scholarly journals House Prices & Property Tax Revenues During the Boom & Bust: Evidence from Small-Area Estimates

2013 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christopher B. Goodman
2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christopher B Goodman

Although the Great Recession put the U.S. economy into a tailspin, we know little about how the changes in house prices influenced property tax collections. Using local level housing data from Zillow matched to property tax data from 1998 to 2012, two questions are examined. First, the elasticity of property tax revenue with respect to house values is estimated. Second, the timing of this elasticity is determined. The analysis rules out that local policymakers capture the entire increase of house value in property tax revenues but unable to rule out that increases in house values are completely offset by changes in effective property tax rates. Decreases in values have an elasticity between 0.3 and 0.4 and take three years for changes in values to impact property tax revenues. While property tax collections declined, local policymakers adjusted effective millage rates such that revenues did not decline as much as home values.


2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 25-30
Author(s):  
Elena S. Stegnienko ◽  
Svetlana A. Frolova

The article discusses attempts to integrate land tax and property tax of individuals into a single tax on real estate in the Russian Federation. The analysis of foreign systems of property taxation on various grounds is given (level of distribution of powers, level of budget to which tax revenues, property, subject of tax are directed). The principles of the effectiveness of the system of taxation of real estate, developed by international practice, are identified.


2018 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 75-96
Author(s):  
Maria Christidou ◽  
Panagiotis Theodore Konstantinou ◽  
Costas Roumanias

We assess the effects of monetary policy on real house prices and housing investment across the US states during the period 1983-2008. We find that an expansionary monetary shock generates higher housing investment and house prices at the national level. At the state level, however the responses of housing investment and house prices differ from the nation-wide responses. We relate this heterogeneity to various observable factors such as property tax rates, howeownership, income inequality, poverty and demographic factors. All these factors are crucial in explaining the heterogeneity of the state-level responses.


Author(s):  
Paul Fish

Much literature has been written about the appeal of property tax as a stable source of revenue for subnational governments in developing countries. Building on this significant background of literature is the author’s practical experience working in local government institutions within both Sierra Leone and Malawi. This article relates to the development and testing of a process of mobilizing the internally generated property tax revenues of local governments, and reports on the results of that process, and the challenges and lessons learned.


2009 ◽  
Vol 31 (2) ◽  
pp. 81-107 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elizabeth Plummer ◽  
Robert J. Pavur

ABSTRACT: In 1993, Texas established a maximum 1.5 percent property tax rate that school districts could impose for purposes of funding their maintenance and operations (M&O). Tax limits are intended to contain government growth and increase the efficiency of government services. Almost all states use property tax limits, and their use continues to increase as states consider ways to decrease the growth in property taxes. This study examines whether the 1.5 percent rate limit lowered the growth of M&O tax revenues and school expenditures, whether these effects differed in the short-run versus long-run, and whether school districts increased other tax and nontax revenue sources to help compensate for lower M&O tax revenues. This study also examines whether the rate limit affected student performance. We use a sample of 1,033 Texas school districts during the period 1994 through 2004, and the Heckman maximum likelihood estimation (MLE) approach to help control for selection bias. We find that the 1.5 percent rate limit decreased the growth of M&O tax revenues and school expenditures, and that expenditures were affected less than M&O tax revenues. Our results suggest that districts helped cushion the rate limit’s effect on expenditures by increasing their debt-related tax revenues. We find only limited evidence that the rate limit’s effects differed in the short-run versus long-run. Finally, we find that student test scores are lower for districts at the 1.5 percent rate limit, and that the decrease in test scores is larger for economically disadvantaged students relative to other students. This suggests that the rate limit is associated with decreases in education quality.


Urban Studies ◽  
1987 ◽  
Vol 24 (5) ◽  
pp. 409-415
Author(s):  
G. Stacy Sirmans ◽  
C.F. Sirmans ◽  
Stanley D. Smith
Keyword(s):  

2018 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 24-51 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ayşe İmrohoroğlu ◽  
Kyle Matoba ◽  
Şelale Tüzel

There are many federal, state, and local laws that distort housing decisions and prices. However, it is often difficult to tease out the quantitative impact of such policies. In this paper, we examine the implications of one of the most significant tax changes initiated by voters in the United States on house prices, housing turnover, and household welfare. In 1978 California passed Proposition 13, which lowered property tax rates and restricted future property tax increases. We find that the introduction of Proposition 13 leads to a 15 percent increase in house prices and a 3.3 percent decrease in the moving rates. The elimination of Proposition 13, however, leads to modest changes in house prices and mobility but sizable welfare gains. (JEL E13, G21, H71, R21, R31)


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document