Previous research has shown that Tiebout-style fiscal competition among local governments reduces the likelihood of adopting income taxes. This literature has not yet considered the impact of yardstick competition on tax instrument choice. This article uses spatial econometrics to test for yardstick competition in the decision to adopt an income tax. The results, based on Ohio school district data, indicate that school districts are more likely to adopt an income tax if their neighbors have already done so. While a negative correlation of Tiebout competition on district income tax adoption persists, controlling for spatial dependence reduces the statistical significance of the effect.
Anselin, Luc.1988. Spatial econometrics: Methods and models. Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers .
2.
Anselin, Luc.2002. Under the hood: issues in the specification and interpretation of spatial regression models. Agricultural Economics27:247-67.
3.
Belsley, David A., Edwin Kuh, and Roy E. Welsch.1980. Regression diagnostics: Identifying influential data and sources of collinearity. New York : Wiley.
4.
Berkman, Michael B., and Eric Plutzer.2004. Grey peril or loyal support? The effects of the elderly on educational expenditures. Social Science Quarterly85:1178-92.
5.
Beron, Kurt J., and Wim P.M. Vijverberg.2004. Probit in a spatial context: A Monte Carlo analysis. In Advances in spatial econometrics, ed. Luc Anselin, Raymond J.G. M. Florax, and Sergio J. Rey, 169-95. Berlin: Springer-Verlag .
6.
Besley, Timothy, and Anne C. Case.1995. Incumbent behavior: Vote seeking, tax setting and yardstick competition. American Economic Review85:25-45.
7.
Borland, Melvin V., and Roy M. Howsen.1996. Competition, expenditures and student performance in mathematics: A comment on Couch et al. Public Choice87:395-400.
8.
Brasington, David M.2007. Public and private school competition: The spatial education production function. In Time and space in economics, ed. T. Asada and T. Ishikawa, 175-203. Tokyo: Springer .
9.
Brasington, David M., and Diane Hite.2005. Demand for environmental quality: A spatial hedonic analysis. Regional Science and Urban Economics35:57-82.
10.
Brennan, Geoffrey, and James M. Buchanan.1980. The power to tax: Analytical foundations of a fiscal constitution. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
11.
Brueckner, Jan, and Luz A. Saavedra.2001. Do local governments engage in strategic property-tax competition?National Tax Journal54:203-29.
12.
Brunner, Eric, and Ed Balsdon.2004. Intergenerational conflict and the political economy of school spending. Journal of Urban Economics56:369-88.
13.
Busch, Ronald J., Douglas O. Stewart, and Allan J. Taub.1999. Ohio’s city-school district income tax: A tale of two cities. Journal of Education Finance24:339-52.
14.
Button, James W.1992. A sign of generational conflict: The impact of Florida’s aging voters on local school and tax referenda. Social Science Quarterly73:786-97.
15.
Cox, Michael E., and Justin M. Ross.2010. Robustness and vulnerability of community irrigation systems: The case of the Taos Valley Acequias. Workshop in Political Theory and Policy Analysis Working Paper, Bloomington, IN.
16.
Fischel, William A.2001. Homevoters, municipal corporate governance, and the benefit view of the property tax. National Tax Journal54:157-74.
17.
Fiva, Jon H., and Jørn Rattsø .2007. Local choice of property taxation: Evidence from Norway. Public Choice132:457-70.
18.
Fleming, M.2004. Techniques for estimating spatially dependent discrete choice models. In Advances in spatial econometrics: Methodology, tools and applications, ed., L. Anselin, R. J. G. M. Florax, and S. J. Rey, 145-68. Berlin: Springer-Verlag .
19.
Goodspeed, Timothy J.1998. Tax competition, benefit taxes, and fiscal federalism . National Tax Journal51:579-86.
20.
Hall, Joshua C.2006. Fiscal competition and tax instrument choice: The role of income inequality. Economics Bulletin8:1-8.
21.
Hall, Joshua C., and Justin M. Ross.2010. Municipality-school border congruency and the coordination of inputs to education: Evidence Ohio School Public Financing and Class Size. Indiana University School of Public & Environmental Affairs Working Paper, Bloomington, IN .
