Land is an essential yet limited natural resource. Its current unsustainable use asks for a better understanding of themain determinants of urban expansion. A heuristic approach is used to analyze urban development in Italy. In particular, the paper estimates an econometric model to test the impact of the Italian property tax (ICI) on the local authorities' behavior and, in particular, on urban planning and development. It tests whether its introduction has fostered rather than dampened construction activity. The hypothesis put forward is that, because of the concurrent market conditions, the introduction of the tax has facilitated urban development. The structure of the tax and the devolution process that began in the '90s induced local municipalities to adopt less tight (accommodative) urban policies to offset budgetary needs. A more elastic urban policy reduces price volatility. However, its overall welfare effect is not clearly determined. Indeed, ceteris paribus, geographical areas with more elastic housing supply witness larger land consumption. The land use changes we witnessed in the last decades could be the combined effect of financial and fiscal aspects. If this is so, careful attention should be given to the issue of whether leaving urban planning and the power to levy property taxes under the same jurisdiction.
Bimonte, S., Stabile, A. (2015). Local taxation and urban development. Testing for the side-effects of the Italian property tax. ECOLOGICAL ECONOMICS, 120, 100-107 [10.1016/j.ecolecon.2015.09.025].
Local taxation and urban development. Testing for the side-effects of the Italian property tax
BIMONTE, SALVATORE;STABILE, ARSENIO
2015-01-01
Abstract
Land is an essential yet limited natural resource. Its current unsustainable use asks for a better understanding of themain determinants of urban expansion. A heuristic approach is used to analyze urban development in Italy. In particular, the paper estimates an econometric model to test the impact of the Italian property tax (ICI) on the local authorities' behavior and, in particular, on urban planning and development. It tests whether its introduction has fostered rather than dampened construction activity. The hypothesis put forward is that, because of the concurrent market conditions, the introduction of the tax has facilitated urban development. The structure of the tax and the devolution process that began in the '90s induced local municipalities to adopt less tight (accommodative) urban policies to offset budgetary needs. A more elastic urban policy reduces price volatility. However, its overall welfare effect is not clearly determined. Indeed, ceteris paribus, geographical areas with more elastic housing supply witness larger land consumption. The land use changes we witnessed in the last decades could be the combined effect of financial and fiscal aspects. If this is so, careful attention should be given to the issue of whether leaving urban planning and the power to levy property taxes under the same jurisdiction.File | Dimensione | Formato | |
---|---|---|---|
ECOLEC_2015_ICI.pdf
non disponibili
Descrizione: articolo principale
Tipologia:
PDF editoriale
Licenza:
NON PUBBLICO - Accesso privato/ristretto
Dimensione
464.71 kB
Formato
Adobe PDF
|
464.71 kB | Adobe PDF | Visualizza/Apri Richiedi una copia |
ECOLEC_2015_VQR_15_19 PP.pdf
accesso aperto
Tipologia:
Post-print
Licenza:
Creative commons
Dimensione
886.62 kB
Formato
Adobe PDF
|
886.62 kB | Adobe PDF | Visualizza/Apri |
I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
https://hdl.handle.net/11365/984433