More evidence confirms the error of stopping land value tax in Pittsburgh
Center for the Study of Economics - Company Message
RSS Follow Become a Fan

Delivered by FeedBurner


Recent Posts

LVT in Los Angeles? Op-Ed says go for it.
Welcome to the Zany World of NYC's Property Tax
Land Value Taxation in Jamaica: Now More Than Ever
Part 1, Land Value Taxation: Politics, Persuasion, and Practicality - A How-To
2016: Another Year of Advances and Retrenchment

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
Affordable Housing
Africa
Agricultural Policy
Allegheny County
ALTER
Altoona
Assessment
Australia
Australian Capital Territory
Baltimore
Berkshire
California
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
Jamaica
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
Los Angeles
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

More evidence confirms the error of stopping land value tax in Pittsburgh

Q. What happens when a city taxes buildings more at the beginning of the greatest building boom in American history?
A. Not much.


One of the best examples of the efficacy of land value tax (LVT) was careful study of the city of Pittsburgh culminating in the Oates/Schwab study of Pittsburgh published in 1997 which concluded all things being equal land value tax policy had the effect of unleashing construction demand – especially downtown construction –just as the steel industry collapsed, and just as the US entered a significant recessionary period (late 1970s and early 1980s)

After a botched revaluation by Allegheny County in Pittsburgh in the year 2000, the sprawl/development community/suburban power centers based outside the cities created enough havoc with the data, all in the midst of a savage mayoral primary. Then-city leaders made a reactive choice and "suspended" LVT.

What were the results?  Certainly, as the nation entered a period of tremendous growth especially in the construction industry, Pittsburgh's taxable building permits dropped.  What development there was, came as the result of heavy lifting by the taxpayers as the "development community" were showered with abatements, subsidies and TIFs, which continues unabated to this day (Pun intended).

New construction is generally limited to condos and other high ticket items.  Older neighborhoods such as the Hill District,  the North Side, Carrick and Beltzhoover, the meat and bones(if you will) of Pittsburgh were slammed with significantly higher tax levies. More and more land has gone off the tax rolls.



A TIF-driven dream: A Developer pays himself to build at 350 5th


Another Wrinkle

All bad news no doubt.  But another issue that has been a constant is the fact that just when LVT was ended, property tax revenues stagnated (again during a huge boom in construction throughout the nation).  Property tax revenues are still far short of what the city expects and needs.

While a healthy property tax base can pay for most if not all of the city's revenues, Pittsburgh wants permission to scrounge in the sofa for loose change, and is wishing for the very type of taxes that are regressive and damaging long-term to an economy: local wage and consumption taxes. In fact, LVT was the replacement for a wage tax, twice enacted by the late and very lamented Mayor Sophie Masloff. 

Despite all the infectious happy talk about Pittsburgh's rebirth, demographic and economic indicators all point downwards.

Perhaps it's time Pittsburgh returns to the future and double down by stripping away inefficient taxes and grants of unfair privilege to the well-connected in exchange for sweat equity and real construction projects.  Return the city to the land value tax, and include the school district tax as well.  Announce that the new protected class in Pittsburgh will be those who want to work, build, and produce a better community.


0 Comments to More evidence confirms the error of stopping land value tax in Pittsburgh:

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