IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/uct/uconnp/2006-16.html

Property Condition Disclosure Law: Why Did States Mandate 'Seller Tell All'?

Author

Listed:
  • Anupam Nanda

    (National Association of Home Builders and University of Connecticut)

Abstract

Thirty-six US states have already enacted some form of seller's property condition disclosure law. At a time when there is a movement in this direction nationally, this paper attempts to ascertain the factors that lead states to adopt disclosure law. Motivation for the study stems from the fact that not all states have yet adopted the law, and states that have enacted the law have done so in different years. The analytical structure employs hazard models, using a unique set of economic and institutional attributes for a panel of 50 US States spanning 21 years, from 1984 to 2004. The proportional hazard analysis of law adoption reveals that greater number of disciplinary actions tends to favor passage of the law. Greater broker supervision, implying generally higher awareness among real estate agents, seems to have a negative impact on the likelihood of a state adopting a property condition disclosure law.

Suggested Citation

  • Anupam Nanda, 2006. "Property Condition Disclosure Law: Why Did States Mandate 'Seller Tell All'?," Working papers 2006-16, University of Connecticut, Department of Economics.
    • Handle: RePEc:uct:uconnp:2006-16
    Note: This paper is adapted from the first chapter of my doctoral dissertation at the University of Connecticut, Storrs, CT. 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 would also like to thank Tim Storey (National Conference of State Legislatures), Daniel Conti (Bureau of Labor Statistics) for assistance with data. All remaining errors are mine.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://media.economics.uconn.edu/working/2006-16.pdf
    File Function: Full text
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kiefer, Nicholas M, 1988. "Economic Duration Data and Hazard Functions," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 26(2), pages 646-679, June.
    2. Anupam Nanda, 2005. "Property Condition Disclosure Law: Does 'Seller Tell All' Matter in Property Values?," Working papers 2005-47, University of Connecticut, Department of Economics, revised Jul 2006.
    3. George Lefcoe, "undated". "Property Condition Disclosure Forms: How REALTORS Eased the Transition from Caveat Emptor to "Seller Tell All"," University of Southern California Legal Working Paper Series usclwps-1008, University of Southern California Law School.
    4. 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.
    5. Peter Kennedy, 2003. "A Guide to Econometrics, 5th Edition," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 5, volume 1, number 026261183x, December.
    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. Anupam Nanda & Katherine A. Pancak, 2009. "Broker Duty to Clients: Why States Mandate Minimum Service Requirements," Alumni working papers 2009-01, University of Connecticut, Department of Economics.
    2. Thomas J. Miceli & Michael P. Stone, 2013. "The Determinants Of State-Level Caps On Punitive Damages: Theory And Evidence," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 31(1), pages 110-125, January.
    3. Daniel Broxterman & Tingyu Zhou, 2023. "Correction to: Information Frictions in Real Estate Markets: Recent Evidence and Issues," The Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics, Springer, vol. 66(2), pages 299-299, February.
    4. Anupam Nanda & Stephen Ross, 2012. "The Impact of Property Condition Disclosure Laws on Housing Prices: Evidence from an Event Study Using Propensity Scores," The Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics, Springer, vol. 45(1), pages 88-109, June.
    5. Tandel, Vaidehi & Gandhi, Sahil & Nanda, Anupam & Agnihotri, Nandini, 2025. "Do mandatory disclosures squeeze the lemons? The case of housing markets in India," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 247(C).
    6. Walsh, Patrick & Mui, Preston, 2017. "Contaminated sites and information in hedonic models: An analysis of a NJ property disclosure law," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 1-14.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Anupam Nanda, 2005. "Property Condition Disclosure Law: Does 'Seller Tell All' Matter in Property Values?," Working papers 2005-47, University of Connecticut, Department of Economics, revised Jul 2006.
    2. Smythe Donald J., 2008. "Transaction Costs, Neighborhood Effects, and the Diffusion of the Uniform Sales Act, 1906-47," Review of Law & Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 4(1), pages 341-372, October.
