A new tax proposal unveiled in early March 2026 is igniting one of the most intense policy debates New Hampshire has seen in years. Known as the “3-3 Tax Savings Plan,” the proposal would introduce a 3% statewide income tax alongside a $3 tax per $1,000 of property value, with the goal of reducing the state’s heavy reliance on local property taxes to fund public education and other services.
The concept was introduced publicly by a coalition of current and former policymakers and advocates led by former New Hampshire Executive Councilor Andru Volinsky. Other organizers associated with the plan include Rep. Tom Oppel (D-Canaan), former Concord mayor and state representative Liz Hager, former Public Utilities Commission member Clifton Below, and several other policy advocates and lawmakers.
Although widely discussed across the state, it’s important to note that the “3-3 Tax Savings Plan” is currently a policy proposal rather than a formally filed bill with a specific bill number in the New Hampshire Legislature. The group behind the plan says their goal is to start a broader public conversation about tax reform and school funding in the state.
Even so, the idea has already generated strong reactions from both supporters and critics, largely because New Hampshire has long built its identity around having no broad-based income tax.
How the “3-3 Tax Savings Plan” Would Work
The proposal combines two main tax components:
A 3% statewide income tax on residents’ earnings
A statewide property tax of $3 per $1,000 of equalized property value
Supporters say the plan could generate roughly $2 billion annually for the state’s Education Trust Fund, which helps finance public schools.
Advocates say that additional funding would allow the state to significantly increase its base education payments to school districts. For example, they suggest the base education grant per student could rise to around $10,000 per student, compared with about $4,266 currently provided by the state.
Proponents argue that increasing state-level funding could allow municipalities to reduce local property tax burdens, which currently fund a large share of education costs.
Built-In Exemptions for Lower-Income Residents
Supporters of the proposal say they designed the tax structure to protect lower-income households and renters.
Key deductions included in the proposal would include:
A $35,000 income tax exemption per taxpayer
A $15,000 deduction for each dependent
An additional $15,000 deduction for single heads of household
A $750 renter credit
A $250,000 homestead exemption for primary residences on the statewide property tax portion
Under those assumptions, advocates say a typical family of four earning about $100,000 annually would pay no income tax under the proposal.
Volinsky and others argue the deductions are designed to make the tax system more progressive while reducing the burden on working- and middle-class residents.
A Direct Challenge to New Hampshire’s Tax Tradition
The proposal has sparked such strong reactions because it challenges one of the most deeply rooted traditions in New Hampshire politics: opposition to broad-based taxes.
For decades, many candidates have signed “The Pledge,” a promise not to support a statewide income or sales tax. The pledge has shaped political campaigns in the state since the 1970s and remains influential today.
Republican leaders — including Governor Kelly Ayotte — quickly rejected the proposal, reaffirming the state’s long-standing position against implementing an income tax.
Some Democratic leaders have also expressed skepticism, signaling that the plan faces a difficult political path even within the party.
Why Property Taxes Are at the Center of the Debate
New Hampshire relies more heavily on local property taxes to fund public education than almost any other state.
Because the state has neither a general sales tax nor a broad income tax, municipalities must often rely on property taxes to fund schools and local services. This system can create significant disparities between communities.
For example, towns with high property values may be able to fund schools with lower tax rates, while towns with smaller tax bases may face higher tax burdens even if they spend less per student.
Supporters of the 3-3 proposal say shifting more education funding to the state level could help stabilize these disparities and reduce local tax pressure.
A Proposal Designed to Start a Conversation
Despite the intense reaction, supporters emphasize that the proposal is not currently moving through the legislature as a formal bill.
Instead, they say the goal is to start a conversation about whether New Hampshire’s tax system — particularly its reliance on property taxes — is sustainable in the long term.
Rep. Tom Oppel (D-Canaan), one of the lawmakers supporting the plan, has said the proposal is intended to encourage residents and policymakers to reconsider how public education is funded in the state.
Whether the proposal eventually becomes legislation remains uncertain, but the debate it has sparked is already shaping conversations across the state.
Why This Debate Matters for Homeowners and Real Estate
For homeowners, buyers, and real estate professionals, the outcome of this debate could have major implications.
Property taxes play a major role in housing affordability and home-buying decisions, especially in a state where local tax rates vary widely from town to town.
If a plan like the “3-3 Tax Savings Plan” were ever adopted, it could shift part of the cost of homeownership from property taxes toward income taxes — potentially changing how buyers evaluate affordability in different communities.
For now, the proposal remains just that: a proposal. But the strong reaction it has generated suggests that New Hampshire’s tax structure — and its reliance on property taxes — may remain one of the most important political and economic debates in the state in the years ahead.