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! ]

Property Condition Disclosure Law: Does 'Seller Tell All' Matter in Property Values?

Author info | Abstract | Publisher info | Download info | Related research | Statistics
Author Info
Anupam Nanda (University of Connecticut)

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

Abstract

At the time when at least two-thirds of the US states have already mandated some form of seller's property condition disclosure statement and there is a movement in this direction nationally, this paper examines the impact of seller's property condition disclosure law on the residential real estate values, the information asymmetry in housing transactions and shift of risk from buyers and brokers to the sellers, and attempts to ascertain the factors that lead to adoption of the disclosur law. The analytical structure employs parametric panel data models, semi-parametric propensity score matching models, and an event study framework using a unique set of economic and institutional attributes for a quarterly panel of 291 US Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSAs) and 50 US States spanning 21 years from 1984 to 2004. Exploiting the MSA level variation in house prices, the study finds that the average seller may be able to fetch a higher price (about three to four percent) for the house if she furnishes a state-mandated seller's property condition disclosure statement to the buyer.

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.econ.uconn.edu/working/2005-47r.pdf
File Format: application/pdf
File Function: Revised version
Download Restriction: no
File URL: http://www.econ.uconn.edu/working/2005-47.pdf
File Format: application/pdf
File Function: Original version
Download Restriction: no

Publisher Info
Paper provided by University of Connecticut, Department of Economics in its series Working papers with number 2005-47.

Download reference. The following formats are available: HTML (with abstract), plain text (with abstract), BibTeX, RIS (EndNote, RefMan, ProCite), ReDIF
Length: 43 pages
Date of creation: Nov 2005
Date of revision: Jul 2006
Handle: RePEc:uct:uconnp:2005-47

Note: This paper is adapted from the third chapter of my doctoral dissertation. I would like to thank my advisors - Stephen L. Ross, John M. Clapp, and Dennis R. Heffley for their insightful comments on the idea and methodology. I greatly benefited from helpful comments from James Davis and Katherine Pancak. Comments from Dhamika Dharmapala, Thomas Miceli, and seminar participants at the University of Connecticut, Economics Brownbag Seminar Series are acknowledged. I would also like to thank Tim Storey (National Conference of State Legislatures), Daniel Conti (Bureau of Labor Statistics) for assistance with data, and Sascha Becker of University of Munich for assistance with STATA module on propensity score matching algorithm (written by Sascha Becker and Andrea Ichino). All remaining rrors are mine.
Contact details of provider:
Postal: University of Connecticut 341 Mansfield Road, Unit 1063 Storrs, CT 06269-1063
Phone: (860) 486-4889
Fax: (860) 486-4463
Web page: http://www.econ.uconn.edu/
More information through EDIRC

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

Related research
Keywords: Property Condition Disclosure; Housing Price Index; Propensity Score Matching Event Study;

Other versions of this item:

Find related papers by JEL classification:
C14 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods: General - - - Semiparametric and Nonparametric Methods
K11 - Law and Economics - - Basic Areas of Law - - - Property Law
L85 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Services - - - Real Estate Services
R21 - Urban, Rural, and Regional Economics - - Household Analysis - - - Housing Demand

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. Arellano, Manuel & Bond, Stephen, 1991. "Some Tests of Specification for Panel Data: Monte Carlo Evidence and an Application to Employment Equations," Review of Economic Studies, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 58(2), pages 277-97, April. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  2. Arellano, Manuel & Honore, Bo, 2001. "Panel data models: some recent developments," Handbook of Econometrics, in: J.J. Heckman & E.E. Leamer (ed.), Handbook of Econometrics, edition 1, volume 5, chapter 53, pages 3229-3296 Elsevier. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
    Other versions:
  3. Gabor Kezdi, 2005. "Robus Standard Error Estimation in Fixed-Effects Panel Models," Econometrics 0508018, EconWPA. [Downloadable!]
  4. Slottje, Daniel J. & Millimet, Daniel L. & Buchanan, Michael J., 2007. "Econometric analysis of copyrights," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 139(2), pages 303-317, August. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  5. Jeffrey Smith & Petra Todd, 2003. "Does Matching Overcome Lalonde's Critique of Nonexperimental Estimators?," University of Western Ontario, CIBC Human Capital and Productivity Project Working Papers 20035, University of Western Ontario, CIBC Human Capital and Productivity Project. [Downloadable!]
    Other versions:
  6. Marco Caliendo & Sabine Kopeinig, 2005. "Some Practical Guidance for the Implementation of Propensity Score Matching," IZA Discussion Papers 1588, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA). [Downloadable!]
    Other versions:
  7. Heckman, James J & Ichimura, Hidehiko & Todd, Petra, 1998. "Matching as an Econometric Evaluation Estimator," Review of Economic Studies, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 65(2), pages 261-94, April. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  8. Marianne Bertrand & Esther Duflo & Sendhil Mullainathan, 2002. "How Much Should We Trust Differences-in-Differences Estimates?," NBER Working Papers 8841, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
    Other versions:
  9. Heckman, James J & Ichimura, Hidehiko & Todd, Petra E, 1997. "Matching as an Econometric Evaluation Estimator: Evidence from Evaluating a Job Training Programme," Review of Economic Studies, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 64(4), pages 605-54, October. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  10. Rajeev H. Dehejia & Sadek Wahba, 1998. "Causal Effects in Non-Experimental Studies: Re-Evaluating the Evaluation of Training Programs," NBER Working Papers 6586, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  11. Ahn, Seung C. & Schmidt, Peter, 1995. "Efficient estimation of models for dynamic panel data," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 68(1), pages 5-27, July. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  12. Kiefer, Nicholas M, 1988. "Economic Duration Data and Hazard Functions," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 26(2), pages 646-79, June. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  13. Roberta Romano & Sanjai Bhagat, 2001. "Event Studies and the Law - Part I: Technique and Corporate Litigation," Yale School of Management Working Papers ysm182, Yale School of Management. [Downloadable!]
  14. Sascha O. Becker & Andrea Ichino, 2002. "Estimation of average treatment effects based on propensity scores," Stata Journal, StataCorp LP, vol. 2(4), pages 358-377, November. [Downloadable!]
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. Anupam Nanda, 2006. "Property Condition Disclosure Law: Why Did States Mandate 'Seller Tell All'?," Working papers 2006-16, University of Connecticut, Department of Economics. [Downloadable!]
    Other versions:
Statistics
Access and download statistics

Did you know? The yearly budget of IDEAS is exactly $0: it relies entirely on volunteer work.

This page was last updated on 2009-11-24.


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.