scholarly journals Unintended Consequences of Property Tax Relief: New York’s STAR Program

Author(s):  
Tae Ho Eom ◽  
William D. Duncombe ◽  
John Yinger
2020 ◽  
pp. 223-259
Author(s):  
Tae Ho Eom ◽  
William Duncombe ◽  
Phuong Nguyen-Hoang ◽  
John Yinger

2014 ◽  
Vol 9 (4) ◽  
pp. 446-480 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tae Ho Eom ◽  
William Duncombe ◽  
Phuong Nguyen-Hoang ◽  
John Yinger

New York’s School Tax Relief Program, STAR, provides state-funded property tax relief for homeowners. Like a matching grant, STAR changes the price of education, thereby altering the incentives of voters and school officials and leading to unintended consequences. Using data for New York State school districts before and after STAR was implemented, we find that STAR increased student performance, school district inefficiency, and school spending by 2 to 4 percent in most districts, leading to an average school property tax rate increase of 14 percent. The STAR-induced tax rate increases offset about one third of the initial STAR tax savings and boosted property taxes for business property. STAR did little to offset the existing inequities in New York State’s education finance system, particularly compared to an equal-cost increase in state aid. This article should be of interest to policy makers involved in property taxes or other aspects of education finance.


1999 ◽  
Vol 23 (2) ◽  
pp. 173-210 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel A. Smith

During the months immediately preceding California’s June 1978 primary election, Proposition 13, the fractious property tax ballot measure, received a dizzying amount of media attention. Newspaper columnists from California and around the country swapped partisan barbs, debating ad infinitum the initiative’s merits and faults. In public forums, political scientists and economists calculated and recalculated the measure’s possible effects and unintended consequences. Heated letters to the editor and sharp-edged political cartoons saturated the editorial pages of local newspapers. Opinion polls registered the public’s sentiment toward the measure on a weekly basis. Shrill advertisements touting either the necessity or the destructiveness of the proposition interrupted regularly scheduled television and radio programs. Indefatigable Howard Jarvis, the monomaniacal, septuagenarian leader of the tax limitation movement, was seemingly everywhere. By election day, the proponents and opponents of Prop 13 had spent over $2 million each on the measure (CFPPC 1988).


1982 ◽  
Vol 58 (4) ◽  
pp. 516 ◽  
Author(s):  
David L. Chicoine ◽  
Steven T. Sonka ◽  
Robert D. Doty

2007 ◽  
Vol 40 (1) ◽  
pp. 36-61 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tae Ho Eom ◽  
Kieran M. Killeen

1978 ◽  
Vol 4 (4) ◽  
pp. 569
Author(s):  
Roger S. Smith ◽  
R. M. Bird ◽  
N. E. Slack

1979 ◽  
Vol 61 (3) ◽  
pp. 409-419 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fred C. White
Keyword(s):  

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aaron R. Cameron

This paper focuses on heritage conservation as it relates to, and intersects with, the realm of municipal finance. The thesis builds a case that municipal Heritage Property Tax Relief Programs (HPTRP’s) in Ontario, as they currently exist, do not work as they were designed. HPTRP’s are aimed at incentivizing heritage designation by offering a financial benefit to property owners, yet in their current configuration, result in additional costs that reduce their effectiveness. The ideal solution would be for the Province to review and redesign the program; however, this is unlikely. A practical solution, which is proposed in this paper, is for municipalities to create a Community Improvement Program (CIP) tool that off-sets some of the unforeseen costs associated with HPTRP’s. The two programs have a history of working synergistically at the local level – and together can accomplish what HPTRP’s were intended to achieve unilaterally.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document