For decades, New Hampshire has relied overwhelmingly on local property taxes to fund public schools.  In fact, in 2019, over 70 cents of every dollar raised for public schools came from local property taxes, the largest share in the country.

This approach has more than a few shortcomings, but none is more glaring that the inequities it forces local property taxpayers to endure.  Given the unequal distribution of property wealth across New Hampshire, this approach means that communities with relatively high property values can produce the funds needed to educate local schoolchildren with very low tax rates.  In contrast, communities with comparatively low property values must impose substantially higher rates, often while yielding lower levels of resources for their public schools.

As a result, as the three comparisons included here demonstrate, expensive homes in affluent areas can end up with property tax bills that are almost identical to – or even less than – those for more affordable homes in working-class towns.

Outcomes like these are as indefensible as they are inequitable.  A family in one part of New Hampshire should not be expected to pay the same amount in school property taxes as a family elsewhere in the state, if their homes are hundreds of thousands of dollars apart in value.  Outcomes like these are particularly egregious since they arise from the failure of the State of New Hampshire to fulfill its responsibility to provide an adequate education for every child, regardless of where they may live.  Yet, outcomes like these could largely be eliminated if the State of New Hampshire were to generate the funds needed to meet its educational obligations through a source of revenue that had a single, uniform rate that was the same for everyone, whether they lived in Newington or Charlestown or in Moultonborough or Claremont.