Prop 19 vs Legacy Prop 60/90 in California: What Changed

Editorial note: Gold California is not a tax advisor, a licensed attorney, or a county assessor. This page is a plain-English comparison of the pre-2021 Propositions 60 and 90 rules with the current Proposition 19 rule, both governing California base year value transfers for homeowners age 55 and older.

Every figure, date, form number, and code section is cited to the California Board of Equalization or to the California Revenue and Taxation Code. Consult a licensed California CPA, attorney, or your county assessor for your specific situation.

Last updated: August 15, 2026 · By Gold California Editorial

This page is for California homeowners age 55 or older, surviving spouses, adult children helping a parent, and executors who are trying to reconcile old Proposition 60 or Proposition 90 rules with the current Proposition 19 framework. It answers a question we hear often. What actually changed, and does the old law still matter for a specific move?

Every figure and every rule below is cited to the California Board of Equalization or to the Revenue and Taxation Code. This is not tax advice; consult a licensed California CPA, attorney, or your county assessor for your specific situation.

What changed on April 1, 2021

California voters approved Proposition 19 on November 3, 2020. The base year value transfer provisions of Proposition 19 became operative on April 1, 2021 (source: California Board of Equalization, Proposition 19).

Before that date, the age-55-or-older base year value transfer for California homeowners lived in Revenue and Taxation Code section 69.5. That statute encoded Propositions 60 (intracounty) and 90 (opt-in intercounty), plus Proposition 110 for severely and permanently disabled homeowners. Since April 1, 2021, the current rule lives in Revenue and Taxation Code section 69.6.

Section 69.5 was not repealed. It still governs a transfer where the original property sale occurred on or before March 31, 2021 (source: BOE Letter to Assessors No. 2021/019, Proposition 19 Base Year Value Transfer Guidance). Section 69.6 governs any transfer where at least one of the two transactions (sale of the original home, or purchase or new construction of the replacement) falls on or after April 1, 2021.

The result is a bright-line cutoff. A base year value transfer that closed under the old rules stays under section 69.5. Any new transfer initiated with a qualifying transaction after March 31, 2021 falls under section 69.6.

Prop 60/90 (section 69.5) vs Prop 19 (section 69.6), side by side

The table below distills the differences a California homeowner age 55 or older will actually feel when comparing the two frameworks. Every entry is cited to the statute or to the BOE guidance in the Sources section.

Sources: California Board of Equalization, Proposition 19 main page and FAQs; BOE Letters to Assessors No. 2020/061, No. 2021/019, and No. 2022/009; California Revenue and Taxation Code sections 69.5 and 69.6. Checked August 2026.

The legacy rule under Revenue and Taxation Code section 69.5

Section 69.5 was the age-55-or-older base year value transfer statute for decades. It implemented Proposition 60 (adopted November 4, 1986, intracounty) and Proposition 90 (adopted November 8, 1988, opt-in intercounty), plus Proposition 110 for severely and permanently disabled homeowners.

The statute reads that a qualifying person "may transfer... the base year value of that property to any replacement dwelling of equal or lesser value that is located within the same county." The replacement must be "purchased or newly constructed by that person as his or her principal residence within two years of the sale... of the original property" (source: California Legislative Information, Revenue and Taxation Code section 69.5).

Two of the words above did the heavy lifting. "Equal or lesser value" barred any transfer where the replacement exceeded the original at the value test. "Within the same county" limited the transfer to intracounty moves unless the receiving county had enacted an opt-in ordinance under section 69.5(a)(2). Prop 90 was that opt-in mechanism, and only a short and shifting list of counties ever accepted intercounty transfers.

The lifetime cap for the age-55 category was one transfer, per subdivision (b)(7): a claimant is eligible only if "the claimant has not previously been granted, as a claimant, the property tax relief provided by this section" (same statutory source).

The current rule under Revenue and Taxation Code section 69.6

Section 69.6 replaced section 69.5 for age-55-or-older and severely disabled claimants effective April 1, 2021. The statute allows a qualifying claimant to transfer the taxable value of an original primary residence to a replacement primary residence "within two years of the sale... of the original property."

The three-use cap is stated explicitly in section 69.6 (source: California Legislative Information, Revenue and Taxation Code section 69.6). The statute reads that a person "shall not be allowed to transfer the taxable value of a primary residence pursuant to this section more than three times." The cap applies to a claimant "who is over 55 years of age or severely or permanently disabled."

