What is the San Francisco Proposition ULA mansion tax, and when did it pass?

San Francisco's transfer-tax mansion-tax ladder is the product of TWO ballot measures. The base 0.5% / 0.68% / 0.75% schedule for sales below $5M existed under SF Business & Tax Regulations Code § 1108(a) before 2020. Proposition I (passed November 2020, effective January 1, 2021) added the 4.5% rate for sales over $10M and 6.0% for sales over $25M. Proposition C — frequently confused with the homeless-services Prop C of 2018, but a separate measure — passed November 2022 and refined the ladder, fixing the $5M-$10M tier at 4.5% and the $10M-$25M tier at 5.5%. The resulting 2026 schedule: 0.5% under $250K, 0.68% to $1M, 0.75% to $5M, 4.5% to $10M, 5.5% to $25M, 6.0% over $25M. The 4.5%-6.0% top tiers are colloquially the "ULA" mansion tax — "United to House LA" was the LA equivalent measure passed in the same November 2022 cycle, and the term has become shorthand for the SF and LA top-tier surcharges generally. Each rate is FLAT on the whole sale price, not marginal — a $5,000,001 sale pays 4.5% on the entire amount.

How does Los Angeles Measure ULA actually work?

LA Measure ULA — formally "United to House LA" — passed the City of Los Angeles ballot in November 2022 and took effect April 1, 2023. It did NOT replace the existing LA Real Property Transfer Tax under LA Municipal Code § 21.9 (the 0.45% base rate that applies to every LA sale regardless of price). Instead, Measure ULA layered an ADDITIONAL surtax on top of the 0.45% base: 4.0% on sales between $5,000,001 and $9,999,999, and 5.5% on sales above $10,000,000. The combined effective rates: 0.45% under $5M, 4.45% from $5M-$10M, 5.95% above $10M. Like SF Prop ULA, each tier applies FLAT to the WHOLE sale price (not marginally) — a $5,000,001 sale pays 4.45% on the entire amount ($222,750.04), not 0.45% on the first $5M and 4.45% on the marginal dollar. The cliff effect is dispositive: a $4,999,999 sale pays $22,499.99 in LA transfer tax (0.45%) and a $5,000,001 sale pays $222,750.04 (4.45%). Measure ULA proceeds fund the City's "House LA" affordable-housing and homeless-services programs.

Why do California charter cities have such different transfer-tax authority than general-law cities?

California Constitution Article XI § 5 — the "home rule" provision — grants charter cities plenary authority over their "municipal affairs," which the California Supreme Court has consistently held includes the power to set local tax rates on real-property conveyances. About 121 of California's ~480 cities have adopted charters under Art. XI § 5; the rest are general-law cities governed by the default Government Code framework. Charter cities can set their own RPTT structure (rates, brackets, applicability) without needing state-legislative authorization — which is how SF, LA, Oakland, Berkeley, San Jose, Santa Monica, and Culver City have built such varied and aggressive city stacks. General-law cities can impose a RPTT only under Cal. Gov. Code § 37101 and at rates not exceeding what the State has authorized, which historically has tracked the county 0.11% rate. The county and city components are administered separately — § 11932 requires both to be paid at recording, but they appear as distinct line items on the closing statement.

Who customarily pays the California Documentary Transfer Tax — buyer or seller?

The default customary allocation in California is that the SELLER pays both the County Documentary Transfer Tax under Cal. Rev. & Tax Code § 11911 and any city-level RPTT. This is the convention in essentially every California county and in San Francisco, Los Angeles, Berkeley, Santa Monica, and Culver City. Oakland Municipal Code § 4.20.030 establishes a 50/50 buyer-seller split by ordinance, though the contract can reallocate. San Jose customarily splits 50/50 as well by long-standing practice. CRITICAL POINT: the seller-pays convention is CUSTOM, not statute — Cal. Rev. & Tax Code § 11911 does not specify which party pays. The purchase contract controls. In a buyer's market or in sponsor-developer sales, the seller often shifts the customary share to the buyer. In a seller's market with a strong demand-supply mismatch (Bay Area 2020-2022), some buyers offered to absorb the seller's transfer-tax burden as a sweetener. Confirm in writing before signing.

Does a refinance trigger California transfer tax?

No. A refinance is not a conveyance of real property under Cal. Rev. & Tax Code § 11911. The mortgage / deed of trust is a security interest, not a transfer of the fee; the owner retains the full present beneficial interest and the lender holds only a contingent security interest. California homeowners can refinance freely — multiple times if rates move favorably — without triggering the county Documentary Transfer Tax or any city RPTT. This mirrors the Prop 13 reassessment-trigger rule under § 60: refinancing does not reset the assessed value for property-tax purposes either. Cash-out refinancing — pulling equity through a new loan — also does not trigger transfer tax, because no real-property interest changes hands. The same principle applies to home-equity lines of credit and second mortgages. The deed has to actually transfer for the transfer tax to attach.

