IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v9y2020i1p8-d303925.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Methodological Approach for the Assessment of Potentially Buildable Land for Tax Purposes: The Italian Case Study

Author

Listed:
  • Fabrizio Battisti

    (Department of Planning Design Technology of Architecture, Sapienza University of Rome, Via Flaminia 72, 00196 Rome, Italy)

  • Orazio Campo

    (Department of Planning Design Technology of Architecture, Sapienza University of Rome, Via Flaminia 72, 00196 Rome, Italy)

  • Fabiana Forte

    (Department of Architecture and Industrial Design, University of Campania “Luigi Vanvitelli”, Via San Lorenzo ad Septimum, 81031 Aversa, Italy)

Abstract

According to Italian legislation for a particular type of real property—lands/areas subject to buildability, but not yet currently buildable—there is a problem related to their “qualification”, or whether or not they must be considered buildable for the purposes of their recurrent taxation. These potentially buildable (POBU) areas, that were previously zoned as “agricultural”, have been rezoned as “general urban planning instruments/regulations” (the General Urban Development Plans or variances, which regulate land governance), whose approval path has yet to be concluded. Their value—the taxable base underpinning their taxation—clearly depends on their qualification (whether or not they are considered buildable). This has produced, in recent years, several disputes between owners and local governments; the law did not give univocal solutions: Today (2019), there is a conflict of case law in relation to considering these areas as being building areas, as it is not clear what estimating procedures should be used. This article is thus based on the assumption that responding to the problems connected with taxing POBU areas must be considered separately from (overcoming, in this way, conflicting case law) the “virtual” qualification of agricultural or buildable area, but must instead, and more simply, be considered as the actual condition it is found in (likelihood of having building potential in the future), and therefore its limitations (present at the time of taxation) and the time necessary for the building to actually be built and not just “potential”. The approach proposed in this article thus offers a solution to the problem that has been raised, by modifying the current de jure approach (defining the moment when the building right is manifested) towards an assessment/appraisal approach (defining the value of the potentially buildable (POBU) area, in relation to its actual conditions). To implement this approach, a methodology—proposing an upgrade of the traditional analytic procedure for the assessment of transformation value has been structured in a way such that consideration may be made of the components characterizing the potentially buildable areas by means of appropriate assessment parameters that go towards forming these areas’ value: These are the market value discount rate of the POBU area in relation to the uncertainty and risk of reaching effective and concrete buildability, and the estimated time needed to complete the procedural path for making the area actually buildable.

