Planners have long been intrigued with the concept of land value taxation (LVT) as a way to eliminate urban blight and sprawl. This research empirically tested the hypothesis that, compared to real property taxation, LVT will speed the rate of redevelopment in central cities. The analysis shows that from 1970 to 1987 central city redevelopment in Auckland and Wellington, New Zealand, was influenced by different population growth rates and by physical differences between the cities, but not by the taxation systems. The physical difference between the two cities, as well as low tax levels and long assessment cycles, may limit these results to this context.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Alonso, W.1964. Location and Land Use: Toward a General Theory of Land RentCambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.
2.
Andrews, R.B.1980. Urban Land Use Succession Theory, Part IMadison, Wisconsin: Center for Urban Land Economics Research.
3.
Archer, R.W.1972. Site Value Taxation in Central Business District Redevelopment, Research Report 19Washington, D.C.: Urban Land Institute.
4.
Becker, A.P.1969. Principal of taxing land and buildings for economic development In Land and Building Taxes.Madison: University of Wisconsin Press .
5.
Bentick, B.L.1979. The impact of taxation and valuation practices on the timing and efficiency of land useJournal of Political Economy87:859-868.
6.
Bentick, B.L., and T.F. Pogue.1988. The impact on development timing of property and profit taxationLand Economics64:317-324.
7.
Bissett, D., and J. Shanks. 23 October 1988. Personal Interview.
8.
Bourassa, S.C.1987. Land value taxation and new housing development in PittsburghGrowth and Change18(4):44-56.
9.
Bourassa, S.C.1990. Land value taxation and housing development: Effects of the property tax reform in three types of citiesAmerican Journal of Economics and Sociology49:101-111.
10.
Clark, W.A.V.1975. The Impact of Property Taxation on Urban Development, Report No. 187Los Angeles: Institute of Government and Public Affairs, University of California, Los Angeles.
11.
Coffin, D.A., and M.A. Nelson.1983. The economic effects of land value taxation—CommentaryGrowth and Change14(3):44-46.
12.
Cord, S.1970. The role of the graded tax in urban redevelopment: A case study of Lancaster, PaAmerican Journal of Economics and Sociology29:321-328.
13.
Edwards, M.E.1984. Site value taxation in Australia: Where land is taxed more and improvements less, average housing values and stocks are higherAmerican Journal of Economics and Sociology43:481-495.
14.
Fisher, E.M., and R.M. Fisher.1954. Urban Real EstateNew York: Henry Holt and Co.
15.
Gaffney, M.1973. Tax reform to release landModernizing Urban Land Policy,ed. M. Clawson. Baltimore, Maryland : Johns Hopkins University Press.
16.
Gneson, R.E.1974. The economics of property taxes and land values: The elasticity of supply of structuresJournal of Urban Economics4:367-381.
17.
Heilbrun, J.1987. Urban Economics and Public Policy, 3rd ed. New York: St. Martin's Press .
18.
Henneberry, D.M., and R. Barrows.1990. Capitalization of exclusive agricultural zoning into farmland pricesLand Economics66:249-258.
19.
Liu, B.C.1985. Mathis and Zech's "empirical test" of land value taxation: A critique of a commendable but unsuccessful effort to measure the effects of a basic levyAmerican Journal of Economics and Sociology44:137-143.
20.
Mathis, E.J., and C.E. Zech.1982. The economic effects of land value taxationGrowth and Change13(4): 2-5.
21.
Mills, D.E.1981. The non-neutrality of land value taxationNational Tax Journal34:125-129.
22.
Netzer, D.1966. Economics of the Property TaxWashington, D.C.: The Brookings Institute.
23.
New Zealand Department of Statistics.1988 . New Zealand Official Yearbook. Wellington: Department of Statistics.
24.
New Zealand Department of Statistics.1990 . Census of Population and DwellingsWellington : Department of Statistics.
25.
Noguchi, Y.1982. On the neutrality of the property taxLand Economics58:383-385.
26.
O'Regan, R.1985. Rating in New Zealand, 2nd ed. Petone, New Zealand: Baranduin Publishers Ltd.
27.
Pollock, R., and D.C. Shoup.1977. The effect of shifting the property tax base from improvement value to land value: An empirical estimateLand Economics53:67-77.
28.
Ratcliff, R.U.1949. Urban Land EconomicsNew York : McGraw-Hill Book Co., Inc.
29.
Roakes, S.L.1991. "The golden key? Land value taxation and central city redevelopment in New Zealand. Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Urban and Regional Planning, University of Wisconsin-Madison .
30.
Skouras, A.1982. Site value taxation and the timing of land developmentAmerican Journal of Economics and Sociology41:223-224.
31.
Syme, M., and S. Markham. 29 February 1988. "Letter to the City Secretary: Land Tax Implications for Auckland City Centre,"Department of Planning and Community Development, Auckland, New Zealand.
32.
Tanzer, E.P.1985. The effect of housing quality of replacing property by site-value taxationJournal of Urban Economics17:305-318.
33.
Tideman, T.N.1982. A tax on land value is neutralNational Tax Journal35:109-111.
34.
Wildasin, D.E.1982. More on the neutrality of land taxationNational Tax Journal35:105-108.
35.
Woodruff, A.H., and L.L. Ecker-Racz .1965. Property taxes and land-use patterns in Australia and New Zealand In Land and Building Taxes, ed. A. P. Becker. Madison : University of Wisconsin Press.