What about transferring property into an LLC — does that trigger the county and city stacks?

Yes — generally. A transfer from an individual to an LLC owned by that individual is a TAXABLE CONVEYANCE for County Documentary Transfer Tax purposes under Cal. Rev. & Tax Code § 11911, because the deed does transfer fee title from the individual to the entity even though there is no economic change in beneficial ownership. The same logic applies to city RPTT in every charter city modeled here. There is a narrow exemption under § 11925 for transfers of partnership / LLC INTERESTS (rather than the underlying real property) where less than 50% of the entity ownership changes hands cumulatively over a 12-month window — but that exemption applies to the entity-interest transfer, not to the original real-estate-to-LLC contribution. Estate-planning attorneys frequently structure California real-property contributions to LLCs to take advantage of the § 11925 mechanic, or to qualify under the § 11930 "no consideration" gift exemption when the LLC member is also the donee. The exposure on a $5M SF property contributed to a wholly-owned LLC: $5,500 county + $37,500 SF city = $43,000 of transfer tax, plus potential Prop 13 reassessment under § 64 of the Rev. & Tax Code. Tools, not advice — consult a California tax attorney before the contribution.

How does the $5M cliff actually work — is the tax marginal or flat?

FLAT. This is the single most-misunderstood mechanic of the California city RPTT regime, and it differs materially from the way the federal income-tax brackets work. Every city tier modeled in this calculator — San Francisco, Los Angeles, Oakland, Berkeley, San Jose, Santa Monica, Culver City — applies the bracket rate to the WHOLE sale price, NOT marginally bracket-by-bracket. A San Francisco $5,000,001 sale pays 4.5% on the entire $5,000,001 (= $225,000.05), not 0.75% on the first $5M and 4.5% on the marginal $1. The cliff at $5,000,000 → $5,000,001 produces a tax jump from $37,500 (0.75%) to $225,000.05 (4.5%) — a $187,500.05 increase from a $1 marginal dollar of sale price. The same cliff exists in LA at $5M (0.45% → 4.45%) and at $10M (4.45% → 5.95%). Sophisticated buyers and sellers at bracket boundaries negotiate the price down just below the cliff to lock in the lower rate. California courts have repeatedly upheld the flat-per-tier structure against uniform-burden challenges under Cal. Const. Art. XIII § 32 — the cliff is intentional and constitutional.

How does California compare to New York and New Jersey mansion taxes?

California's TOP-TIER transfer taxes are the highest in the United States. A $30M Manhattan penthouse pays roughly $1.4M in combined NY State Mansion Tax (3.9%) + NYC RPTT (1.425%) + NYC Additional Tax (0.25%) + NY State RPT (0.4%) — about 4.7% effective. The same $30M sale in San Francisco pays $1,833,000 (6.11% effective: $33K county + $1,800,000 SF ULA 6.0%). In LA the same sale pays $1,818,000 (6.06% effective: $33K county + $1,785,000 LA 5.95%). In a New Jersey city the same sale pays roughly $310,000 (NJ Realty Transfer Fee + Mansion Tax). The California-charter-city stack at the $25M+ tier exceeds every other US jurisdiction. CRITICAL CAVEAT: California's overall transfer-tax burden is LIGHTER than New York or New Jersey for most transactions — the median California sale (≈$800K under $5M) pays only the 0.11% county base in a non-charter city, far below the 1.5%+ that even modest New York sales incur. The high California rates are concentrated in the top-tier SF / LA Mansion-Tax-style surcharges.

What exemptions might apply, and what does this calculator NOT model?

Several exemptions narrow the reach of the County Documentary Transfer Tax. Cal. Rev. & Tax Code § 11922 exempts transfers to or from the United States, the State of California, or any political subdivision (e.g., a county taking property by eminent domain, or transferring surplus property to a city). § 11923 exempts SEC-regulated corporate reorganizations that meet specific federal criteria. § 11925 exempts transfers of partnership / LLC INTERESTS where less than 50% of the entity ownership changes hands cumulatively over 12 months — the workhorse exemption for entity-structured commercial transactions. § 11930 exempts transfers where no consideration is given — gifts, inheritances, deeds in lieu of foreclosure where no cash changes hands, court-ordered transfers without consideration. Most city ordinances parallel the county exemptions but each has its own enumeration; SF Business & Tax Regs. Code § 1105 lists SF-specific exemptions including the affordable-housing and intra-family deed-correction carve-outs. This calculator does NOT model any exemptions — it computes the tax that would apply to a fully-taxable arms-length conveyance with all consideration paid. Tools, not advice — confirm exemption eligibility with a California-licensed tax professional before claiming any exemption on the recording.

