PropertyProf Blog

Editor: Stephen Clowney
Univ. of Arkansas, Fayetteville

A Member of the Law Professor Blogs Network

Thursday, December 8, 2011

Ross & Yan on Property Tax & the Millage Rate

Justin Ross (Indiana - Public Affairs) & Wenli Yan (Kentucky - Public Policy) have posted Fiscal Illusion from Property Reassessment? An Empirical Test of the Residual View on SSRN.  Here's the abstract:

The textbook view of the real property tax is that the millage rate is simply a residual, determined by dividing the revenue to be raised from property by the taxable base of assessed values. In such a case, changes in assessed values are neutral with respect to property tax revenue as it can be offset or adjusted by changing the millage rate, and reappraisals of property assessments simply serve the purpose of maintaining horizontal equity across individual households. Critics of this view claim that policy makers do not fully revise the millage rate in response to changing assessed values, allowing them to effectively raise revenue without raising tax rates. Using data from Virginia cities and counties between 2000 and 2008, this paper estimates the response of levy growth rates to assessed value growth. Unlike the previous literature testing these competing claims, this paper is able to disentangle assessed value growth from other forms of economic growth, including the market values of property. Our findings suggest that mass reappraisals per se provide some cover for politicians to raise levy growth rates, but the growth in aggregate taxable assessed values is largely irrelevant.

Steve Clowney

http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/property/2011/12/ross-yan-on-property-tax-the-millage-rate.html

| Permalink

TrackBack URL for this entry:

http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341bfae553ef0153942b93da970b

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Ross & Yan on Property Tax & the Millage Rate:

Comments

That's a great story Steve. Of course, the bank is not likely to leave it there, so it's not likely the end of the story. In Act II, bank goes back to high-priced law firm and tells it what happened. Lawyer then redrafts form notes to say something like "the payoff penalty shall be x% of the sum of all principal payments made in excess of principal amounts due under amortization schedule." The next consumer loses.

Posted by: Kent Schenkel | Dec 14, 2011 8:25:01 AM

Post a comment