    3. Colombo, Massimo G. & Grilli, Luca & Piva, Evila, 2006. "In search of complementary assets: The determinants of alliance formation of high-tech start-ups," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(8), pages 1166-1199, October.
    4. Wilson Bart J & Findlay David W. & Meehan James W. & Wellford Charissa & Schurter Karl, 2010. "An Experimental Analysis of the Demand for Payday Loans," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 10(1), pages 1-31, October.
    5. María Moral & Jordi Jaumandreu, 2007. "Automobile demand, model cycle and age effects," Spanish Economic Review, Springer;Spanish Economic Association, vol. 9(3), pages 193-218, September.
    6. Jinsuk Yang & Qing Hao & Mahmut Yaşar, 2023. "Institutional investors and cross‐border mergers and acquisitions: The 2000–2018 period," International Review of Finance, International Review of Finance Ltd., vol. 23(3), pages 553-583, September.
    7. Renneboog, L.D.R. & Simons, T., 2005. "Public-to-Private Transactions : LBOs, MBOs, MBIs and IBOs," Other publications TiSEM 3b76799c-591c-4d22-b126-a, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    8. Styan, Jacob & Boerngen, Maria A. & Barrowclough, Michael J., 2021. "Factors Influencing Increased Usage of Cash Rent Leases in Illinois," Journal of the ASFMRA, American Society of Farm Managers and Rural Appraisers, vol. 2021.
    9. Jason Barabas, 1998. "Wage Erosion, Economic Assessments, and Social Welfare Opinions," JCPR Working Papers 56, Northwestern University/University of Chicago Joint Center for Poverty Research.
    10. Daron Acemoglu & Amy Finkelstein, 2008. "Input and Technology Choices in Regulated Industries: Evidence from the Health Care Sector," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 116(5), pages 837-880, October.
    11. Carlberg, Jared G., 2002. "Effects Of Ownership Restrictions On Farmland Values In Saskatchewan," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 34(2), pages 1-10, August.
    12. Georges Dionne, 1998. "La mesure empirique des problèmes d’information," L'Actualité Economique, Société Canadienne de Science Economique, vol. 74(4), pages 585-606.
    13. Guiso, Luigi & Jappelli, Tullio, 2002. "Private Transfers, Borrowing Constraints and the Timing of Homeownership," Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 34(2), pages 315-339, May.
    14. Nachum Sicherman, 1996. "Gender Differences in Departures from a Large Firm," ILR Review, Cornell University, ILR School, vol. 49(3), pages 484-505, April.
    15. Liuan Wang & Lu (Lucy) Yan & Tongxin Zhou & Xitong Guo & Gregory R. Heim, 2020. "Understanding Physicians’ Online-Offline Behavior Dynamics: An Empirical Study," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 31(2), pages 537-555, June.
    16. Rodríguez, Elsa Mirta M. & Lacaze, María Victoria & Lupín, Beatriz, 2007. "Willingness to pay for organic food in Argentina: evidence from a consumer survey," Nülan. Deposited Documents 1300, Universidad Nacional de Mar del Plata, Facultad de Ciencias Económicas y Sociales, Centro de Documentación.
    17. Cavit Pakel & Neil Shephard & Kevin Sheppard, 2009. "Nuisance parameters, composite likelihoods and a panel of GARCH models," OFRC Working Papers Series 2009fe03, Oxford Financial Research Centre.
    18. Liv Osland & Inge Thorsen, 2013. "Spatial Impacts, Local Labour Market Characteristics and Housing Prices," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 50(10), pages 2063-2083, August.
    19. Blackman, Allen & Guerrero, Santiago, 2012. "What drives voluntary eco-certification in Mexico?," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 40(2), pages 256-268.
    20. Burton, Michael P. & Rigby, Dan & Young, Trevor, 2003. "Modelling the adoption of organic horticultural technology in the UK using Duration Analysis," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 47(01), pages 1-26, March.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • C41 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods: Special Topics - - - Duration Analysis; Optimal Timing Strategies
    • D82 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Asymmetric and Private Information; Mechanism Design
    • K11 - Law and Economics - - Basic Areas of Law - - - Property Law
    • L51 - Industrial Organization - - Regulation and Industrial Policy - - - Economics of Regulation
    • L85 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Services - - - Real Estate Services
    • R52 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - Regional Government Analysis - - - Land Use and Other Regulations

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:uct:uconnp:2006-16. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Mark McConnel (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/deuctus.html .

    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.