What the phrase actually refers to
Start with what did not happen, because the search term implies more than the law delivered.
There has been no repeal of the Structural Integrity Reserve Study mandate. No suspension of the milestone inspection regime. No general forgiveness of reserve obligations. Nothing of that kind has been enacted in Florida, and nothing of that kind was even close.
What "reserve fund relief" maps to is the funding-flexibility package in HB 913, effective 1 July 2025, with certain provisions effective 1 October 2025. It moved deadlines, raised a threshold, opened up alternative ways to fund a required reserve, created a narrow pause mechanism, and gave boards new authority to pay for mandated work. It changed how and when associations fund structural reserves, not whether they have to.
That distinction is the single most misunderstood point in the whole topic, and it is worth stating in its own sentence before anything else: for budgets adopted on or after 31 December 2024, an association required to obtain a SIRS still cannot vote to waive or reduce reserves for the components on the study's list, or use those reserves for any other purpose. HB 913 did not touch that.
The five mechanisms
1. Deadline extension
The SIRS deadline moved from 31 December 2024 to 31 December 2025. Alongside it, an association required to complete a milestone inspection on or before 31 December 2026 may complete the study simultaneously with that inspection — and the statute states that in no event may the study be completed after 31 December 2026. There is also a post-milestone deferral of no more than the two consecutive budget years following a completed milestone inspection, to allow the association to prioritise the repairs the inspection identified.
2. A higher inclusion threshold
The catch-all reserve item threshold rose from $10,000 to $25,000, with annual inflation adjustment using the Consumer Price Index and the Department of Business and Professional Regulation publishing the revised amount by 1 February each year. The operative figure is $25,000 or the adjusted amount, whichever is greater. Fewer items are therefore pulled into the mandatory study — though note this affects only the catch-all category. Roof, structure, fireproofing and fire protection, plumbing, electrical, waterproofing and exterior painting, and windows and exterior doors remain mandatory regardless of cost.
3. Alternative funding methods
Reserves for a required SIRS may now be funded by regular assessments, which remains the default, or by a special assessment, a line of credit, or a loan. Any method other than regular assessments requires approval by a majority of the total voting interests. Where a line of credit is used in lieu of fully funding reserves annually, owners must receive clear notice that reserves will not be funded annually, that credit will be used instead, and of the amount of projected future assessments. Any secured line of credit must be disclosed to subsequent purchasers.
4. A temporary pause or reduction after a milestone inspection
For budgets adopted on or before 31 December 2028, a unit-owner-controlled association that completed a milestone inspection within the previous two calendar years may temporarily pause or reduce reserve contributions for no more than two consecutive annual budgets, on a vote of a majority of the total voting interests, and only to fund the repairs the milestone inspection recommended. Before contributions resume, the association must obtain an updated SIRS to determine future funding needs. The provision does not apply to developer-controlled associations or to those with a bulk assignee or bulk buyer.
5. Board authority to assess or borrow for mandated work
For condominiums existing on or after 1 July 2025 and not controlled by the developer, a board may levy special assessments or obtain loans without prior membership approval to perform maintenance, repair or replacement required by the milestone inspection report or the SIRS, in order to protect health and safety.
Why structural reserves are still non-waivable
Every one of those five mechanisms is about how the money arrives. None of them removes the obligation for the money to arrive.
The general Florida rule at §718.112(2)(f) still permits a majority of the total voting interests to vote for no reserves or reduced reserves, or to use reserves for other purposes, with the statutory warning on the ballot that doing so may result in owner liability for unanticipated special assessments. That rule survives — for non-structural reserves. Landscaping, amenities and similar items can still be voted down.
For the components on the SIRS list, the vote is gone. For budgets adopted on or after 31 December 2024, an association required to obtain a SIRS cannot vote to waive or reduce those reserves, and cannot redirect them. The only exits are a vote to terminate the condominium, and a determination by a local building official that the building is uninhabitable due to a natural emergency, which allows the board to pause contributions without prior member approval.
Read mechanism four against that background and its shape becomes clear. The pause is not a waiver. It is a deferral tied to funding actual repairs — the association is not permitted to keep the money, only to redirect it into the work the milestone inspection identified — and it expires: the pause is limited to two consecutive budgets, requires an updated study before contributions resume, and is unavailable for budgets adopted after 31 December 2028. It is a cash-flow accommodation for associations facing a repair bill and a reserve contribution at the same moment. It is not a holiday.
A line of credit is not a reserve
Mechanism three is the one with the largest gap between what it sounds like and what it means for a buyer, and it deserves its own treatment.
A line of credit is not money. It is a promise to borrow later, secured against the association. An association "funding reserves" through a line of credit has a percent-funded figure that means something entirely different from one holding cash, because the numerator of that fraction is the balance actually held. The eventual repayment reaches owners either as increased regular assessments or as a special assessment — the cost has been scheduled, not avoided.
The statute recognises this directly, attaching disclosure obligations no other funding method carries. Owners voting on a line of credit used in lieu of annual funding must be told that reserves will not be funded annually, that credit will be used instead, and what the projected future assessments will be. Any secured line of credit must be disclosed to subsequent purchasers — a requirement existing precisely because the arrangement is not visible in the reserve balance.
For a buyer the reading is straightforward. A disclosed line of credit is a material fact, not a technicality. Ask what it is secured against, what has been drawn, what the projected future assessments were represented to be when owners voted, and how the repayment is scheduled. The same questions apply to a loan. A special assessment used to top up reserves is more transparent in this respect, because it appears as an amount owed rather than as an unremarkable line in a funding plan.