Two ideas were rewritten from section 69.5. First, the "same county" limit disappeared. Section 69.6 does not carry the intracounty default, and no county opt-in is required. Every California county assessor administers a qualifying claim on the same terms (see BOE Prop 19 FAQs, cited above).

Second, the equal-or-lesser-value bar was replaced with a graduated timing test and an excess-added mechanism. If the replacement is worth more than the original at the applicable timing factor, the difference is added to the transferred base year value; the transfer is not denied (source: same section 69.6, subdivisions (a) and (c)).

Third, the number of allowed transfers rose from one to three per lifetime for the age-55 or severely-disabled category. A separate slot exists for wildfire and Governor-proclaimed disaster victims under section 69.6(c), addressed on a different Gold California page.

Once per lifetime vs three uses per lifetime

Under section 69.5, an age-55-or-older claimant received one Prop 60/90 base transfer, ever. A second sale-and-replacement scenario would not qualify, unless the claimant later became severely and permanently disabled, in which case a second transfer became possible under Proposition 110.

Under section 69.6, an age-55-or-older claimant is allowed up to three transfers per lifetime. The cap is stated in the first paragraph of the statute (quoted above). The three uses are total across the claimant's lifetime, not per property or per county.

The BOE has addressed the interaction with prior use directly. Under Proposition 19, three transfers are allowed for homeowners over age 55 or physically and permanently disabled. That allowance stands "even if a property owner previously transferred a base year value under Propositions 60/90 or 110" (source: BOE, Proposition 19 FAQs).

Practically, a claimant who used Prop 60 in 2015 still has three fresh Prop 19 uses available today. A claimant who never used Prop 60 or Prop 90 also has three Prop 19 uses. The old and new lifetime counters are not merged.

Intracounty by default vs statewide since April 1, 2021

The most visible change for a mover is geographic scope. Under section 69.5, a transfer was intracounty by default. An intercounty transfer under Prop 90 required the receiving county's board of supervisors to have adopted an opt-in ordinance (section 69.5(a)(2)). In practice, only a short and rotating list of counties ever accepted them, which forced many age-55-and-older movers to stay in their home county to keep the base year value.

Section 69.6 removed the intracounty default. Since April 1, 2021, the base year value transfer works from any California county to any California county. No county ordinance is required, and every assessor accepts a qualifying claim (source: BOE Letter to Assessors No. 2022/009, Implementation of Proposition 19: Base Year Value Transfers).

That change turned a bounded Prop 60/90 opportunity into a genuine statewide portability option. For readers weighing a move from, say, Los Angeles County to Placer County, or from Alameda County to San Diego County, the receiving county no longer needs to have adopted a Prop 90 ordinance for the transfer to work.

Equal or lesser only vs equal, lesser, or greater with excess added

Under section 69.5, the replacement's full cash value had to be equal to or less than the original's full cash value at the applicable timing point. If the replacement exceeded that threshold, the transfer was denied entirely and the replacement was assessed at market like any other purchase.

Section 69.6 kept the same timing factors but changed the outcome when the replacement is worth more. The statute uses three timing factors:

• 100 percent of the original's full cash value if the replacement is purchased or newly constructed before the sale of the original.
• 105 percent if the replacement is purchased or newly constructed within the first year after the sale of the original.
• 110 percent if the replacement is purchased or newly constructed within the second year after the sale of the original.

If the replacement's full cash value is at or below that timing-adjusted number, the factored base year value carries over unchanged. If the replacement exceeds it, the taxable value of the replacement is the taxable value of the original property plus the excess (source: same section 69.6). The excess is the difference between the replacement's full cash value and the original's full cash value.

The BOE gives a worked example. An original home has a full cash value of $400,000 and a factored base year value of $100,000 at time of sale. The replacement is purchased within one year after the sale. The adjusted full cash value equals $400,000 times 105 percent, which is $420,000.

Assume the replacement's full cash value is $600,000. The excess is $600,000 minus $420,000, which equals $180,000. That $180,000 is added to the factored base year value of $100,000. The new base year value on the replacement is $280,000 (source: BOE, Proposition 19 FAQs, worked example).

Under section 69.5, the same buyer would have received no transfer at all on a $600,000 replacement, because the replacement exceeded the equal-or-lesser threshold. The section 69.6 excess-added mechanism is the practical widening of who benefits.

