Iowa voters are deciding whether to make certain income-tax increases harder for future legislatures to enact. Amendment 1, on the November 3 general-election ballot, would write a two-thirds vote requirement into the state Constitution for bills that raise specified income-tax rates or establish a new state tax on income.
The legislative text would require at least two-thirds of all elected members in both chambers. In the 100-member House, that means 67 votes instead of the 51 needed for a simple majority; in the 50-member Senate, it means 34 rather than 26. The proposal covers individual and corporate income-tax rates, as well as other state taxes based on income or legal and special reserves.
The amendment would not itself raise or lower a tax. An official county election notice reproduces the certified ballot language, which excludes taxes imposed at a local government’s option. It also gives challengers one year after enactment to sue over whether a covered bill passed correctly; after that deadline, the law would be treated as properly enacted under the new section.
How the measure reached voters
Iowa constitutional amendments must clear two successive General Assemblies before going to voters. The Legislature’s publication record says lawmakers approved this proposal in 2024 and again on May 3, 2026. The second resolution directs submission at the 2026 general election and would add a new Article XIII on taxation limitations if ratified.
A “yes” vote adopts the supermajority rule; a “no” vote keeps the existing simple-majority standard. Because the amendment is limited to income-based taxes, it would not impose the same two-thirds hurdle on changes to sales taxes or other levies outside the text.
The text also directs the General Assembly to pass implementing laws. Every future bill covered by the amendment would have to contain a separate provision describing the special enactment requirement, creating a clear legislative record of whether the two-thirds rule applies. The one-year litigation deadline would then limit how long that procedural question could remain open.
The policy dispute
Supporters argue that the higher threshold would protect taxpayers from abrupt increases when political control changes. Iowans for Tax Relief has promoted the measure as a durable check on future legislatures, according to Iowa Public Radio.
Opponents, led by a coalition that includes Common Good Iowa, labor, education and hunger-policy groups, argue that restricting income-tax options could shift pressure toward sales taxes or spending cuts. Supporters reject that forecast and say lawmakers can maintain services by limiting spending growth. Those are competing projections; the ballot measure itself sets a voting rule and does not mandate a future budget outcome.
Iowa Public Radio reported that 15 states had some form of supermajority requirement for income-tax increases as of April 2025. Iowa voters’ immediate choice is narrower: whether to move a specified class of state tax decisions from ordinary legislative majorities to a constitutionally protected two-thirds threshold.