Reviewed against Cal. Rev. & Tax Code §§ 11901-11935 (Documentary Transfer Tax Act); § 11911 (county rate $0.55 per $500); § 11911.1 (entity transfers); § 11922 (government exemption); § 11925 (partnership / LLC interest); § 11930 (gift / inheritance); Cal. Gov. Code § 37101 (general-law city authority); Cal. Const. Art. XI § 5 (charter-city plenary authority); SF Business & Tax Regs. Code § 1108(a) + Prop I (2020) + Prop C / ULA (2022); LA Municipal Code § 21.9 + Measure ULA (2022); Oakland Municipal Code § 4.20 + Measure X (2022); Berkeley Municipal Code Ch. 7.52; San Jose Municipal Code § 4.59 + Measure E (2020); Santa Monica Municipal Code § 6.96 + Measure GS (2022); Culver City Municipal Code § 3.40 + Measure RE (2020)

California Documentary Transfer Tax + City RPTT Calculator

Compute the two-layer California real-estate transfer tax stack — the statewide County Documentary Transfer Tax under Cal. Rev. & Tax Code § 11911 (the $0.55 / $500 = 0.11% county base) plus any city-level Real Property Transfer Tax authorized by Cal. Gov. Code § 37101 and the local charter (Cal. Const. Art. XI § 5). Models the eight most-impactful 2026 city schedules: San Francisco's 0.5%-6.0% Prop ULA mansion-tax ladder (highest in the United States at the $25M+ tier), Los Angeles's 0.45% base + 4.0% / 5.5% Measure ULA surtax, Oakland's Measure X four-tier 0%-2.5% ladder, Berkeley, San Jose's Measure E schedule, Santa Monica's Measure GS schedule, Culver City's Measure RE schedule, and the catch-all 'other California city' case where only the county 0.11% applies. Each city tier applies FLAT to the whole sale price (not marginally) and the cliff effect at $5M / $10M / $25M is dispositive.

Published by

The Fennec Lab Editorial Team

Statute-cited · Unit-tested

Reviewed against: Cal. Rev. & Tax Code §§ 11901-11935 (Documentary Transfer Tax Act); § 11911 (county rate $0.55 per $500); § 11911.1 (entity transfers); § 11922 (government exemption); § 11925 (partnership / LLC interest); § 11930 (gift / inheritance); Cal. Gov. Code § 37101 (general-law city authority); Cal. Const. Art. XI § 5 (charter-city plenary authority); SF Business & Tax Regs. Code § 1108(a) + Prop I (2020) + Prop C / ULA (2022); LA Municipal Code § 21.9 + Measure ULA (2022); Oakland Municipal Code § 4.20 + Measure X (2022); Berkeley Municipal Code Ch. 7.52; San Jose Municipal Code § 4.59 + Measure E (2020); Santa Monica Municipal Code § 6.96 + Measure GS (2022); Culver City Municipal Code § 3.40 + Measure RE (2020)

Last reviewed: 2026-05-16

Calculator

Adjust the inputs below; the result updates instantly.

Transaction

Sale price / consideration ($)

$1,500,000

Location

City / jurisdiction

City in which the property is located. Drives the city-level RPTT rate lookup. Use 'Other California city' for any California city that has not enacted a city-level transfer-tax ordinance — about 450 of California's ~480 cities fall into this bucket, and only the 0.11% county Documentary Transfer Tax applies. The eight cities modeled individually are the ones whose ordinances stack materially on top of the county base: San Francisco (the 0.5%-6.0% Prop ULA ladder), Los Angeles (the 0.45% base + Measure ULA 4.0% / 5.5% surtax), Oakland (Measure X), Berkeley, San Jose, Santa Monica, and Culver City.

Property type

Property class

Property classification. The county Documentary Transfer Tax under Cal. Rev. & Tax Code § 11911 applies identically to residential and commercial transfers — and so do the city RPTT schedules currently modeled. The classification is surfaced because (1) certain city ordinances that may be enacted in the future may branch on use class, (2) commercial entity-to-entity transfers often qualify for the § 11925 partnership / LLC less-than-50%-interest exemption that residential transfers rarely do, and (3) lenders and title companies key their internal closing-cost estimates off the class. Tools, not advice — consult a California tax professional before relying on an exemption.

Total California transfer taxes

1,650.00

County Documentary Transfer Tax (Cal. Rev. & Tax § 11911): $1,650.00
City Real Property Transfer Tax: $0.00
Effective transfer-tax rate: 0.11%
City tier applied: $0+ — no city RPTT
Comparison: tax in a city with no city RPTT: $1,650.00
City-stack premium vs no-RPTT baseline: $0.00
ULA mansion-tax surtax tier?: No — sale is below the $5M ULA cliff or is in a city without a ULA-style surtax.
Summary: On a $1,500,000 residential sale in Other California city (no city RPTT), total California transfer taxes are $1,650 (0.110% effective rate). County Documentary Transfer Tax (Cal. Rev. & Tax Code § 11911) at the statewide 0.11% rate: $1,650. No city-level Real Property Transfer Tax applies in this jurisdiction — the county 0.11% is the only transfer tax on the conveyance. (About 450 California cities have not enacted a city-level RPTT under Cal. Gov. Code § 37101.) Customarily paid by the SELLER under Cal. Rev. & Tax Code § 11911 and (in charter cities) the local ordinance, though the purchase contract can reallocate. For comparison, the same sale in a city without a local RPTT would owe $1,650 — a difference of $0 attributable to the city stack. Tools, not advice — confirm exemption eligibility (§§ 11922 government, 11925 partnership/LLC, 11930 gift/inheritance) with a California tax professional before closing.

