A new proposed tax law in Rhode Island is sparking major debate—particularly because it could cost wealthy property owners, including superstar Taylor Swift, more than $100,000 a year in added fees. Nicknamed the “Taylor Swift Tax,” this non-owner-occupied property charge is set to target high-value homes that sit empty for most of the year.
While it might only be a minor hit for someone with a billion-dollar fortune like Taylor, the potential $140,000 annual charge has many homeowners voicing concern.
What Is the ‘Taylor Swift Tax’?
The official name of the proposed charge is the non-owner-occupied tax, and it’s aimed at homeowners who own properties in Rhode Island valued at more than $1 million but don’t use them as their main home. This includes vacation homes, second properties, or investment estates that often remain unoccupied for large parts of the year.
If the law is approved, it will take effect starting July next year.
Why It’s Targeting Watch Hill—and Taylor Swift
One of the most famous properties that could be affected is Taylor Swift’s $17 million Watch Hill mansion. This beachfront home, with eight bedrooms across 12,000 square feet, has become iconic thanks to its appearance in Taylor’s lyrics, Fourth of July parties, and its status as a luxury retreat.
But despite its fame, lawmakers see it as a classic example of a “non-owner-occupied” property. If the new law passes, Taylor Swift could be on the hook for $140,000 per year in extra fees just for this one property.
What Lawmakers Are Saying
Supporters of the tax argue that wealthy, absentee homeowners are making real estate less affordable for local Rhode Islanders. Because these luxury homes sit unused for much of the year, they believe it’s fair to ask the owners to contribute more to the community—especially toward affordable housing projects.
They also say this tax could encourage owners to rent out the homes while they’re not using them, helping to increase housing availability.
Why Some Homeowners Are Worried
Not everyone is happy about the proposal. Many current homeowners are concerned that the new costs will force them to sell their homes if they can’t keep up with the added financial burden. While celebrities like Taylor Swift can afford the tax, the same isn’t true for all second-home owners.
Critics argue the tax could hurt retirees, long-time property owners, and families who own vacation homes but no longer spend as much time there.
Taylor Swift’s Real Estate Empire
Even if Swift has to pay the new Rhode Island tax, it won’t make much of a dent in her real estate empire. She owns properties across the U.S., including:
A $47.7 million collection of apartments and townhouses in New York City’s Tribeca area.
A $1.9 million penthouse in Nashville bought when she was just 20 years old.
The Northumberland Estate in Nashville, a Greek revival home with a guest house.
Several homes with historic charm, luxury features, and high-end renovations.
Despite the controversy, Swift’s Watch Hill mansion remains one of her most iconic properties, inspiring songs like The Last Great American Dynasty and serving as the backdrop for her gatherings and creative moments.
The proposed “Taylor Swift tax” in Rhode Island is meant to target wealthy absentee homeowners and bring in funds for affordable housing. While celebrities like Swift can afford the extra cost, many property owners are raising concerns about how such a law would affect them. If passed, the law will come into effect in July next year and could change how luxury properties are taxed across the state.
