PROVIDENCE, R.I. (WPRI) – A new tax on high-end Rhode Island homes that sit empty for most of the year took effect Wednesday, affecting thousands of property owners across the state.

Rhode Island’s Non-Owner Occupied Property Tax — also known as the “Taylor Swift tax,” a nickname inspired by the pop star’s estate in Westerly’s affluent Watch Hill neighborhood — is a new state-level tax on residential properties assessed at more than $1 million that aren’t occupied by the owner or a tenant for at least 183 days a year.

The tax is charged at a rate of $2.50 for every $500 of assessed value above $1 million, on top of the property taxes owners already pay to their city or town.

For example, Swift’s mansion, known as “Holiday House” or “High Watch,” is assessed at more than $28 million, according to Westerly land records. If it’s determined that she doesn’t occupy the residence for more than half the year, Swift’s tax bill would increase by about $136,000 annually under the new law, unless she qualifies for an exemption. (The law uses the assessed value set by municipalities and not the sales value.)

Revenue from the tax is earmarked for Rhode Island’s Low-Income Housing Tax Credit Fund, which is used to build affordable housing across the state.

R.I. Division of Taxation spokesperson Paul Grimaldi said, as of May, the state had identified 22,431 residential properties statewide with an assessed value over $1 million. Of those, 8,245 properties were flagged as non-owner-occupied and could be subject to the new tax.

The state sent notices earlier this year to owners who may owe the tax, explaining how they can seek an exemption.

Who qualifies for an exemption?

There are currently two ways to get out of paying.

A home can be exempt if it is rented long-term for more than 183 days a year or if the owner is running the property as a registered short-term rental (Airbnb-style) that’s booked more than half the year and paying the state’s lodging taxes.

Michael Pereira, president of the Rhode Island Association of Realtors, said the “Taylor Swift” nickname for the tax distracts from the financial impact the levy could have on property values.

“It romanticized the actual act,” he said. “She’s going to be paying over $130,000. It’s substantial.”

Pereira said his organization was caught off guard when legislative leaders slipped the tax into last year’s state budget at the last minute without the kind of public hearings that accompanied previous versions of the proposal.

“We were sort of blindsided by that,” he said. “We didn’t have any time to put together a survey.”

His chief concern is how the state will ensure the tax is administered fairly.

“People are going to receive bill notifications from the state who actually occupy the property or perhaps have a rental,” Pereira said. “Is there a lot of red tape to prove that you’re innocent and you don’t owe the tax?”

Pereira also raised the possibility that the tax could push part-time residents to sell, flooding the high-end market. So far this year, Pereira said Rhode Island home sales under $1 million are down 3% compared to last year, while sales over $1 million are up 8%.

Pereira said it’s too early to know whether the tax is the cause.

An earlier fiscal analysis prepared by the Division of Taxation projected that the tax would generate about $24.5 million in its first year, growing to more than $27 million by 2031, once more people come into compliance.

The analysis showed more than 90% of the homes subject to the tax were valued between $1 million and $5 million, 6% up to $10 million, and 1% up to $15 million. Less than 1% of homes subject to the tax were valued above that amount.

Property owners subject to the tax can pay in quarterly installments beginning Sept. 15 or in a single lump sum by that date.

“I just feel like the way we’re going about it … we’re deterring people to want to invest in Rhode Island,” Pereira said. 

Political parties are quick to declare victory when the bills they support make it into law. But for Vermont’s Republican minority in the Legislature, it was the laws they succeeded in rolling back this year that seem to have the party celebrating just as much.

In a newsletter to supporters last month, Paul Dame, chair of the Vermont Republican Party, adopted a sweeping tone as he reflected on the 2026 legislative session that had ended just days before.

“If Vermont’s Republicans are not the most effective minority in any legislature in the country, then I’d like to hear who is,” Dame wrote in the email. The GOP accomplished its goals, he went on, “in ways that seemed impossible just two years ago.”

Two years ago, Vermont’s 2023-24 legislative biennium ended with Democrats enacting six bills into law that Republican Gov. Phil Scott had vetoed and that Scott’s GOP allies in the House and Senate broadly opposed. Democrats were able to do so because they had a supermajority of seats in both chambers.

But then, voters elected a wave of additional Republicans to the House and Senate that November — many if not all of them maligning some of those new laws on the campaign trail — and the political dynamic in the Statehouse changed.

In the two years since, Republicans enjoyed more committee leadership roles, which dictate which bills get airtime, and found an easier path to get some of their party’s priorities into law. Dame pointed, for example, to a 2025 law expanding state tax breaks for military retirees, something Scott had backed for years with no success.