Tools to go with this

Closing on a California property at or above the $5M ULA cliff in San Francisco or Los Angeles? Need a methodical California transfer-tax verification packet?

Fennec Press's California real-estate bundle includes a city-by-city RPTT reference (the eight charter cities with material city stacks plus the catch-all rule for the ~450 jurisdictions where only the 0.11% county tax applies), a SF Prop ULA + LA Measure ULA cliff-modeling worksheet, and worked examples of the § 11925 partnership / LLC less-than-50%-interest exemption that often determines whether an entity restructuring triggers the county and city stacks. Tools, not advice — consult a California-licensed tax professional before closing.

Open Fennec Press California real-estate bundle→

Fennec Press is our sister site. Outbound link is UTM-tagged and disclosed.

How this calculator works

California layers two distinct transfer-tax regimes on every real-property conveyance: a thin, uniform statewide County Documentary Transfer Tax under Cal. Rev. & Tax Code § 11911, and — in roughly two dozen charter cities — a thick, locally-set city Real Property Transfer Tax that stacks on top. The county base is one of the lightest in the United States. The charter-city stacks, particularly in San Francisco and Los Angeles after the November 2022 ballot, include the highest residential transfer taxes anywhere in the country.

This calculator models both layers and surfaces the cliff effect at the $5M / $10M / $25M boundaries that has reshaped high-end California real-estate negotiation since 2023.

County Documentary Transfer Tax — Cal. Rev. & Tax Code § 11911, statewide, $0.55 per $500 (= 0.11%).
City Real Property Transfer Tax — Cal. Gov. Code § 37101 + local charter ordinance; ranges from $0 (most general-law cities) to 6.0% (SF top tier).

Layer 1 — County Documentary Transfer Tax (Cal. Rev. & Tax Code § 11911)

Enacted in 1967 as part of the Documentary Transfer Tax Act (§§ 11901–11935) to replace the repealed federal documentary stamp tax, the county Documentary Transfer Tax has had the same rate ever since: $0.55 per $500 of consideration, or 0.11% of the sale price. It applies to every California conveyance, in every one of the 58 counties, with no thresholds and no class-based variation. The county receives the full revenue.

Customarily the SELLER pays under the long-standing convention, though Cal. Rev. & Tax Code § 11911 itself does not specify which party — the purchase contract controls. The exposures: a $500,000 sale pays $550; a $5,000,000 sale pays $5,500; a $50,000,000 sale pays $55,000.

Layer 2 — City Real Property Transfer Tax

About 30 California cities have exercised authority to impose a city-level Real Property Transfer Tax. The structures vary enormously, from $0 (most of the ~450 general-law cities and most non-coastal charter cities) to $30 per $500 = 6.0% at the top SF tier under Prop ULA.

San Francisco — Charter § 1108(a) + Proposition I (2020) + Proposition C / ULA (2022)

| Sale price | SF RPTT rate | |---|---| | $0 – $250,000 | 0.50% | | $250,001 – $1,000,000 | 0.68% | | $1,000,001 – $5,000,000 | 0.75% | | $5,000,001 – $10,000,000 | 4.50% (ULA cliff) | | $10,000,001 – $25,000,000 | 5.50% | | $25,000,001+ | 6.00% — highest residential transfer tax in the US |

Proposition I (November 2020) added the 4.5% / 5.5% / 6.0% top tiers. Proposition C — the November 2022 measure, not to be confused with the 2018 homeless-services Prop C of the same name — refined the schedule into the current shape. Customarily paid by the seller under SF Business & Tax Regulations Code § 1102(b).

Los Angeles — LAMC § 21.9 + Measure ULA (November 2022)

| Sale price | Combined LA RPTT rate | |---|---| | $0 – $5,000,000 | 0.45% (base only) | | $5,000,001 – $9,999,999 | 4.45% (0.45% base + 4.0% Measure ULA) | | $10,000,001+ | 5.95% (0.45% base + 5.5% Measure ULA) |

Measure ULA — formally "United to House LA" — took effect April 1, 2023. The Measure ULA surtax (4.0% / 5.5%) layers on top of the existing 0.45% base rate under LAMC § 21.9; it did not replace it. Measure ULA proceeds fund the City of LA's "House LA" affordable-housing and homeless-services programs. The cliff effect at $5M has substantially chilled $5M+ transactions — Measure ULA has generated materially less revenue than its proponents projected, in large part because sellers near the cliff have pulled listings or restructured deals to fall below the threshold.

