Property Taxes and Residential Rents
Tsoodle & Turner (Real Estate Economics 2008) find US property taxes DO reach residential rents — a one-standard-deviation rate increase raises annual rent by roughly $400-450. Honest counter-evidence for property-tax pass-through; its bearing on a pure land tax is limited by the building component.
Summary
"Property Taxes and Residential Rents" by Leah J. Tsoodle and Tracy M. Turner (Real Estate Economics 36(1), 2008, pp. 63–80) is one of the few modern US studies to test property-tax incidence directly in the rental market. Using hedonic rent equations on American Housing Survey data combined with National League of Cities tax data, with controls for unit, neighborhood, and city characteristics, the authors find that property taxes are partly passed through to tenants: a one standard deviation increase in the property-tax rate raises annual residential rents by roughly $400–450.[1]
The wiki carries this page as honest counter-evidence on landlords cannot pass LVT to tenants (wired as challenged_by): it shows the building-inclusive property tax can reach rents. The standard theoretical bridge (Mieszkowski; Zodrow) implies this pass-through operates through the structures component — buildings can go unbuilt, so their tax can shift — which does not transfer to a pure land tax on a fixed base. But that transfer argument is theory, not something this study tests, and the page states it as such.
Context — the older exchange it revived
The 1968–81 literature split the same way: Orr (1968, NTJ) found no shifting of Boston-area tax differentials to rents;[2] Heinberg & Oates (1970, NTJ) critiqued his method and found some partial shifting;[3] Dusansky, Ingber & Karatjas (1981, JUE, Suffolk County NY) found substantial forward shifting (secondary sources disagree on whether full).[4] Tsoodle & Turner is the modern, better-controlled member of the shifting-happens side. The modern quasi-experimental members of each side are Löffler & Siegloch (full pass-through, Germany) and Schwegman & Yinger (~14% shifting, New York).
Verification note
Direct fetches were proxy-blocked this session; bibliographic details and the magnitude are corroborated across four independent renderings, and a free author-hosted PDF exists (k-state.edu, unfetched). Scan depth Light.
Bears On
- Outcome (challenges): Landlords cannot pass LVT to tenants — for the property tax, not the land component
- Research: Löffler & Siegloch · Schwegman & Yinger
See Also
- Mieszkowski (1972) — why the structures/land split matters
- Carroll & Yinger (1994) — the low-pass-through Boston result
Sources
- Leah J. Tsoodle & Tracy M. Turner, "Property Taxes and Residential Rents," Real Estate Economics 36(1), 2008, pp. 63–80. DOI — used for the pass-through finding and magnitude (B-claim).
- Larry L. Orr, "The Incidence of Differential Property Taxes on Urban Housing," National Tax Journal 21(3), 1968, pp. 253–262. — no-shifting result (B-claim).
- John D. Heinberg & Wallace E. Oates, "The Incidence of Differential Property Taxes on Urban Housing: A Comment and Some Further Evidence," National Tax Journal 23(1), 1970. — partial-shifting re-estimate (B-claim).
- Richard Dusansky, Melvin Ingber & Nicholas Karatjas, "The Impact of Property Taxation on Housing Values and Rents," Journal of Urban Economics 10(2), 1981, pp. 240–255. Listing — forward-shifting result; [VERIFY: full-vs-partial magnitude — secondary sources conflict].