22.
Hoxby, Caroline M.2000. Does competition among public schools benefit students and taxpayers?American Economic Review90:1209-38.
23.
King, Kerry A.2005. The impacts of school choice on regional economic growth . The Review of Regional Studies35:356-68.
24.
LeSage, James P.1997. Regression analysis of spatial data. Journal of Regional Analysis and Policy27:83-94.
25.
---. 1999. Spatial econometrics. In The web book of regional science, ed. Scott Loveridge.Morgantown, WV: Regional Research Institute, West Virginia University. www.rri.wvu.edu/regscweb.htm
26.
LeSage, James P., and R. Kelly Pace .2009. Introduction to spatial econometrics . Boca Raton, FL: Taylor & Francis Group.
27.
Mieszkowski, P., and G. Zodrow.1989. Taxation and the Tiebout model: The differential effects of head taxes, taxes on land rents, and property taxes . Journal of Economic Literature27:1098-1146.
28.
Mukherjee, Bumba, and David A. Singer.2008. Monetary institutions, partisanship, and inflation targeting. International Organization62:323-58.
29.
Mur, Jesus, and Ana Angulo.2005. A closer look at the spatial Durbin model. ERSA conference papers ersa05p392, European Regional Science Association.
30.
National Center for Education Statistics.1994. School district data book. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics.
31.
Norstrand, Rolf.1980. The choice between income tax and land tax in Danish municipalities . Public Finance35:412-24.
32.
Oates, Wallace E.1999. An essay on fiscal federalism. Journal of Economic Literature37:1120-49.
33.
Oates, Wallace E.2005. Property taxation and local public spending: The Renter effect. Journal of Urban Economics57:419-31.
34.
Ohio Department of Education.2007. District Profile Report (formerly Cupp Report) [electronic file]. Columbus, OH: Ohio Department of Education.
35.
Ohio Department of Taxation.2007. Tax Data Series: School District Data [electronic file]. Columbus: Ohio Department of Taxation.
36.
Pace, R. Kelley, and James P. LeSage.2010. Omitted variable biases of OLS and spatial lag models. In Progress in spatial analysis: Methods and applications, ed. Antonio Páez , Julie Le Gallo, Ron N. Buliung, and Sandy Dall’Erba , 17-28. Berlin: Springer.
37.
Pace, R. Kelley, Ronald Barry, and C.F. Sirmans.1998. Spatial statistics and real estate. Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics17:5-13.
38.
Poterba, James M.1997. Demographic structure and the political economy of public education. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management16:48-66.
39.
Rincke, Johannes.2006. Policy innovation in local jurisdictions: Testing for neighborhood influence in school choice policies. Public Choice129:189-200.
---. In Press. Assessor incentives and property assessment. Southern Economic Journal.
42.
Schneider, Mark.1986Fragmentation and the growth of local government. Public choice48:255-64.
43.
Shock, David R.2004-2005. Voting behavior in school district tax elections: An analysis of property and income tax options. Journal of Economics and Politics17:1-15.
44.
Sjoquist, David.1981. A median voter analysis of variations in the use of property taxes among local governments. Public Choice36:273-85.
45.
Sobel, Russell, and Andrea Dean.2008. Has Wal-Mart buried mom and pop? The impact of Wal-Mart on self-employment and small establishments in the United States. Economic Inquiry46:676-95.
46.
Sobel, Russell, and Kerry King.2008. Does school choice increase the rate of youth entrepreneurship? Economics of Education Review27:429-38.
47.
Spry, John A.2005. The effects of fiscal competition on local property and income tax reliance. Topics in Economic Analysis and Policy5:1-19.
48.
Staley, Samuel R., and John P. Blair.1995. Institutions, quality competition and public service provision: The case of public education. Constitutional Political Economy6:21-33.
49.
Stansel, Dean A.2006. Interjurisdictional competition and local government spending in U.S. metropolitan areas. Public Finance Review34:173-94.
50.
Tiebout, Charles.1956. A pure theory of local expenditures. Journal of Political Economy64:416-24.
51.
Zax, Jeffrey.1989. Is there a Leviathan in your neighborhood? American Economic Review79:560-67.