Oakland — Municipal Code § 4.20 + Measure X (2022)

| Sale price | Oakland RPTT rate | |---|---| | $0 – $300,000 | 0.00% | | $300,001 – $2,000,000 | 1.00% | | $2,000,001 – $5,000,000 | 1.75% | | $5,000,001+ | 2.50% |

Customarily split 50/50 between buyer and seller under Oakland Municipal Code § 4.20.030 (different from the seller-pays convention in SF / LA). The November 2022 Measure X restructured the previous flat 1.5% rate into this four-tier progressive schedule.

Berkeley, San Jose, Santa Monica, Culver City

| City | Schedule | |---|---| | Berkeley (BMC Ch. 7.52) | 0% under $1M; 1.5% to $2M; 2.5% above $2M | | San Jose (SJMC § 4.59, Measure E 2020) | 0.075% under $2M; 0.75% to $5M; 1.5% above $5M | | Santa Monica (SMMC § 6.96, Measure GS 2022) | 0.30% under $5M; 0.60% above $5M | | Culver City (CCMC § 3.40, Measure RE 2020) | 0.45% under $1.5M; 1.5% to $3M; 3.0% to $10M; 4.0% above $10M |

Every other California city

For the ~450 California cities that have not enacted a city-level RPTT ordinance, only the 0.11% county tax applies. A $1,000,000 home sale in Fresno, Bakersfield, Riverside, Sacramento (proper), San Diego, Long Beach, Anaheim, Glendale, Irvine, Modesto, Stockton, Fontana, Santa Rosa, Pomona, Ontario, Salinas, or any other non-stacking jurisdiction pays $1,100 in total transfer tax — full stop.

Worked example — $1M home in San Diego (no city RPTT)

A $1,000,000 single-family home in San Diego. Property type: residential. City: "other-city" — San Diego has not enacted a city-level RPTT.

County DTT (0.11%): $1,000,000 × 0.0011 = $1,100 (seller).
City RPTT: $0 — no city-level transfer tax in San Diego.
TOTAL: $1,100.
Effective rate: 0.11%.

This is the "default California" case. Most California cities — including San Diego, Sacramento, Fresno, Bakersfield, Riverside, Long Beach, Anaheim — have NOT enacted a city-level RPTT. A $1M residential sale in any of these pays the same $1,100 in total transfer tax.

Worked example — $1M home in San Francisco

The same $1M sale in San Francisco. The cliff between SF and the rest of California is dispositive at the $1M tier.

County DTT (0.11%): $1,000,000 × 0.0011 = $1,100 (seller).
SF City RPTT: $1M falls in the 0.68% tier ($250K–$1M). $1,000,000 × 0.0068 = $6,800 (seller).
TOTAL: $7,900.
Effective rate: 0.79%.

Note: a sale exactly at $1,000,001 would flip to the 0.75% tier ($1M–$5M), producing $7,500.0075 in city tax — meaningfully more. The cliff at $1M is real, though much less dispositive than the $5M ULA cliff. The same $1M sale in SF pays $7,900 total transfer tax; in San Diego (no city RPTT), $1,100; in Los Angeles (base 0.45% under $5M), $5,500. The same home, same price, same buyer, generates 7.2× the transfer tax in SF vs San Diego.

Worked example — $6M home in San Francisco (Prop ULA $5M cliff)

A $6,000,000 single-family home or condo in San Francisco. This is the canonical Prop ULA ladder example. The cliff between $5,000,000 and $5,000,001 is where the ULA tier kicks in.

County DTT (0.11%): $6,000,000 × 0.0011 = $6,600 (seller).
SF City RPTT: $6M falls in the 4.50% Prop ULA tier ($5M–$10M). $6,000,000 × 0.045 = $270,000 (seller).
TOTAL: $276,600.
Effective rate: 4.61%.

The cliff at $5,000,000 is brutal. A $4,999,999 SF sale pays $5,500 county + $37,499.99 city (0.75% tier) = $43,000. A $5,000,001 sale pays $5,500.001 county + $225,000.045 city (4.5% tier) = $230,500. The $2 marginal increase across the cliff produces $187,500 of additional tax.

Sophisticated buyers and sellers at the $5M boundary regularly negotiate the price down to $4,999,999 — sometimes via "personal property" carve-outs allocating a portion of the consideration to non-realty (furniture, art, fixtures) so the reported sale price falls below $5M. The State and City audit these allocations aggressively under Cal. Rev. & Tax Code § 11932 — improper allocations are routinely reassessed with penalties.

