost revenue. Like 2022’s Amendment 2, which was rejected by West Virginia voters by nearly a two-to-one margin, SJR 6 would take property taxing authority away from local communities and give the significant power over funding for local public services to the state legislature.
Personal property taxes totaled $1.05 billion in tax year 2024, accounting for over 40 percent of all local property tax revenue. The constitutional amendment proposed by the committee substitute for SJR 6 would give the legislature control over all personal property taxes, including business machinery and equipment, business inventory, the working interest of natural gas personal property, and personal vehicles. This is significantly broader than the language in 2022’s Amendment 2 which did not include natural gas personal property.
Property taxes provide revenue for the essential public structures, services, and programs that enhance the quality of life for all people in the state. In West Virginia, property taxes are primarily a local revenue, providing over $2.5 billion in 2024 for local public services like libraries, police and fire protection, parks and recreation, and senior centers, with over two-thirds of property tax revenue funding local school districts.
The proposed exemptions under SJR 6 would cause local governments to lose constitutional protections for an important revenue stream that they cannot easily make up due to their limited capacity to raise revenue. The $1.05 billion in property tax revenue from personal vehicles and all other personal property accounts for more than 70 percent of total property tax revenue in some counties.
| County | Total Personal Property Tax Revenue | Personal Property Tax Revenue as a Share of Total Property Tax Revenue |
| BARBOUR | $6,671,518 | 55.1% |
| BERKELEY | $28,000,135 | 18.5% |
| BOONE | $7,229,690 | 31.7% |
| BRAXTON | $3,531,453 | 33.7% |
| BROOKE | $36,525,637 | 65.7% |
| CABELL | $36,771,242 | 32.9% |
| CALHOUN | $824,165 | 10.8% |
| CLAY | $1,172,467 | 26.4% |
| DODDRIDGE | $53,019,247 | 74.3% |
| FAYETTE | $9,192,333 | 24.1% |
| GILMER | $1,932,958 | 28.6% |
| GRANT | $3,819,947 | 22.0% |
| GREENBRIER | $7,832,136 | 21.7% |
| HAMPSHIRE | $3,271,741 | 16.9% |
| HANCOCK | $12,233,165 | 42.0% |
| HARDY | $3,364,301 | 23.1% |
| HARRISON | $52,835,106 | 42.3% |
| JACKSON | $16,147,087 | 40.6% |
| JEFFERSON | $11,823,235 | 13.7% |
| KANAWHA | $68,182,163 | 27.2% |
| LEWIS | $14,533,528 | 52.8% |
| LINCOLN | $835,607 | 9.3% |
| LOGAN | $13,845,380 | 45.0% |
| MARION | $17,397,515 | 27.8% |
| MARSHALL | $136,340,364 | 69.7% |
| MASON | $6,586,372 | 25.9% |
| MCDOWELL | $6,940,012 | 39.7% |
| MERCER | $10,792,449 | 23.9% |
| MINERAL | $8,321,817 | 35.1% |
| MINGO | $6,738,370 | 34.2% |
| MONONGALIA | $46,638,825 | 32.7% |
| MONROE | $2,397,466 | 25.7% |
| MORGAN | $2,848,020 | 16.1% |
| NICHOLAS | $6,211,694 | 34.8% |
| OHIO | $39,060,010 | 49.2% |
| PENDLETON | $1,091,758 | 15.2% |
| PLEASANTS | $9,110,872 | 56.3% |
| POCAHONTAS | $1,495,394 | 14.9% |
| PRESTON | $5,909,375 | 24.9% |
| PUTNAM | $18,313,714 | 25.4% |
| RALEIGH | $24,712,411 | 33.7% |
| RANDOLPH | $4,960,949 | 26.1% |
| RITCHIE | $27,326,195 | 68.4% |
| ROANE | $2,107,574 | 22.1% |
| SUMMERS | $1,091,764 | 14.2% |
| TAYLOR | $8,948,488 | 39.0% |
| TUCKER | $2,079,908 | 21.7% |
| TYLER | $124,109,488 | 79.7% |
| UPSHUR | $4,666,304 | 31.4% |
| WAYNE | $10,312,571 | 31.4% |
| WEBSTER | $1,188,200 | 32.4% |
| WETZEL | $80,908,330 | 72.5% |
| WIRT | $916,851 | 16.2% |
| WOOD | $28,382,631 | 30.8% |
| WYOMING | $9,390,471 | 37.9% |
| TOTAL | $1,050,890,403 | 40.5% |
Source: WVCBP analysis of WV State Tax Department data
While the proposed amendment calls for the legislature to “provide an equal or greater revenue share to those counties impacted” by the revenue loss, it does not provide a mechanism or permanent funding stream to do so. Nor does the proposed amendment specify how future years’ revenue losses would be calculated. With the state facing hundreds of millions of dollars in future projected budget gaps, it is not fiscally feasible to replace even a fraction of the potential lost revenue.
The amendment proposed by SJR 6 would weaken the ability of local governments to invest in education, roads, public safety, recreation, and more. Local governments would lose significant power and authority over their own sources of revenue and would be forced to rely on promises from state lawmakers to fund their own public services – promises which, as explained above, are not expected to be fiscally feasible to keep.
Like with Amendment 2, arguments for eliminating the personal property tax are not based on evidence and data. There is little evidence that West Virginia’s property tax curtails economic growth. Instead, research shows that the public services that are funded by property taxes are the same factors that attract businesses and people to the state, help the economy grow, and create a shared prosperity.
