This file is part of IDEAS, which uses RePEc data


[ Papers | Articles | Software | Books | Chapters | Authors | Institutions | JEL Classification | NEP reports | Search | New papers by email | Author registration | Rankings | Volunteers | FAQ | Blog | Help! ]

Assessing the Effects of Local Taxation Using Microgeographic Data

Author info | Abstract | Publisher info | Download info | Related research | Statistics
Author Info
Duranton, Gilles
Gobillon, Laurent
Overman, Henry G.

Additional information is available for the following registered author(s):

Abstract

We study the impact of local taxation on the location and growth of firms. Our empirical methodology pairs establishments across jurisdictional boundaries to estimate the impact of taxation. Our approach improves on existing work as it corrects for unobserved establishment heterogeneity, for unobserved time-varying site specific effects, and for the endogeneity of local taxation. Applied to data for English manufacturing establishments we find that local taxation has a negative impact on employment growth, but no effect on entry.

Download Info
To download:

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. Information about this may be contained in the File-Format links below. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL: http://www.cepr.org/pubs/dps/DP5856.asp
File Format: application/pdf
File Function:
Download Restriction: CEPR Discussion Papers are free to download for our researchers, subscribers and members. If you fall into one of these categories but have trouble downloading our papers, please contact us at subscribers@cepr.org

As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

Publisher Info
Paper provided by C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers in its series CEPR Discussion Papers with number 5856.

Download reference. The following formats are available: HTML (with abstract), plain text (with abstract), BibTeX, RIS (EndNote, RefMan, ProCite), ReDIF
Length:
Date of creation: Sep 2006
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:cpr:ceprdp:5856

Contact details of provider:
Postal: Centre for Economic Policy Research, 53--56 Great Sutton Street, London EC1V 0DG
Phone: 44 - 20 - 7183 8801
Fax: 44 - 20 - 7183 8820

Order Information:
Email:

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its listing, contact: ().

Related research
Keywords: borders; local taxation; regression discontinuity; spatial differencing;

Other versions of this item:

Find related papers by JEL classification:
H22 - Public Economics - - Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue - - - Incidence
H71 - Public Economics - - State and Local Government; Intergovernmental Relations - - - State and Local Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue
R38 - Urban, Rural, and Regional Economics - - Production Analysis and Firm Location - - - Government Policies; Regulatory Policies

This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
  1. Gibbons, Steve & Machin, Stephen, 2003. "Valuing English primary schools," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 53(2), pages 197-219, March. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  2. Paulo Guimaraes & Octavio Figueiredo & Douglas Woodward, 2000. "A tractable approach to the firm location decision problem," Working Papers 2, Núcleo de Investigação em Microeconomia Aplicada (NIMA), Universidade do Minho. [Downloadable!]
    Other versions:
  3. Marianne Bertrand & Esther Duflo & Sendhil Mullainathan, 2004. "How Much Should We Trust Differences-in-Differences Estimates?," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, MIT Press, vol. 119(1), pages 249-275, February. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
    Other versions:
  4. Sandra E. Black, 1997. "Do better schools matter? Parental valuation of elementary education," Research Paper 9729, Federal Reserve Bank of New York. [Downloadable!]
    Other versions:
  5. Bob Thompson & Sotiris Tsolacos, 2001. "Industrial Land Values — A Guide to Future Markets?," Journal of Real Estate Research, American Real Estate Society, vol. 21(1/2), pages 55-76. [Downloadable!]
  6. Gilles Duranton, 2005. "Testing for Localization Using Micro-Geographic Data," Review of Economic Studies, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 72(4), pages 1077-1106, October. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
    Other versions:
  7. Head, Charles Keith & Mayer, Thierry, 2002. "Market Potential and the Location of Japanese Investment in the European Union," CEPR Discussion Papers 3455, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
    Other versions:
  8. Timothy J. Bartik, 2003. "Local Economic Development Policies," Staff Working Papers 03-91, W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  9. Thomas J. Holmes, 1998. "The Effect of State Policies on the Location of Manufacturing: Evidence from State Borders," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 106(4), pages 667-705, August. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  10. Berman, Eli & Bui, Linda T. M., 2001. "Environmental regulation and labor demand: evidence from the South Coast Air Basin," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 79(2), pages 265-295, February. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
    Other versions:
  11. Steve Bond & Kevin Denny & John Hall & William McClusky, 1996. "Who pays business rates?," Fiscal Studies, Institute for Fiscal Studies, vol. 17(1), pages 19-35, February. [Downloadable!]
  12. Paulo Guimaraes & Octávio Figueiredo & Douglas Woodward, 2004. "Industrial Location Modeling: Extending the Random Utility Framework," Journal of Regional Science, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 44(1), pages 1-20. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  13. Epple, Dennis & Nechyba, Thomas, 2004. "Fiscal decentralization," Handbook of Regional and Urban Economics, in: J. V. Henderson & J. F. Thisse (ed.), Handbook of Regional and Urban Economics, edition 1, volume 4, chapter 55, pages 2423-2480 Elsevier. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  14. Kahn, Matthew E., 2004. "Domestic pollution havens: evidence from cancer deaths in border counties," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 56(1), pages 51-69, July. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
Full references

Cited by:
(explanations, Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.)

  1. Marius Brülhart & Mario Jametti & Kurt Schmidheiny, 2007. "Do Agglomeration Economies Reduce the Sensitivity of Firm Location to Tax Differentials?," Economics Working Papers 1062, Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu Fabra. [Downloadable!]
    Other versions:
  2. Redding, Stephen J, 2009. "Economic Geography: a Review of the Theoretical and Empirical Literature," CEPR Discussion Papers 7126, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
    Other versions:
  3. Jordi Jofre-Monseny & Albert Solé-Ollé, 2008. "Which Communities should be afraid of Mobility? The Effects of Agglomeration Economies on the Sensitivity of Firm Location to Local Taxes," CESifo Working Paper Series CESifo Working Paper No. , CESifo Group Munich. [Downloadable!]
  4. Jordi Jofre Monseny & Alberto Sole Olle, 2007. "Tax Differentials and Agglomeration Economies in Intraregional Firm Location," Working Papers in Economics 180, Universitat de Barcelona. Espai de Recerca en Economia. [Downloadable!]
  5. Raffaella Sadun, 2008. "Does Planning Regulation Protect Independent Retailers?," CEP Discussion Papers dp0888, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE. [Downloadable!]
Statistics
Access and download statistics

Did you know? There is a FAQ (frequently asked questions).

This page was last updated on 2009-11-25.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Department of Economics, College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, University of Connecticut using RePEc data on a server sponsored by the Society for Economic Dynamics.