Worked example — $15M Hollywood property in LA (Measure ULA $10M cliff)

A $15,000,000 commercial property in Los Angeles. The same $10M cliff applies to commercial AND residential under Measure ULA — there is no class-based exemption from the surtax. $15M sits above the $10M tier, so the 5.95% combined rate (0.45% base + 5.5% Measure ULA) applies to the whole sale price.

County DTT (0.11%): $15,000,000 × 0.0011 = $16,500 (seller).
LA City RPTT: 5.95% × $15,000,000 = $892,500 (seller).
TOTAL: $909,000.
Effective rate: 6.06%.

The Measure ULA surtax stacks on top of the 0.45% base, producing the 5.95% combined rate above $10M. The cliff at $10M is even more dispositive than at $5M. A $9,999,999 LA sale pays $11,000 county + $444,999.96 city (4.45% tier) = $455,999.96 total. A $10,000,001 sale pays $11,000 county + $595,000.06 city (5.95% tier) = $606,000.06 total. The $2 marginal increase across the $10M cliff produces about $150,000 of additional tax.

Worked example — $30M penthouse in San Francisco (Prop ULA top tier 6.0%)

The absolute top of the California transfer-tax curve. A $30,000,000 penthouse conveyance in San Francisco. Residential, individual seller and buyer.

County DTT (0.11%): $30,000,000 × 0.0011 = $33,000 (seller).
SF City RPTT: $30M falls in the 6.00% Prop ULA top tier ($25M+). $30,000,000 × 0.06 = $1,800,000 (seller).
TOTAL: $1,833,000.
Effective rate: 6.11%.

The $1,800,000 SF city RPTT on a $30M sale is the highest residential transfer-tax exposure on any single real-estate transaction in the United States. For comparison: the same $30M sale in Manhattan pays roughly $1,405,000 combined (NY State Mansion at 3.9% = $1,170,000 + NYC RPTT at 1.425% = $427,500 + NYC Additional at 0.25% = $75,000 + State RPT at 0.4% = $120,000, less some interaction = ~$1.4M). The SF top-tier ULA exceeds even the four-layer NY stack.

Whether buyers actually pay this — or whether high-end SF sales have simply migrated to other markets to avoid the cliff — is a contested empirical question. Available data suggests SF $25M+ closings have fallen substantially since Prop C took effect, though it is hard to disentangle the ULA effect from broader market dynamics.

Worked example — $4M Oakland property (Measure X)

A $4,000,000 mixed-use property in Oakland. Measure X (November 2022) restructured Oakland's previously flat 1.5% rate into a four-tier ladder; $4M sits in the third tier at 1.75%.

County DTT (0.11%): $4,000,000 × 0.0011 = $4,400.
Oakland City RPTT: $4M falls in the 1.75% tier ($2M–$5M). $4,000,000 × 0.0175 = $70,000.
TOTAL: $74,400.
Effective rate: 1.86%.

Customarily split 50/50 buyer/seller under Oakland Municipal Code § 4.20.030 — so each side absorbs roughly $37,200. The 50/50 convention is unique among the California cities modeled here; SF / LA / Berkeley / Santa Monica / Culver City all follow the seller-pays default.

Cliff mechanics — flat, not marginal

The single most important mechanic of the California city RPTT regime, and the most-misunderstood: every city tier modeled here applies the bracket rate to the WHOLE sale price, NOT marginally bracket-by-bracket. This is different from how federal income-tax brackets work.

A San Francisco $5,000,001 sale pays 4.5% on the entire $5,000,001 (= $225,000.045), not 0.75% on the first $5M and 4.5% on the marginal $1 ($37,500 + $0.045 = $37,500.045). The single-dollar increase across the cliff produces a $187,500 jump in tax. The same flat-tier mechanic applies at every California city cliff modeled here:

| Cliff | Jump | |---|---| | SF $1M (0.68% → 0.75%) | +$700 on $1M | | SF $5M (0.75% → 4.5%) | +$187,500 on $5M (largest cliff in CA) | | SF $10M (4.5% → 5.5%) | +$100,000 on $10M | | SF $25M (5.5% → 6.0%) | +$125,000 on $25M | | LA $5M (0.45% → 4.45%) | +$200,000 on $5M | | LA $10M (4.45% → 5.95%) | +$150,000 on $10M | | Oakland $300K (0% → 1%) | +$3,000 on $300K | | Oakland $2M (1% → 1.75%) | +$15,000 on $2M | | Oakland $5M (1.75% → 2.5%) | +$37,500 on $5M | | Berkeley $1M (0% → 1.5%) | +$15,000 on $1M | | Berkeley $2M (1.5% → 2.5%) | +$20,000 on $2M | | San Jose $2M (0.075% → 0.75%) | +$13,500 on $2M | | San Jose $5M (0.75% → 1.5%) | +$37,500 on $5M | | Santa Monica $5M (0.3% → 0.6%) | +$15,000 on $5M | | Culver City $1.5M (0.45% → 1.5%) | +$15,750 on $1.5M | | Culver City $3M (1.5% → 3.0%) | +$45,000 on $3M | | Culver City $10M (3.0% → 4.0%) | +$100,000 on $10M |

California courts have repeatedly upheld the flat-per-tier structure against challenges that the cliff produces a non-uniform burden under California Constitution Art. XIII § 32 — the cliff is intentional and constitutional. Practical implication: at every cliff boundary, sellers and buyers should expect aggressive negotiation. Sometimes the seller drops the price by $1; sometimes the parties allocate a portion of consideration to genuine personal property (which is permitted if substantiated under Cal. Rev. & Tax Code § 11932).

