IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ire/issued/v04n012001p95-117.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Tax Policies and Residential Mobility

Author

Abstract

Governmental tax policies have direct consequences for public spending and the distribution of wealth among a country’s population. But unintended consequences may also occur as a result of the design of those policies. We illustrate the potential impact of such unintended consequences by analyzing differences in home ownership mobility in California, Illinois, and Massachusetts that appear to result from the distinct differences in the design of real estate tax polices across these states. California’s Proposition 13, which became law in 1978, limits the increase in real estate taxes to a maximum of 2% in any given year regardless of home value appreciation. With home value appreciation, Proposition 13 creates sizeable disincentives to move. The evidence from an analysis of single family home sales records in California, Illinois, and Massachusetts indicates that California’s homeowners are significantly less mobile than their counterparts in Illinois and Massachusetts. The lower mobility was clearly not intended by the passage of Proposition 13, though its impact on society is potentially very significant. We recommend that countries in the process of developing tax systems for residential real estate ownership (such as China, the countries of the former USSR, and many countries in Africa) take account of such originally unintended consequences.

Suggested Citation

  • Mark Hoven Stohs & Paul Childs & Simon Stevenson, 2001. "Tax Policies and Residential Mobility," International Real Estate Review, Asian Real Estate Society, vol. 4(1), pages 95-117.
  • Handle: RePEc:ire:issued:v:04:n:01:2001:p:95-117
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.umac.mo/fba/irer/papers/past/vol4_pdf/095-117US21.pdf
    File Function: Full text
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Engle, Robert & Granger, Clive, 2015. "Co-integration and error correction: Representation, estimation, and testing," Applied Econometrics, Publishing House "SINERGIA PRESS", vol. 39(3), pages 106-135.
    2. Fama, Eugene F. & Gibbons, Michael R., 1982. "Inflation, real returns and capital investment," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 9(3), pages 297-323.
    3. Jack H. Rubens & Michael T. Bond & James R. Webb, 1989. "The Inflation-Hedging Effectiveness of Real Estate," Journal of Real Estate Research, American Real Estate Society, vol. 4(2), pages 45-56.
    4. Hoesli, Martin & MacGregor, Bryan D. & Matysiak, George & Nanthakumaran, Nanda, 1997. "The Short-Term Inflation-Hedging Characteristics of U.K. Real Estate," The Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics, Springer, vol. 15(1), pages 27-57, July.
    5. Fama, Eugene F, 1975. "Short-Term Interest Rates as Predictors of Inflation," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 65(3), pages 269-282, June.
    6. Fama, Eugene F, 1981. "Stock Returns, Real Activity, Inflation, and Money," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 71(4), pages 545-565, September.
    7. Crocker H. Liu & David J. Hartzell & Martin E. Hoesli, 1997. "International Evidence on Real Estate Securities as an Inflation Hedge," Real Estate Economics, American Real Estate and Urban Economics Association, vol. 25(2), pages 193-221.
    8. Fama, Eugene F. & Schwert, G. William, 1977. "Asset returns and inflation," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 5(2), pages 115-146, November.
    9. Fama, Eugene F, 1976. "Inflation Uncertainty and Expected Returns on Treasury Bills," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 84(3), pages 427-448, June.
    10. Fama, Eugene F, 1977. "Interest Rates and Inflation: The Message in the Entrails," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 67(3), pages 487-496, June.
    11. Nelson, Charles R & Schwert, G William, 1977. "Short-Term Interest Rates as Predictors of Inflation: On Testing the Hypothesis That the Real Rate of Interest is Constant," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 67(3), pages 478-486, June.
    12. K.C. Chen & Daniel D. Tzang, 1988. "Interest-Rate Sensitivity of Real Estate Investment Trusts," Journal of Real Estate Research, American Real Estate Society, vol. 3(3), pages 13-22.
    13. Fama, Eugene F. & Gibbons, Michael R., 1984. "A comparison of inflation forecasts," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 13(3), pages 327-348, May.
    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. Cheung, Ron & Cunningham, Chris, 2011. "Who supports portable assessment caps: The role of lock-in, mobility and tax share," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(3), pages 173-186, May.
    2. John Deskins & William Fox, 2008. "Measuring Behavioral Responses to the Property Tax," International Center for Public Policy Working Paper Series, at AYSPS, GSU paper0816, International Center for Public Policy, Andrew Young School of Policy Studies, Georgia State University.
    3. Ayse Imrohoroglu, 2014. "Proposition 13: An Equilibrium Analysis," 2014 Meeting Papers 1250, Society for Economic Dynamics.
    4. Mark Hoven Stohs & Yun W. Park, 2007. "Residential Stability or Rational Bubble: Proposition 13 in Southern California," International Real Estate Review, Asian Real Estate Society, vol. 10(1), pages 26-47.
    5. Nada Wasi & Michelle J. White, 2005. "Property Tax Limitations and Mobility: The Lock-in Effect of California's Proposition 13," NBER Working Papers 11108, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    California; Real Estate Tax; Residential Mobility; Unintended effect;

    JEL classification:

    • L85 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Services - - - Real Estate Services

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:ire:issued:v:04:n:01:2001:p:95-117. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (IRER Secretary Office/Webmaster). General contact details of provider: http://www.asres.org/ .

    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.

    We have no references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.