Utah voters rejected Constitutional Amendment B on Tuesday, a legislative proposal that would have required 60% voter approval, instead of a simple majority, for citizen initiatives that raise taxes. MultiState’s results page showed only 37.7% voting yes in unofficial returns, and Ballotpedia’s scorecard listed the measure as defeated.
The vote leaves the rule where it was: a tax-raising initiative in Utah needs more than 50% of the votes cast. Amendment B would have raised that bar to 60% for any initiative that creates a new tax, expands a tax to new items, raises a rate or cuts a property tax rate by less than current law would. A measure with 55% support would have passed before and would have failed under Amendment B.
Stay ahead of Social Security tax news: Miss an enrollment or claim deadline and the money can be gone. Join the Retirement Money Brief and we’ll send you our Will My Social Security Be Taxed? Worksheet as a welcome gift.
Get the Brief + the tax worksheet →
We may earn a commission from links on this page.
What would the 60% rule have covered?
Ballotpedia’s description says the amendment applied to citizen-initiated laws that create a new tax, expand an existing tax to new items or transactions, raise an existing rate, or reduce a property tax rate less than current law would. It would have applied only to initiatives put to a vote after Nov. 1, 2026. Laws passed by the Legislature were never part of it.
That last point drove much of the argument. Lawmakers can change taxes by ordinary majority votes in the House and Senate, while an initiative under Amendment B would have needed three-fifths of the public. The amendment changed the voting rule only for initiatives and left the legislative process alone.
Who sent Amendment B to the ballot?
The Utah Legislature referred the amendment through Senate Joint Resolution 2 in 2025. Sen. Lincoln Fillmore introduced it on Jan. 21, 2025. A Senate committee advanced it 4-1 on Jan. 29, and the full Senate passed it 21-8 on Feb. 5, 2025, after a House committee vote of 7-3 on Feb. 26, the House passed it 55-17 on March 6, 2025. Ballotpedia says every yes vote in both chambers came from a Republican.
Fillmore, of South Jordan, asked in the Deseret News: “How easy do you want it to be to raise taxes on your neighbors?” He questioned whether 50.1% of Utahns should be able to raise taxes on the other 49.9%. Rep. Jason Kyle of Huntsville, the House sponsor, said anyone who wants to raise taxes should have broad support from neighbors.
Billy Hesterman of the Utah Taxpayers Association said the supermajority would ensure tax changes are supported and justified. Rusty Cannon, vice chair of Taxpayer Shield PAC, which backed the amendment, told KSL that “if $3 million is air-dropped into Utah to oppose this, that should tell you obviously what they want.”
What did opponents say it would do?
The opposition campaign, Utahns Protecting Our Constitution, had spent more than $3 million against the amendment before Election Day, much of it from out-of-state donors, KSL reported. Its spokesperson, Scott Cuthbertson, said: “If you want to have your government be more accountable, not less accountable, then vote no on B.”
Elizabeth Rasmussen, who led the committee, called Amendment B an unnecessary, permanent change that takes power from citizens. Opponents argued it could limit access to Medicaid and health care. Rep. Andrew Stoddard, a Sandy Democrat, said it created an unfair standard because the Legislature does not need 60% to change taxes.
Deseret News pointed to a concrete example. Utah’s 2018 Medicaid expansion, Proposition 3, passed with 53.3% of the vote, so it would not have passed under Amendment B. A Noble Predictive Insights poll of likely voters conducted Oct. 26 and 27 found 34% in favor and 56% opposed, close to the result.
Was Utah the only state to reject a tougher tax-vote standard?
No. The Tax Foundation wrote on Wednesday that voters in Utah and California rejected measures that would make it more difficult for the voters themselves to approve tax increases. The same story reported that Colorado’s Amendment 87, a graduated income tax, was narrowly ahead but had not been called.
A proposal pitched as a protection for taxpayers lost by a wide margin in Utah. Its 37.7% yes share was 22.3 points short of the 60% the amendment would have demanded of tax initiatives, and well below the 50% that a plain majority would take.
What changes now for Utah’s tax initiatives?
For taxpayers, nothing changes immediately, because the amendment would have affected only initiatives that reach a ballot. Any future initiative to create or raise a tax in Utah still needs a simple majority, as does one that trims a property tax rate by less than current law would.
The result remains unofficial. MultiState’s page gives the 37.7% yes share and the election date of Nov. 3, with no vote counts.
Voters also saw Amendment A, a separate proposal that changes how the state notifies the public about constitutional amendments. Deseret News reported that it would replace the requirement that proposed amendments be published in newspapers in every county for two months with a format lawmakers choose, as long as notice goes out 60 days before the election. It addresses the problem that voided Amendment D in 2024, when a rushed special session did not allow enough time for the newspaper requirement.
Does your state tax the retirement income you live on?
Utah voters kept the simple-majority rule for tax-raising initiatives, so a state’s tax rules can still change on a plain majority of the votes cast. For retirees, the rules that count are the ones in their own state, and they differ from state to state.
Cut Your Retirement Tax Bill: 12 Moves sets out your state’s rules, including the eight states that tax some Social Security, and works out how much of your Social Security is taxed on one worksheet. It also covers giving from an IRA straight to charity, left out of taxable income.
Get the retirement tax guide that works out how much of your Social Security is taxed →
This article was produced with AI assistance and edited for accuracy against the sources linked above.
David M. Keller is a finance writer based in Columbus, Ohio, covering personal finance and consumer-focused economic topics. He earned his degree in journalism from Ohio University and began his career reporting on local business and economic trends for a regional media outlet. Since then, he has contributed to a variety of online publications, focusing on clear, practical coverage of topics such as cost of living, debt, and everyday financial decision-making.