Charter-city authority — Cal. Const. Art. XI § 5

The reason San Francisco, Los Angeles, Oakland, and others can set such varied (and high) rates is California Constitution Article XI § 5 — the "home rule" provision. About 121 of California's ~480 cities have adopted charters under Art. XI § 5 and have plenary authority over their "municipal affairs," which the California Supreme Court has consistently held includes the power to set local tax rates on real-property conveyances. General-law cities can impose a RPTT only under Cal. Gov. Code § 37101 and at rates not exceeding what the State has authorized — historically tracking the 0.11% county rate.

The municipal-affairs doctrine is why charter-city RPTT ordinances have survived every state-preemption challenge brought against them, including the high-profile lawsuits filed against LA Measure ULA in 2023 (resolved in the City's favor at the trial-court level in 2024). The federal constitutional challenges — equal protection, takings, dormant Commerce Clause — have similarly failed.

Who pays — customary allocation

| City | Customary allocation | |---|---| | San Francisco | Seller pays (SF Business & Tax Regs. Code § 1102(b)) | | Los Angeles | Seller pays (custom; LAMC § 21.9 silent on allocation) | | Oakland | Split 50/50 (Oakland Municipal Code § 4.20.030) | | Berkeley | Seller pays | | San Jose | Often split 50/50 by long-standing local practice | | Santa Monica | Seller pays | | Culver City | Seller pays | | County DTT (Cal. Rev. & Tax § 11911) | Seller pays by convention; statute silent |

Critical: every "customary" allocation above is exactly that — custom, not statute (with the narrow exception of Oakland's 50/50 split under its municipal code). The purchase contract controls. In a buyer's market or in sponsor-developer sales, the seller often shifts the customary share to the buyer. In a seller's market with strong demand-supply mismatch (Bay Area 2020-2022), some buyers offered to absorb the seller's transfer-tax burden as a sweetener. Confirm in writing before signing.

Comparison to New York and New Jersey

| Jurisdiction | Tax on $30M sale | Effective rate | |---|---|---| | San Francisco (Prop ULA top tier) | $1,833,000 | 6.11% | | Los Angeles (Measure ULA top tier) | $1,818,000 | 6.06% | | Manhattan (four-layer NY stack) | ~$1,405,000 | 4.68% | | Jersey City / Hoboken (NJ RTF + Mansion) | ~$310,000 | 1.03% | | Other California city (county-only) | $33,000 | 0.11% |

At the very top of the curve, California exceeds New York. Everywhere else, California is dramatically lighter than New York or New Jersey — the median California sale (≈$800K) outside SF / LA / Oakland / Berkeley / San Jose pays $880 in transfer tax, far below the $5,200+ a comparable $800K Manhattan sale would pay (State RPT alone). The California burden is concentrated at the top in a handful of charter cities; the broader market is among the lightest-taxed in the US.

Common errors

Five mistakes turn up routinely in California transfer-tax math:

Treating the city tier as marginal. It is NOT progressive bracket-by-bracket. The tier rate applies to the whole sale price. The cliff at each boundary is real — $1 of marginal price across the SF $5M cliff costs $187,500.
Forgetting the county base. Even in a "no city RPTT" jurisdiction like San Diego, Sacramento, or Fresno, the 0.11% county Documentary Transfer Tax always applies. There is no California jurisdiction with $0 transfer tax.
Conflating Measure ULA with SF Prop ULA. They were passed in the same November 2022 cycle and use similar names, but apply to different cities with different rate structures. SF's tiers run 4.5% / 5.5% / 6.0%; LA's run 4.0% / 5.5% (atop a 0.45% base).
Assuming the seller-pays convention is statutory. It's not. The convention is just convention — the purchase contract controls. Oakland (and arguably San Jose) split 50/50 by ordinance / practice.
Confusing the county Documentary Transfer Tax with property tax. The Documentary Transfer Tax is a one-time tax on the conveyance (transfer). The Prop 13 property tax is the annual ad-valorem tax on the assessed value — a completely separate mechanism. Both can apply on the same property: the seller owes the DTT at closing; the buyer owes property tax (on the reassessed basis under Prop 13) for the remainder of the tax year.