The board can now assess without asking the members
Mechanism five changes the balance of power inside an association more than any of the others, and gets far less attention.
Before 1 July 2025, a membership vote was in many associations a genuine obstacle to a large assessment. Owners facing a large bill vote against it, and the historical result was deferral — the mechanism that produced the underfunding the statute now exists to address.
Under HB 913, for condominiums existing on or after 1 July 2025 and not controlled by the developer, the board can levy a special assessment or take out a loan without prior membership approval where the work is required by the milestone inspection report or the SIRS and is needed to protect health and safety. The practical consequence: in Florida, owners can no longer vote down a structurally mandated assessment.
For a buyer that cuts both ways. It removes the possibility of buying into a building where owners simply refuse to fix a documented structural problem. It also removes any protection a buyer might have imagined against a large assessment appearing after closing. The inspection reports and the board minutes are therefore doing more work than the governing documents are, and they are what should be read first.
Two smaller changes belong here: boards may invest reserve funds in certificates of deposit without a member vote, and SIRS reserves are reported to be fundable using the pooled accounting method, with a change of accounting method permitted without a member vote. Pooling is an accounting methodology, not a funding level, and it does not lower the obligation — but it does mean a surplus on one component can offset a shortfall on another.
Where an association stands in August 2026
The current position is easy to state and easy to get wrong from older sources.
- The operative law is the statute as amended by HB 913, effective 1 July 2025. Nothing enacted since has changed it.
- The 2026 regular session produced no amendment. CS/SB 1498 died in the Appropriations Committee on Agriculture, Environment and General Government on 13 March 2026, and the House companion died in Rules the same day. Its proposed 1 July 2026 effective date is moot, and the drafting conflict it would have fixed — developer-turnover provisions applying to buildings regardless of height while the related SIRS provisions carry a three-habitable-story threshold — is still sitting in the statute.
- The general SIRS deadline of 31 December 2025 has passed. The only remaining runway is the milestone-concurrent route, which closes on 31 December 2026.
For a buyer under contract in a qualifying Florida building, the documents that answer the real question are: the milestone inspection phase one report and any phase two report, with dates and the professional's licence; confirmation of whether the local enforcement agency has adopted the 25-year trigger; the SIRS, with its date, the preparer's licence or designation, and the mandatory-versus-other item split; the current budget showing reserve line items and any waiver vote on non-structural reserves; whether the association has voted to use a special assessment, line of credit or loan in lieu of funding reserves; whether contributions have been paused under the post-milestone provision, and when the pause ends; board minutes on any resolution to commence repairs within 365 days of a phase two report; and the estoppel certificate under §718.116(8).
Whether a particular association's position complies is a question for a Florida attorney, not an inference from a budget. But the shape of the answer is usually visible in those documents, and an association that can produce all of them promptly is telling you something about itself before you have read a word. The statutory text is public at flsenate.gov.
Common questions
Did Florida eliminate the condo reserve requirement?
No. HB 913, effective 1 July 2025, provided funding flexibility, not exemption. For budgets adopted on or after 31 December 2024, an association required to obtain a Structural Integrity Reserve Study still cannot vote to waive or reduce reserves for the components that study covers, or use those reserves for other purposes. What changed is how those reserves may be funded and when the study had to be completed.
What is HB 913?
It is the 2025 Florida bill, effective 1 July 2025 with certain provisions effective 1 October 2025, that delivered five things: the SIRS deadline moved to 31 December 2025 with a milestone-concurrent hard stop of 31 December 2026; the catch-all reserve item threshold rose from $10,000 to $25,000 with annual CPI adjustment; reserves became fundable by special assessment, line of credit or loan on a majority vote; a temporary pause or reduction after a milestone inspection became available; and boards gained authority to assess or borrow for mandated work without a member vote.
Can a Florida condo association pause reserve contributions?
Only in narrow circumstances. A unit-owner-controlled association that completed a milestone inspection within the previous two calendar years may pause or reduce contributions for no more than two consecutive annual budgets, on a majority vote of the total voting interests, and only to fund the repairs the milestone inspection recommended. It must obtain an updated SIRS before contributions resume, and the mechanism is unavailable for budgets adopted after 31 December 2028. Developer-controlled associations and those with a bulk assignee or bulk buyer cannot use it.
Can a Florida board levy a special assessment without a member vote?
Yes, for structurally mandated work. For condominiums existing on or after 1 July 2025 and not controlled by the developer, a board may levy a special assessment or obtain a loan without prior membership approval to perform maintenance, repair or replacement required by the milestone inspection report or the SIRS, to protect health and safety. Owners can no longer vote down an assessment for work those documents require.
Is funding reserves with a line of credit the same as funding them?
No, and the statute treats it differently for that reason. A line of credit is a promise to borrow, not a balance held, so a percent-funded figure produced alongside one means something different. Where credit is used in lieu of annual funding, owners must be told that reserves will not be funded annually, that credit will be used instead, and what the projected future assessments will be — and any secured line of credit must be disclosed to subsequent purchasers.
Did anything change in the 2026 legislative session?
No. CS/SB 1498 died in the Appropriations Committee on Agriculture, Environment and General Government on 13 March 2026 and the House companion died in Rules the same day, so the operative law remains the statute as amended by HB 913 effective 1 July 2025. One consequence is that the drafting inconsistency SB 1498 would have resolved — developer-turnover provisions applying regardless of building height while the related SIRS provisions carry a three-habitable-story threshold — is still in the statute.