The April 1, 2021 cutoff and grandfathering

The two statutes coexist along a bright line. A base year value transfer where the original property sale occurred on or before March 31, 2021 remains under section 69.5 (source: BOE Letter to Assessors No. 2021/019, cited in Sources). The old rules travel with the closing date.

A base year value transfer where at least one of the two transactions falls on or after April 1, 2021 falls under section 69.6. In practice, virtually every fresh sale-and-replacement started in the years since April 1, 2021 is under Prop 19.

What section 69.5 still does, in mid-2026, is govern residual claim filings. A claimant who sold on March 30, 2021 and bought within two years still files under section 69.5, using the pre-2021 form BOE-60-AH, if the sale date drives the applicable statute. County assessors handle these residual filings under the old framework.

If you already used Prop 60 or Prop 90 before 2021

A common question is whether a single Prop 60 or Prop 90 use before 2021 blocks a new Prop 19 use today. The BOE answer is no. The three Prop 19 slots for age-55-or-older claimants are separate from prior use under section 69.5.

The BOE addresses this in its Prop 19 FAQs, cited above. Under Proposition 19, three transfers are allowed for homeowners over age 55 or physically and permanently disabled, "even if a property owner previously transferred a base year value under Propositions 60/90 or 110."

The corollary matters too. A prior use of section 69.5 does not add to the three-use cap; the maximum remains three under section 69.6. If a claimant used one Prop 60 slot in 2015 and one Prop 19 slot in 2023, the claimant has two Prop 19 slots remaining. Track the count with the receiving county assessor.

A spousal pair is treated as a single claimant unit. If either spouse used a prior transfer, the use is attributed to the couple, per the BOE assessor-level guidance (BOE Letter to Assessors No. 2022/009).

How to file under Prop 19 today (Form BOE-19-B)

A claim for an age-55-or-older base year value transfer under section 69.6 is filed with the county assessor of the replacement home. The form is BOE-19-B, "Claim for Transfer of Base Year Value to Replacement Primary Residence for Persons at Least Age 55 Years" (source: BOE-19-B sample form).

The steps below reflect the standard filing path under Prop 19. Every county assessor publishes a version of the same form, sometimes with local instructions layered on top.

1. Confirm which statute governs your move. If your sale closed on or before March 31, 2021, section 69.5 applies. If a qualifying transaction falls on or after April 1, 2021, section 69.6 (Prop 19) applies.
2. Pull the last property tax bill for the original home. The assessed value line is the factored base year value that would transfer under either statute.
3. Confirm the sale date of the original home and the purchase or completion date of the replacement. The two dates set the 100, 105, or 110 percent adjustment factor used by both statutes.
4. Compute the adjusted full cash value of the original. Multiply the original's full cash value at time of sale by the applicable percentage, based on the timing.
5. Compare to the replacement's full cash value. Under section 69.6, if the replacement is at or below the adjusted number, the factored base year value transfers unchanged; if greater, the excess is added. Under section 69.5, a replacement above the adjusted number was disqualifying.
6. Download the correct form. Under section 69.6 today, use BOE-19-B from the receiving county assessor. Under section 69.5, the age-55 form was BOE-60-AH.
7. File the claim within three years of the replacement's purchase or completion. Both statutes use a three-year filing window; late filings receive prospective relief only.
8. File the homeowners' exemption on the replacement within one year of the transfer. The exemption is proof of principal-residence status and protects the claim under either statute.

Worked example: a couple who used Prop 60 in 2015

Common confusion: base transfer vs parent-child exclusion

Proposition 19 rewrote two different property tax rules on the same ballot. Do not confuse them. This page addresses the base year value transfer for age-55-or-older homeowners under section 69.6. The parent-child exclusion is a separate provision in section 63.2, which controls what happens when a parent gifts or bequeaths a home to a child.

The parent-child exclusion under Prop 19 became operative on February 16, 2021, ahead of the base year value transfer date. Under the new section 63.2, the exclusion applies only to the transferor's principal residence, and only if the transferee makes it their principal residence within one year. The exclusion amount is the factored base year value plus $1,000,000, indexed for inflation; anything above that ceiling is added to the transferred base year value (source: BOE, Proposition 19).