What this calculator does not do

This is a planning and screening tool. It does not:

Substitute for the recording filing. The county Documentary Transfer Tax under § 11911 must be paid at the time of recording — the county recorder will not record the deed until the tax is paid. Use this calculator to model the closing, but the actual recording must be done through the title company or closing agent.
Model exemptions. § 11922 (government), § 11923 (SEC reorganization), § 11925 (partnership / LLC less-than-50% interest), § 11930 (gift / inheritance / no-consideration) all exempt certain transfers from the county DTT. Most city ordinances parallel the county exemptions but each has its own enumeration. Confirm exemption eligibility with a California tax professional before claiming any exemption.
Cover every California city. About 30 California cities have city-level RPTT ordinances; we model the eight with the most material rate stacks. For other charter-city ordinances (Albany, Emeryville, Hayward, Mountain View, Palo Alto, Piedmont, Redwood City, Richmond, San Leandro, San Mateo, San Rafael, Vallejo, etc.), use the "other-city" option as a floor and consult the local ordinance — most are in the 0.50%–2.00% range.
Handle Prop 13 reassessment. A change-of-ownership conveyance also triggers Prop 13 reassessment under Cal. Rev. & Tax Code § 60 et seq. Use the California Proposition 13 Property Tax Calculator for that side of the analysis.
Apply to transfers outside California. If the property is in Oregon, Nevada, Arizona, or any other state, this calculator does not apply.

Tools, not advice. Consult a California-licensed tax professional before relying on any output for a real transaction.

How this page is maintained

California transfer tax has been amended substantially in recent years. SF Prop ULA was added by Proposition I (November 2020) and refined by Proposition C (November 2022). LA Measure ULA passed November 2022 and took effect April 1, 2023. Oakland Measure X passed November 2022 and took effect January 1, 2023. Santa Monica Measure GS and Culver City Measure RE were enacted in the same cycle. We monitor the SF Office of the Treasurer & Tax Collector, the LA City Clerk, the Oakland Finance Department, and the California State Board of Equalization for ordinance amendments and refresh the calculator within 30 days of any enacted change. The current 2026 schedules have been stable since the 2022-2023 ballot cycle; any change will be reflected here promptly.

Last reviewed: 2026-05-16 against Cal. Rev. & Tax Code § 11911, Cal. Gov. Code § 37101, Cal. Const. Art. XI § 5, and the local ordinances of San Francisco, Los Angeles, Oakland, Berkeley, San Jose, Santa Monica, and Culver City.

FAQ

Common questions

Edge cases and clarifications around california documentary transfer tax + city rptt calculator.

California layers TWO distinct transfer-tax regimes on every real-property conveyance. First, the County Documentary Transfer Tax under Cal. Rev. & Tax Code § 11911, enacted as part of the Documentary Transfer Tax Act (§§ 11901-11935) in 1967 to replace the repealed federal documentary stamp tax. The county rate is $0.55 per $500 of consideration — equivalent to 0.11% of the sale price — and it applies STATEWIDE to every California conveyance. The full revenue goes to the county. Second, a city-level Real Property Transfer Tax authorized by Cal. Gov. Code § 37101 for general-law cities and by the plenary tax authority of Cal. Const. Art. XI § 5 for charter cities. About 30 California cities have enacted a city-level RPTT, with rates ranging from $0 (most general-law cities) to 6.0% (San Francisco's top Prop ULA tier — the highest residential transfer tax anywhere in the United States). The county and city layers stack — there is no offset.

Resources

Links marked sponsoredmay earn The Fennec Lab a commission. They do not affect the calculator's output. See disclosures.

California Rev. & Tax Code § 11911 (County Documentary Transfer Tax) — statewide county base rate $0.55 per $500 = 0.11%
California Rev. & Tax Code §§ 11901-11935 (Documentary Transfer Tax Act) — full statutory framework including § 11922 (government), § 11925 (partnership/LLC), § 11930 (gift/inheritance) exemptions
California Government Code § 37101 (general-law city tax authority) — statutory authority for general-law cities to impose a city-level RPTT
San Francisco Business & Tax Regulations Code Art. 12-C (Real Property Transfer Tax) — SF transfer tax ordinance — § 1108(a) rate schedule, § 1102(b) seller-pays convention, § 1105 exemptions
San Francisco Proposition C (November 2022) — ballot measure restructuring SF Prop ULA mansion-tax tiers to current 4.5% / 5.5% / 6.0% schedule
Los Angeles Measure ULA — "United to House LA" (November 2022) — ballot measure adding 4.0% / 5.5% surtax on LA sales above $5M / $10M, effective April 1, 2023
Oakland Municipal Code Title 4 — Real Property Transfer Tax — Oakland Measure X (2022) four-tier 0%-2.5% schedule and 50/50 buyer-seller split
California State Board of Equalization — Documentary Transfer Tax — CA BOE administrative guidance on the county Documentary Transfer Tax mechanic and recording-time payment