Suggested Citation

  • Fabrizio Battisti & Orazio Campo & Fabiana Forte, 2020. "A Methodological Approach for the Assessment of Potentially Buildable Land for Tax Purposes: The Italian Case Study," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(1), pages 1-22, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:9:y:2020:i:1:p:8-:d:303925
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/9/1/8/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/9/1/8/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. (IFS), Institute for Fiscal Studies & Mirrlees, James (ed.), 2011. "Tax By Design: The Mirrlees Review," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199553747.
    2. Anthony B. Atkinson & Thomas Piketty & Emmanuel Saez, 2011. "Top Incomes in the Long Run of History," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 49(1), pages 3-71, March.
    3. Graziella Bertocchi, 2011. "The Vanishing Bequest Tax: The Comparative Evolution Of Bequest Taxation In Historical Perspective," Economics and Politics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 23(1), pages 107-131, March.
    4. Luc Arrondel & André Masson, 2013. "Taxing more (large) family bequests: why, when, where?," Working Papers halshs-00834189, HAL.
    5. Paola Profeta & Simona Scabrosetti & Stanley Winer, 2014. "Wealth transfer taxation: an empirical investigation," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 21(4), pages 720-767, August.
    6. Antonio Nesticò & Francesco Sica, 2017. "The sustainability of urban renewal projects: a model for economic multi-criteria analysis," Journal of Property Investment & Finance, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 35(4), pages 397-409, July.
    7. Maria Bostenaru Dan, 2018. "Decision Making Based on Benefit-Costs Analysis: Costs of Preventive Retrofit versus Costs of Repair after Earthquake Hazards," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-26, May.
    8. Dan Andrews, 2010. "Real House Prices in OECD Countries: The Role of Demand Shocks and Structural and Policy Factors," OECD Economics Department Working Papers 831, OECD Publishing.
    9. Fabrizio Battisti & Orazio Campo, 2019. "A Methodology for Determining the Profitability Index of Real Estate Initiatives Involving Public–Private Partnerships. A Case Study: The Integrated Intervention Programs in Rome," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-22, March.
    10. Kneller, Richard & Bleaney, Michael F. & Gemmell, Norman, 1999. "Fiscal policy and growth: evidence from OECD countries," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 74(2), pages 171-190, November.
    11. Stefano Capolongo & Leopoldo Sdino & Marta Dell’Ovo & Rossella Moioli & Stefano Della Torre, 2019. "How to Assess Urban Regeneration Proposals by Considering Conflicting Values," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(14), pages 1-15, July.
    12. Ezio Micelli, 2014. "Cinque problemi intorno a perequazione, diritti edificatori e piani urbanistici," SCIENZE REGIONALI, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 2014(2), pages 9-27.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Fabrizio Battisti & Carlo Pisano, 2022. "Common Property in Italy. Unresolved Issues and an Appraisal Approach: Towards a Definition of Environmental-Economic Civic Value," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(11), pages 1-21, October.
    2. Małgorzata Dudzińska & Barbara Prus & Radosław Cellmer & Stanisław Bacior & Katarzyna Kocur-Bera & Anna Klimach & Agnieszka Trystuła, 2020. "The Impact of Flood Risk on the Activity of the Residential Land Market in a Polish Cultural Heritage Town," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(23), pages 1-18, December.
    3. Fabrizio Battisti & Orazio Campo, 2021. "The Assessment of Density Bonus in Building Renovation Interventions. The Case of the City of Florence in Italy," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-21, December.
    4. Fabrizio Battisti, 2023. "SDGs and ESG Criteria in Housing: Defining Local Evaluation Criteria and Indicators for Verifying Project Sustainability Using Florence Metropolitan Area as a Case Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(12), pages 1-37, June.
    5. Daikun Wang & Victor Jing Li & Huayi Yu, 2020. "Mass Appraisal Modeling of Real Estate in Urban Centers by Geographically and Temporally Weighted Regression: A Case Study of Beijing’s Core Area," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(5), pages 1-18, May.
    6. Enrico Fattinnanzi & Giovanna Acampa & Fabrizio Battisti & Orazio Campo & Fabiana Forte, 2020. "Applying the Depreciated Replacement Cost Method When Assessing the Market Value of Public Property Lacking Comparables and Income Data," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(21), pages 1-22, October.
    7. Bhanage Vinayak & Han Soo Lee & Shirishkumar Gedem, 2021. "Prediction of Land Use and Land Cover Changes in Mumbai City, India, Using Remote Sensing Data and a Multilayer Perceptron Neural Network-Based Markov Chain Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-22, January.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Paola Profeta & Simona Scabrosetti & Stanley Winer, 2014. "Wealth transfer taxation: an empirical investigation," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 21(4), pages 720-767, August.
    2. European Commission, 2013. "Tax reforms in EU Member States - Tax policy challenges for economic growth and fiscal sustainability – 2013 Report," Taxation Papers 38, Directorate General Taxation and Customs Union, European Commission.
    3. Andrienko, Yuri & Apps, Patricia & Rees, Ray, 2014. "Optimal Taxation, Inequality and Top Incomes," IZA Discussion Papers 8275, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    4. Wojciech Kopczuk, 2012. "Taxation of Intergenerational Transfers and Wealth," NBER Working Papers 18584, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    5. Yuri Andrienko & Patricia Apps & Ray Rees, 2016. "Optimal taxation and top incomes," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 23(6), pages 981-1003, December.
    6. Kudła Janusz & Woźniak Rafał & Walczyk Konrad & Dudek Maciej & Kruszewski Robert, 2023. "Determinants of inheritance and gifts taxation in the European Union," International Journal of Management and Economics, Warsaw School of Economics, Collegium of World Economy, vol. 59(3), pages 225-242, September.
    7. Santiago Acosta-Ormaechea & Atsuyoshi Morozumi, 2021. "The value-added tax and growth: design matters," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 28(5), pages 1211-1241, October.
    8. Thomas Piketty & Emmanuel Saez, 2012. "Optimal Labor Income Taxation," NBER Working Papers 18521, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    9. Marcon, Giulio, 2021. "La ricchezza in Italia Rapporto di ricerca [Wealth in Italy. Research Report]," MPRA Paper 107809, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    10. Sanjeev Gupta & João Tovar Jalles, 2020. "Tax Revenue Reforms and Income Distribution in Developing Countries," Working Papers REM 2020/0137, ISEG - Lisbon School of Economics and Management, REM, Universidade de Lisboa.
    11. Bas Jacobs, 2013. "From Optimal Tax Theory to Applied Tax Policy," FinanzArchiv: Public Finance Analysis, Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 69(3), pages 338-389, September.
    12. Oguzhan Akgun & Boris Cournède & Jean-Marc Fournier, 2017. "The effects of the tax mix on inequality and growth," OECD Economics Department Working Papers 1447, OECD Publishing.
    13. Henrekson, Magnus & Stenkula, Mikael, 2015. "Swedish Taxation since 1862: An Overview," Working Paper Series 1052, Research Institute of Industrial Economics, revised 10 Sep 2015.
    14. Figari, Francesco & Paulus, Alari & Sutherland, Holly & Tsakloglou, Panos & Verbist, Gerlinde & Zantomio, Francesca, 2012. "Taxing Home Ownership: Distributional Effects of Including Net Imputed Rent in Taxable Income," IZA Discussion Papers 6493, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    15. Marco Trisciuoglio & Michela Barosio & Ana Ricchiardi & Zeynep Tulumen & Martina Crapolicchio & Rossella Gugliotta, 2021. "Transitional Morphologies and Urban Forms: Generation and Regeneration Processes—An Agenda," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-19, June.
    16. Mr. Luc Eyraud, 2014. "Reforming Capital Taxation in Italy," IMF Working Papers 2014/006, International Monetary Fund.
    17. Francesc Trillas, 2013. "Book Review of The Darwin Economy. Liberty, Competition and the Common Good," The Journal of Economic Inequality, Springer;Society for the Study of Economic Inequality, vol. 11(2), pages 277-281, June.
    18. Paddy Carter & Alex Cobham, 2016. "Are taxes good for your health?," WIDER Working Paper Series wp-2016-171, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    19. Stefan Bach, 2016. "Erbschaftsteuer, Vermögensteuer oder Kapitaleinkommensteuer: Wie sollen hohe Vermögen stärker besteuert werden?," Discussion Papers of DIW Berlin 1619, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
    20. Anne-Marie Brook, 2014. "Options to Narrow New Zealand’s Saving – Investment Imbalance," Treasury Working Paper Series 14/17, New Zealand Treasury.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:9:y:2020:i:1:p:8-:d:303925. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.