The base year value transfer under section 69.6, which this page covers, has no $1,000,000 ceiling on the excess-added mechanism. If the replacement is worth more than the adjusted original, the entire difference is added to the transferred base. The two Prop 19 provisions share a ballot measure but they are structurally different rules.

When using Prop 19 is not the right move

A balanced page names when the current rule cuts against you or wastes one of your three lifetime slots. Several situations argue for slowing down.

• Your sale actually closed before April 1, 2021. Section 69.5 applies to that transfer, not section 69.6. You cannot elect Prop 19 for a pre-cutoff sale. Talk to your county assessor about a residual section 69.5 filing.
• The replacement is much more expensive than the original. The excess-added mechanism means most of a much-larger replacement is reassessed at market. The transferred base may not save enough tax to justify using a slot.
• You may need to move again in a few years. Each move uses one of your three Prop 19 slots. If a downsize is likely to be followed by another move for family, care, or a smaller home, keep at least one slot in reserve.
• The original home was never your principal residence. Rentals, second homes, and vacation properties do not qualify. Neither section 69.5 nor section 69.6 covers non-residence property under the age-55 category.
• You plan to leave California. Prop 19 is statewide, but only inside California. A move to another state does not carry a California base year value with it.
• You are counting on the parent-child exclusion. That is a different Prop 19 provision (section 63.2) with its own one-year residence test and its $1,000,000 factored-base add-on. Do not conflate the two rules when planning a family transfer.

If one of these describes you, wait, get advice from a licensed California CPA or attorney, and revisit later. The Prop 19 base transfer rewards planning; it does not reward rushing.

Prop 19 vs Prop 60/90 questions, answered

Did Prop 19 repeal Propositions 60 and 90?

Not exactly. Proposition 19 rewrote the constitutional authority for the age-55-or-older base year value transfer and directed the Legislature to enact new implementing statute. Revenue and Taxation Code section 69.5, which implemented Props 60, 90, and 110, was not deleted; it still governs a transfer where the original sale closed on or before March 31, 2021. The new statute, section 69.6, governs any transfer with a qualifying transaction on or after April 1, 2021.

If I used Prop 60 in 2015, do I still have three Prop 19 slots?

Yes. Per the BOE Prop 19 FAQs, three Prop 19 transfers are available to an age-55-or-older claimant, "even if a property owner previously transferred a base year value under Propositions 60/90 or 110." Prior section 69.5 uses do not consume section 69.6 slots.

Can I still file a Prop 60 or Prop 90 claim today for an old sale?

Yes, in the residual case. If your original property sale closed on or before March 31, 2021, section 69.5 governs the transfer and the form is BOE-60-AH for the age-55 category. Ask the receiving county assessor for the correct current form; the three-year filing window applies from the date the replacement was purchased or completed.

Was the geographic scope really county-by-county before 2021?

Yes. Section 69.5 required the replacement dwelling to be in the same county as the original, unless the receiving county board of supervisors had adopted an opt-in ordinance under Prop 90. Only a shifting list of counties ever accepted intercounty transfers. Section 69.6 removed that requirement, so since April 1, 2021, the transfer works statewide.

Under the old rule, could my replacement home be worth more than my original?

Generally no. Section 69.5 required the replacement to be of equal or lesser value than the original at the applicable timing point (100, 105, or 110 percent). If the replacement exceeded that threshold, the transfer was denied and the replacement was assessed at market like any other purchase. Under section 69.6, a more expensive replacement now works via the excess-added mechanism.

Do I file the same form under Prop 19 as under Prop 60?

No. Under section 69.6 today, an age-55-or-older claimant files Form BOE-19-B with the county assessor of the replacement home. Under section 69.5, the age-55 form was BOE-60-AH. Different statutes, different forms, but the same three-year filing window from purchase or completion of the replacement.

Is the two-year sale-purchase window the same under both rules?

Yes. Both section 69.5 and section 69.6 require the sale of the original and the purchase or new construction of the replacement to fall within two years of each other. Either sequence works: sell first and buy within two years, or buy first and sell within two years. The BOE has stated it does not have authority to extend the operative dates.

Does a Prop 19 base transfer help with California state income tax?

No. Proposition 19 changes the local property tax base year value on a replacement home. It has no effect on California state income tax, on federal income tax, on Section 121 capital-gains treatment of the sale itself, or on any retirement-account rules. Those are separate systems; consult your tax advisor for your specific situation.