This is for general informational purposes only. Consult with your CPA, tax advisor, and/or attorney for guidance specific to your situation. Measure ULA rules, ballot language, and local reform proposals can change.
Measure ULA reform is back in the conversation. For the last three years, most owners have treated ULA as a painful but known cost. That may not be enough anymore.
There are now three ULA scenarios worth modeling before November 2026:
- ULA remains in its current form.
- A statewide measure limits local real estate transfer taxes.
- Los Angeles puts a local reform package in front of voters.
No one should assume which path wins. The practical question is underwriting. What does each outcome do to exit value, buyer pool, refinance math, and timing?
Where Measure ULA Stands Today
Measure ULA applies to qualifying real estate transfers in the City of Los Angeles. It is not a Santa Monica tax, a Culver City tax, or a countywide tax.
The Los Angeles Office of Finance currently lists the first ULA tier at 4% from $5.3 million through just under $10.6 million, and the second tier at 5.5% starting at $10.6 million. The City’s base real property transfer tax still applies separately at $2.25 per $500, which is effectively 0.45%.
The thresholds adjust. For transactions closing after June 30, 2026, the Office of Finance says the new ULA thresholds will be $5.4 million and $10.9 million.
That matters for owners close to the line. The proceeds calculation changes materially once a sale crosses the first threshold.
If you want to know how that affects your building, start with a real valuation, not a rule of thumb. FIG offers a complimentary broker opinion of value.
Why November 2026 Matters
The California Secretary of State lists initiative 1983, formally titled “Limits Ability of Voters to Raise Revenues for Local Government Services,” as eligible for the November 2026 ballot.
As of the Secretary of State’s May 2026 status page, the measure is eligible for the ballot. Eligible measures become qualified on the 131st day before the next statewide general election unless withdrawn before qualification.
The official summary says the measure would raise the approval threshold for voter-proposed local special taxes from a simple majority to two-thirds. It would also prohibit charter-city voters from approving real estate transfer taxes other than the existing 0.11% transfer tax authorized by Revenue and Taxation Code section 11911. Existing noncompliant property-related taxes would be overturned two years after enactment.
That is the statewide pressure point.
If the measure passes and applies as summarized, ULA may not remain a permanent assumption in its current form. If it fails, ULA could continue as-is unless Los Angeles voters approve a separate local change.
The Local Measure ULA Reform Lane
Affordable LA’s April 2026 “Mend It, Don’t End It” briefing proposes a package that would preserve ULA’s housing mission while changing how the tax applies. The proposal is not current law, but it shows where the policy conversation may go.
The proposal includes a 15-year exemption for newly built multifamily and commercial properties, a 1% to 2% ULA cap on non-single-family properties after year 15, disaster relief, financing flexibility, stronger reporting standards, and bonding authority.
For existing apartment owners, the rate cap is the line item to watch. For developers, the 15-year exemption is the bigger issue.
That is where people get hurt. Buyers may discount offers because reform looks possible. Sellers may wait because relief looks possible. Both can be wrong.
What the Current Data Shows
The City of Los Angeles open data portal currently shows 1,497 ULA transactions and about $1.09 billion in ULA revenue in the public dataset reviewed May 27, 2026.
For fiscal year 2026, the same dataset shows 412 transactions and about $363.4 million in ULA revenue. Multifamily residential properties accounted for 59 of those FY2026 transactions and about $58.9 million in ULA revenue.
The reform coalition’s April 2026 briefing argues the other side of the ledger. It cites a 67% reduction in $5 million-plus transactions in the City of Los Angeles after ULA, based on a RAND Housing Center analysis. It also says $589 million remained unspent across ULA programs and that 9.3% of the FY2025-26 expenditure plan had been spent six months into the year.
Those claims should be read carefully because the briefing is advocacy material. Still, ULA is now being debated as a transaction-volume and development-feasibility issue, not just as a revenue tool.
How Owners Should Model the Three Scenarios
If you own a City of Los Angeles apartment building that may trade above the ULA threshold, the next step is scenario modeling.
Scenario 1: ULA Remains As-Is
This is the base case.
Under this scenario, sellers continue to model ULA as a direct reduction in net proceeds, and buyers continue to underwrite the cost into pricing.
For Westside apartment buildings, the current pricing backdrop is not loose enough to absorb sloppy assumptions. FIG’s pricing system currently shows stabilized Westside multifamily cap rates around 5.5% to 5.75%, value-add cap rates around 4.75% to 5.25%, and GRMs around 11.0 to 14.5.
That does not mean every building trades in that band. It means the rent roll, unit mix, deferred maintenance, jurisdiction, and buyer profile matter.
