Category: taxes

Measuring the costs of political corruption

Trying to do some investment research, I got diverted to a couple of articles from the Review of Financial Studies.

In Corruption, Political Connections, and Municipal Finance, the authors assert that “Higher state corruption is associated with greater credit risk and higher bond yields.”  They apparently can measure the corruption and the cost; however the actual article is behind a paywall. I wonder if their results allow us to estimate how many dollars Illinoisans pay in higher debt service due to our political culture, or if the current estimate of “lots and lots” is sufficient.

Do Politically Connected Boards Affect Firm Value? might not seem to be a question worth asking, but it’s nice that academics have, they say, hand-classified corporate board members as “politically connected” to either of the two dominant U S parties. They find that nomination of a politically-connected individual to a board tends to increase stock prices, and that after the 2000 election, stocks associated with Republican boards went up, whereas those associated with Democrats went down.  Again, I cannot see the original article.

How corporate taxes caused the crash

Well, not entirely, but the deductibility of interest and the nondeductibility of dividends certainly encouraged corporations to borrow more than they otherwise would have.  Combined with tax incentives, interest payments were effectively subsidized more than 100%, as explained here.

Stumbling onto another land value tax endorsement

Just happened to find it while searching for something else in a Florida library

The killer argument in favour of a national tax on land values for any modern government relates to the effect of globalisation on the tax base. The ability of companies to shift their operations from one tax jurisdiction to another in a world of increasingly mobile capital means that the corporate tax base is likely to erode. This is taking longer to happen than intuition might suggest, but the logic of capital mobility and of transfer pricing by large corporations makes it inevitable. Rich private individuals are similarly prone to shift residence and domicile to minimise their tax liabilities. But it is much harder to shift factories, offices, shops and houses, and impossible to move the ground on which they are built.

The article also includes a prescient observation regarding the housing bubble

Better still, the effect on the housing market would be inherently countercyclical. When house prices and land values are rising, the tax would admittedly with a delay act as a dampener on the boom.

source: One tax to untangle this unholy mess.(real property taxes).
Estates Gazette (Feb 28, 2004): p.50.

Going to the candidates’ debate

Cook County Assessor candidates, that is. Five folks will be on the ballot, 3 Dems (one of whom will emerge from next Tuesday’s primary), one Green and one Repub.  Can you say “pandering to real estate homeowners?” Of course people hate to pay taxes, but whose burden is hardest to bear, those who own real estate or those who must rent their abodes? What it comes down to, of course, is that homeowners vote, and real estate tax bills have big black numbers.  Whereas renters are much less likely to vote, and are nickled and dimed (make that $5 and $10) by sales tax and income tax that are harder to see.

Anyhow, the debate is this Thursday, at the Union League Club (65 W Jackson), 4:30 PM.  It is open to the public without charge, but you must register in advance (by calling 312 435-5946) and you must dress in nothing less than business casual attire.  A bit more detail here.

Easier TIF qualification

Now you don’t need to even pretend that your TIF area is dilapidated. Just propose a STAR Line station within a half mile, get the Board to approve, and you can divert tax dollars pretty much for whatever you want. Thanks to ILAPA’s Sharon Caddigan for the alert.  Of course, an openly-administered TIF process might be appropriate for development near any transit station, provided that the funds raised are used to actually provide service at the station.

Government land ownership vs. community collection of land rent

Bloomberg’s report on land taken for the new Shanghai Disneyland tells us something about how people may fare under government ownership of land. One retailer, whose land was taken last year for an unspecified project, still hasn’t gotten compensation:

“All I care now is how much compensation we will end up getting after layers and layers of government officials get their share,”

I don’t see why Disney should get government help in assembling land for their project– it’s not infrastructure–, tho such assistance is routinely provided in the US too. Under a geoist system, where the community collects the land rent and uses it to fund governmental services, landowners would have strong incentive to sell and little incentive to hold out.  Disney could buy land cheaply but would pay substantial rent (in the form of land tax) to retain it. Those relocating could buy land cheaply elsewhere, and if in a less desirable location would find their land tax reduced.  Folks would also, of course, have no other taxes to pay and would receive a share of the rent collected in excess of governmental needs.

Extra help for idlers, from Jim Houlihan

New data shows, once again in 2007, that Cook County Assessor Jim Houlihan doesn’t think our tax laws give enough subsidy to land speculators, so he’s doing something extra to underassess vacant land.

By law and ordinance, he is supposed to put assessments at a specific proportion of what he estimates the actual value of real estate to be. These ratios have been adjusted over the years, and documentation is sparse, but for 2007 it appears that parcels containing single family or apartment buildings up to six units are to be assessed at 16% of value, and vacant land at 22%.

Annually, the Illinois Department of Revenue calculates the ratio between value assessed by Mr. Houlihan’s staff, and actual sales prices. The results for 2007(pdf)? Residential 8.34%, vacant 7.81%. (Not quite as bad as some previous years, however.)

The County is not ignoring this problem. Since the Assessor seems unable to assess vacant land at a higher percentage of value than land people use, they have changed the assessment policy so that, beginning wtih 2009, both residential and vacant land are to be assessed at 10% of value. We shall see how this proceeds.