A ballot measure to slash California transfer taxes just got pulled in a Sacramento deal. Here is what Bay Area sellers actually pay now, broken down by city.

Sell a $1.5 million house in Fremont and the Bay Area transfer tax runs about $1,650. Sell that same house in Oakland and the bill is closer to $24,150. Same price, same week, roughly fourteen times the tax, and the only thing that changed is which side of a city line the front door sits on.
That gap is the part of a home sale almost nobody prices in until the closing statement lands. And it just got pulled back into the headlines, because Sacramento spent the past week fighting over whether cities should be allowed to charge transfer taxes at all.
In May, the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association qualified a statewide measure for the November ballot that would have capped every local real estate transfer tax at 0.11 percent. That is not a trim. It is a demolition. It would have rolled San Francisco, Oakland, Berkeley, Richmond and the rest back to the bare county rate and blown holes in the city budgets that lean on transfer-tax money.
Then Assemblymember Buffy Wicks, one of the Legislature's most aggressive housing voices, dropped AB 736 to head it off. Her bill would cap transfer taxes at 1.5 percent in most jurisdictions and 3 percent in places like San Francisco and Culver City, and it would shrink Los Angeles's Measure ULA mansion tax along the way.
And then it flipped. Days after introducing the bill, lawmakers cut a deal and Howard Jarvis voluntarily pulled its measure. Instead of a transfer-tax cap, November voters now get a measure raising the threshold to pass new special taxes to two-thirds, up from a simple majority. AB 736, with no ballot measure left to counter, is suddenly a bill in search of a reason to exist. The California Association of Realtors had already sent members a red alert, worried the Wicks cap would let the 361 general-law cities that currently collect almost nothing raise their transfer taxes toward 1.5 percent.
For sellers, the upshot is simpler than the politics. Nothing you pay changed. The measure that would have slashed your transfer tax is gone, the bill that would have capped it is stalled, and today's rates, the ones below, still stand.
California's base documentary transfer tax is $1.10 per $1,000 of price, about 0.11 percent, and for most Bay Area suburbs that is the whole bill. The cities that pile on top are charter cities, and several of them tax the entire sale price at a rate that climbs with value. Here is what that looks like in dollars on a $1.5 million sale, which sits in the middle of a lot of Bay Area price ranges.
| City | Government type | Tax on a $1.5M sale | Effective rate |
|---|---|---|---|
| Most Bay Area suburbs (Fremont, Sunnyvale, Walnut Creek, Concord, Daly City) | General law | $1,650 | 0.11% |
| Palo Alto | Charter | $6,600 | 0.44% |
| San Jose | Charter | $6,600 | 0.44% |
| San Francisco | Charter (city + county) | $11,250 | 0.75% |
| Richmond | Charter | $20,400 | 1.36% |
| Berkeley | Charter | $24,150 | 1.61% |
| Oakland | Charter | $24,150 | 1.61% |
Total city plus county documentary transfer tax on a $1.5 million sale. Tiered cities tax the full price at the applicable rate. Rates from CaliforniaCityFinance.com (December 2025) and the SF Assessor-Recorder.
Two things to read off that table. First, transfer tax is not one Bay Area number, it is a patchwork. Second, the tiered cities tax the whole price, not just the slice above a threshold, so crossing a tier line stings. In Richmond, a sale at $1,000,001 is taxed at the $1 million-to-$3 million rate on every dollar, not just the last one.
Here is the part that surprises people. On a normal sale, San Francisco is not the expensive one. The eye-watering SF rates, the 5.5 and 6 percent everyone reads about, only bite on sales above $10 million and $25 million. Under $5 million, the city charges 0.75 percent. So on that $1.5 million house, San Francisco's tax is around $11,250, while Oakland and Berkeley clear $24,000 and Richmond lands near $20,000.
That flips the usual mental map. If you are weighing where to land in the East Bay, the transfer tax belongs in the value math right next to price and property taxes. It is the same habit we bring to how Oakland neighborhoods rank by value: the sticker number is only the start, and the costs hiding behind the city line are often what decide whether a place is actually a deal.
A buyer comparing a home in Fremont, a general-law city at $1.10 per $1,000, against one a few miles north in Oakland is looking at a five-figure swing in selling costs down the road, before anyone mentions schools or commute. San Jose is its own case. Its Measure E transfer tax only kicks in above roughly $2.3 million, so most San Jose sellers pay the low base rate, but a luxury sale crosses into Measure E territory fast and the rate jumps to as much as 1.5 percent on top. If you are sizing up how San Jose neighborhoods rank overall, that threshold is worth knowing before you fall for a specific street.
The way we look at it, the city, or even the unincorporated-county line a house sits behind, is a neighborhood fact, like the school zone or the flood map. It is not a footnote. It shows up in what you net. A few Peninsula and South Bay cities, Palo Alto, Mountain View, San Mateo, San Rafael, charge a modest city tax of their own, but the truly heavy rates cluster in the East Bay charter cities, and that is exactly where buyers tend to assume the suburbs are cheaper across the board.
It does not mean rates went up or down. Today's numbers hold. It does not mean the fight is over either. Wicks could revive AB 736, and the two-thirds measure headed to the November ballot would make it harder for cities to pass new special taxes, transfer taxes included, going forward. That is a future-tax question, not a this-year-rate question.
What it does mean is practical. If you are selling, ask your agent or escrow officer for a net sheet with the actual city transfer-tax line spelled out, and find out who customarily pays it where you are. It varies by county and city, and it is negotiable. If you are buying with one eye on the eventual resale, put the city's transfer tax on the comparison sheet next to price and property taxes, because you will meet it again on the way out.
Two neighborhoods can look identical on paper and sit in different cities with very different exit costs. The transfer tax is one more reason the boundary matters, and looking past the listing photos at the whole area, cost included, is the entire reason we built Houseberry.
In California the seller customarily pays the documentary transfer tax, but it is fully negotiable and local practice varies by county and city. In some charter cities the city portion is commonly split between the parties. Whatever you agree to, get it in writing in the purchase contract.
No. The ballot measure that would have capped transfer taxes was pulled, and AB 736 has not passed. Current city rates still apply. The measure voters will actually see in November is about the vote threshold for new special taxes, not a change to today's transfer-tax rates.
Only at the very top. The 6 percent rate applies to sales of $25 million and up, with 5.5 percent from $10 million to $25 million. The large majority of San Francisco homes sell in the 0.75 percent band. For a typical sale, several East Bay cities cost a seller more.
Start with the city. A general-law city, which covers most Bay Area suburbs, charges about 0.11 percent, while charter cities like Oakland, Berkeley and San Francisco charge more and tax the full price. Then weigh it against everything else that varies by area. Our neighborhood rankings, like the best-value neighborhoods in Oakland or the value picture in San Francisco, are built for exactly that kind of side-by-side.