For more context on where buyers are underwriting today, read our Los Angeles multifamily cap rates 2026 update.
Scenario 2: Statewide Measure Limits ULA
If the statewide measure passes and applies as summarized, the long-term ULA burden could change dramatically.
But owners should not assume immediate relief. The Secretary of State summary references a two-year timeline for overturning noncompliant property-related taxes after enactment. There may also be litigation, implementation questions, and local responses.
For sellers, this creates a timing problem. Waiting may preserve upside if the tax is reduced or removed. Waiting may also expose you to market risk, rent-control changes, capital expenditures, or a softer buyer pool.
The right answer depends on the building.
A clean, well-located Westside property with durable income may have more flexibility. A building with near-term debt maturity may not.
Our LA rent control guide explains why the rent roll drives valuation more than surface-level price-per-unit comps.
Scenario 3: Los Angeles Reforms ULA Locally
The local reform proposal is the most nuanced scenario.
A 15-year new-construction exemption would matter most to developers and new projects. A 1% to 2% cap on non-single-family properties after year 15 would matter more broadly to larger apartment sales.
If a rate cap became law, it could narrow the proceeds gap on larger multifamily transactions without eliminating ULA entirely.
But a coalition briefing is not a ballot measure. A ballot measure is not an enacted ordinance. Litigation can also change the final result.
The practical move is to model today’s tax rate, model a lower ULA burden, then decide whether the difference is large enough to change timing.
What This Means for Westside Apartment Owners
For FIG’s core Westside markets, the relevance depends on city boundaries. Santa Monica has its own rent control system and is not subject to City of Los Angeles ULA. If you own there, start with the Santa Monica multifamily market and local transfer-tax rules.
West LA, Brentwood, Mar Vista, Palms, and Westwood can fall inside the City of Los Angeles, which means ULA may be directly relevant.
The same sale price can produce different net proceeds depending on jurisdiction, threshold, timing, debt, basis, and transaction structure. Talk to your CPA and attorney before making tax or legal decisions.
What About Santa Monica Measure GS?
Santa Monica owners have a related but separate issue: Measure GS. ULA does not apply to Santa Monica. Measure GS does.
Santa Monica’s transfer-tax structure has its own cliff: under $5 million, the city tax is 0.3%; from $5 million to $8 million, the city tax is 0.6%; at $8 million and above, the city tax jumps to 5.6%. With the county tax included, the total rate at $8 million and above is about 5.71%.
That means a Santa Monica owner near $8 million has a different planning problem than an LA City owner near the ULA threshold. The question is not just value. It is net proceeds.
If current law stays in place, Santa Monica owners should assume Measure GS applies. If the statewide measure passes as summarized, Santa Monica could be affected because the summary targets charter-city real estate transfer taxes above the existing 0.11% level. What we do not know yet is timing, implementation, litigation risk, or exactly how Santa Monica would respond.
If Los Angeles pursues local ULA reform, that would not directly rewrite Measure GS. It could still matter if buyers compare LA City and Santa Monica transfer-tax burdens differently.
For a deeper Santa Monica-specific breakdown, see our guide on how to sell your Santa Monica apartment building.
For owners considering a sale in the next 6 to 18 months, I would watch four things: whether the statewide measure remains on track, whether Los Angeles advances a local reform measure, whether buyers start pricing possible reform into offers before the law changes, and whether your building’s own fundamentals improve or deteriorate while you wait.
Bottom Line
Measure ULA is no longer just a line item buried in closing costs. It is a live policy variable that can affect pricing, buyer demand, and seller timing.
The mistake would be taking a political view and calling it strategy.
The better move is to model the scenarios, understand current value, and decide whether waiting actually improves your position.
If you own a City of Los Angeles apartment building and want to understand how ULA affects your sale proceeds, buyer pool, or timing, request a complimentary broker opinion of value. You can also reach Don directly at 424-377-6002 or dfavia@realtyinvadvisors.com.
Sources
Los Angeles Office of Finance, Real Property Transfer Tax and Measure ULA FAQ.
California Secretary of State, Eligible Statewide Initiative and Referendum Measures, initiative 1983.
City of Los Angeles Open Data, Revenue Generated by Measure ULA.
Affordable LA Coalition, “Mend It, Don’t End It,” April 2026 briefing.
City of Santa Monica Measure GS transfer tax tiers and FIG Santa Monica seller guide.
FIG pricing intelligence, Westside multifamily pricing data, updated March 2026.
This is for general informational purposes only. Consult with your CPA, tax advisor, and/or attorney for guidance specific to your situation.
