IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ucp/munifj/doi10.1086-mfj35010045.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Development District Bond Financings: The Good and the Bad

Author

Listed:
  • Nathan S. Betnun

Abstract

Since 2000, municipalities have used more than $55 billion of development district bonds to finance infrastructure for new development, including more than 2,000 landsecured special tax bonds totaling $27 billion and 1,300 TIF bond issues totaling $28 billion. As of January 1, 2014, 31% (by dollar volume) of land-secured bonds issued in Florida since 2000 and 52% of these bonds in four adjoining states were in payment default. For the other 45 states, the combined incidence of default was 2.4%, including 0.5% in California, where the majority of these bonds were issued. Two key differences relate to the nature of the issuers and to appraisal standards. The overall incidence of default on TIF bonds was 0.9%. California, which had accounted for 67% of TIF volume, recently abolished the agencies authorized to issue these bonds to save the state from the cost of backfilling lost local tax revenues, a cost not covered by most other states. Other than for California TIF bonds, the volume of development district bonds is expected to increase in the coming years.

Suggested Citation

  • Nathan S. Betnun, 2014. "Development District Bond Financings: The Good and the Bad," Municipal Finance Journal, University of Chicago Press, vol. 35(1), pages 45-60.
  • Handle: RePEc:ucp:munifj:doi:10.1086/mfj35010045
    DOI: 10.1086/MFJ35010045
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/MFJ35010045
    Download Restriction: Access to the online full text or PDF requires a subscription.

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/MFJ35010045
    Download Restriction: Access to the online full text or PDF requires a subscription.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1086/MFJ35010045?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    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:ucp:munifj:doi:10.1086/mfj35010045. 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.

    We have no bibliographic 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.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Journals Division (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/MFJ .

    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.