Property tax caps for user fees; what could be better? Almost anything
Center for the Study of Economics - Company Message
RSS Follow Become a Fan

Delivered by FeedBurner


Recent Posts

Part 1, Land Value Taxation: Politics, Persuasion, and Practicality - A How-To
2016: Another Year of Advances and Retrenchment
Part 2 - Land Value Taxation: Politics, Persuasion, and Practicality - A How-To
Podcast Features Millbourne, PA, LVT aids town in fiscal rebirth
Hartford Connecticut Explores Land Value Tax to Battle Parking Lot Blight

Most Popular Posts

Noted UK Think Tank: Tax Land Values
Eliminating the property tax? It must not happen, but we’ll see what happens.
Altoona, PA: City tax wholly on land values = normality
Land Value Tax in Britain: Progress While the Rear Guard Digs In
Dr. Herbert Barry's Proposal to Really Reassess Allegheny County

Categories

Act 47
Africa
Agricultural Policy
Allegheny County
ALTER
Altoona
Australia
Australian Capital Territory
Baltimore
Berkshire
Canberra
Clairton
Connecticut
Connecticut General Assembly
Current News Item
de Blasio
Economic Development
Economic Policy
Economic Rent
Economist
Ed Vargas
Education
EPA
Federal Tax Policy
Fiscal Policy and Taxes
Frederick
Free Markets
Gentrification
George Osborne
Global Taxation
Harrisburg
Hartford
Healthy Communities
Housing
Housing Policy
Hurricane Sandy
India
Ireland
Jeffrey Berger
Jimmy Tayoun
Justin Skariah
Kenyatta Johnson
Lancaster
Land Policy
Land Value Tax
Lanesborough
Larry Deutsch
Law and the Constitution
Legislation
Len Fasano
Liberal Democrats
Local Government
Maria Quinones-Sanchez
Martin Looney
Maryland
Massachusetts
Matt Ritter
Matthew Ritter
Mayor Rick Gray
Michael Kinsley
Michigan
Millbourne
Model Legislation
Monroe County
Montreal
Moonachie
Namibia
National Tax Policy
New Jersey
New London
New York City
NY
Oregon
Parking and Transportation
Patricia Dillon
Pennsylvania
Philadelphia
Pittsburgh
Portland
Property Assessment
Property Tax Reform
Public Health
Public Opinion
Public Resources
Public Works
Regional Tax Base Sharing
Regionalism
Regressive
Rhode Island
Rochester
Roland Lemar
Sales Taxes
Scranton
Senator Jan Malik
Sin Taxes
Smart Growth
Soda Tax
Taiwan
Tax Exemption and Abatment
Thomas Piketty
Titusville
Tom Kramer
Transportation Funding
Transportation Policy
Uncategorized
United Kingdom
Urban Blight
Urban Rejuvenation
Urban Tax Policy
Vince Cable
Wage and Income Taxes
Wales
Wealth
Wilson Goode Jr.
powered by

Incentive Taxation

Property tax caps for user fees; what could be better? Almost anything

Tax Caps and User Fees: Caution Needed

Six Houses all in a row, assessed at the same value of $100,000 at a tax rate of 1%. Taxes still rise, while local government seeks alternative funds in flat fees for services, such as trash pick up.










Regressivity is a more common outcome of user charges than is commonly acknowledged. That ought to change. City services based on value (i.e. a user charge on publicly created land values) can be made more progressive than resorting to invisible charges or flat fees.

An ever-more-common urban finance scenario: Homeowners are upset about tax increases every year. The specter of those unable to pay (the "poor widow") provides ammunition for unflattering press, angry citizens and increased agitation from opponents. A natural reaction in the United States over the past 30 years has been to “do something”.

This is the root of most property tax limitation movement from Prop 13 in California Prop 2 1/2 in Massachusetts, New Jersey’s recent 2% annual tax increase in property taxes, and late but loudly to the game New York State's 2% annual cap. A victory for the poor and middle class? Not quite.

Government, particularly local government, is actually quite sensitive to the needs and desires of its citizens. Restricted by tax caps, other means are used to keep revenue flowing for parks, garbage pickup, and all the various services that constituents demand.
So, government finds other ways to keep the tap running, but in ways that are nearly invisible: borrowing (paying off the principal and interest is put off until everybody involved is long gone), hidden taxes – usually the sales tax – or the ever-growing popular option “fee-for-service.”

The economically impoverished town of Clairton Pennsylvania provides a simple explanation of how this works. Homeowners and business pay for how much water they use. Sounds almost fair enough. Leave the bathwater running all day long you pay more. But what’s really creating an issue and angst is another part of the water service: a flat fee. For residents, it’s $50 a month, whether you are a long retired steel worker who has little income or somebody making hundred thousand dollars a year. For business, you could be struggling storefront shop or a thriving pizza delivery and you pay $100 a month.


0 Comments to Property tax caps for user fees; what could be better? Almost anything:

Comments RSS

Add a Comment

Your Name:
Email Address: (Required)
Website:
Comment:
Make your text bigger, bold, italic and more with HTML tags. We'll show you how.
Post Comment