Office Space Supply Restrictions in Britain: The Political Economy of Market Revenge
Office space in Britain is the most expensive in the world and regulatory constraints are the obvious explanation. We estimate the ‘regulatory tax’ for 14 British office locations from 1961 to 2005. These are orders of magnitude greater than estimates for Manhattan condominiums or office space in continental Europe. Exploiting the panel data, we provide strong support for our hypothesis that the regulatory tax varies according to whether an area is controlled by business interests or residents. Our results imply that the cost of the 1990 change converting commercial property taxes from a local to a national basis – transparently removing any fiscal incentive to permit local development – exceeded any plausible rise in local property taxes.
|Date of creation:||18 Apr 2007|
|Date of revision:|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: |
Web page: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de
More information through EDIRC
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.:
- Paul C. Cheshire & Christian A.L. Hilber, 2008.
"Office Space Supply Restrictions in Britain: The Political Economy of Market Revenge,"
Royal Economic Society, vol. 118(529), pages F185-F221, 06.
- Paul Cheshire & Christian A.L. Hilber, 2008. "Office space supply restrictions in Britain: the political economy of market revenge," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 4372, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
- P. Cheshire & C. Hilber, 2007. "Office Space Supply Restrictions in Britain: The Political Economy of Market Revenge," ERES eres2007_119, European Real Estate Society (ERES).
- Paul Cheshire & Christian A.L. Hilber, 2007. "Office space supply restrictions in Britain: the political economy of market revenge," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 3203, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
- Cheshire, Paul & Hilber, Christian A. L., 2007. "Office Space Supply Restrictions in Britain: The Political Economy of Market Revenge," MPRA Paper 5435, University Library of Munich, Germany.
- P. C. Cheshire & Stephen Charles Sheppard, 2005. "The introduction of price signals into land use planning decision-making : a proposal," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 568, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
- Joseph Gyourko & Christopher Mayer & Todd Sinai, 2013.
American Economic Journal: Economic Policy,
American Economic Association, vol. 5(4), pages 167-99, November.
- Bertaud, Alain & Brueckner, Jan K., 2005. "Analyzing building-height restrictions: predicted impacts and welfare costs," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 109-125, March.
- Gyourko, Joseph & Tracy, Joseph, 1991. "The Structure of Local Public Finance and the Quality of Life," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 99(4), pages 774-806, August.
- Ihlanfeldt, Keith R. & Shaughnessy, Timothy M., 2004. "An empirical investigation of the effects of impact fees on housing and land markets," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(6), pages 639-661, November.
- Paul Cheshire & Stephen Sheppard, 1997. "Welfare Economics of Land Use Regulation," Urban/Regional 9702001, EconWPA.
- Paul Cheshire, 2005. "Unpriced Regulatory Risk and the Competition of Rules: Unconsidered Implications of Land Use Planning," Journal of Property Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 22(2-3), pages 225-244, October.
- Edward L. Glaeser & Joseph Gyourko, 2003. "The impact of building restrictions on housing affordability," Economic Policy Review, Federal Reserve Bank of New York, issue Jun, pages 21-39.
- Mayer, Christopher J. & Somerville, C. Tsuriel, 2000.
"Land use regulation and new construction,"
Regional Science and Urban Economics,
Elsevier, vol. 30(6), pages 639-662, December.
- John Muellbauer, 2005. "Property Taxation and the Economy after the Barker Review," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 115(502), pages C99-C117, 03.
- Patric H. Hendershott & Colin M. Lizieri & George A. Matysiak, 1999. "The Workings of the London Office Market," Real Estate Economics, American Real Estate and Urban Economics Association, vol. 27(2), pages 365-387.
- J. Phillips & E. Goodstein, 2000. "Growth management and housing prices: the case of Portland, Oregon," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 18(3), pages 334-344, 07.
- Song, Yan & Knaap, Gerrit-Jan, 2003. "New urbanism and housing values: a disaggregate assessment," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 54(2), pages 218-238, September.
- Paul Cheshire & Stephen Sheppard, 2004. "The Introduction of Price Signals into Land Use Planning," Urban/Regional 0410002, EconWPA.
- Glaeser, Edward L & Gyourko, Joseph & Saks, Raven, 2005. "Why Is Manhattan So Expensive? Regulation and the Rise in Housing Prices," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 48(2), pages 331-69, October.
- Mayo, Stephen & Sheppard, Stephen, 2001. "Housing Supply and the Effects of Stochastic Development Control," Journal of Housing Economics, Elsevier, vol. 10(2), pages 109-128, June.
- Wheaton, William C & Torto, Raymond G & Evans, Peter, 1997. "The Cyclic Behavior of the Greater London Office Market," The Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics, Springer, vol. 15(1), pages 77-92, July.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:5435. 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: (Ekkehart Schlicht)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.