Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [LandCafe] Re: Tax Incidence and Land Tax

Expand Messages
  • Fred Foldvary
    From: Roy Langston ... Feldstein was correct in saying that with LVT, there is more investment in capital goods, but his conclusion
    Message 1 of 3 , Feb 11, 2010
    • 0 Attachment
      From: Roy Langston <roy_langston1@...>
      > that the tax on pure land rents is at
      > least partly shifted.

      Feldstein was correct in saying that with LVT, there is more investment in capital goods, but his conclusion that therefore the rate of interest would fall is incorrect.

      Fred Foldvary
    • Harry Pollard
      Logan, You can get it from Jstor and a couple of other places for a fee. The next best thing is a paper about Feldstein s paper at: http://tinyurl.com/ye8hhwx
      Message 2 of 3 , Feb 12, 2010
      • 0 Attachment

        Logan,

         

        You can get it from Jstor and a couple of other places for a fee.

         

        The next best thing is a paper about Feldstein’s paper at:

         

        http://tinyurl.com/ye8hhwx

         

        or

         

        http://74.125.155.132/search=cache:DxXya3g1HGIJ:www.econ.ucla.edu/workingpapers/wp125.pdf+Surprising+Incidence+of+a+Tax+on+Pure+Rent&cd=7&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us

        or you can try the attachment, but it’s pretty big and may not make it!

         

        Harry

         

        From: LandCafe@yahoogroups.com [mailto:LandCafe@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of loganboettcher
        Sent: Wednesday, February 10, 2010 2:08 PM
        To: LandCafe@yahoogroups.com
        Subject: [LandCafe] Tax Incidence and Land Tax

         

         

        Has anyone ever read this paper by Martin Feldstein, and if so, is he wrong or what part(s) does he have correct?

        Abstract: The classic example of an unshiftable tax is the general tax on pure rental income. Since Ricardo, economists have believed that the annual net rental income of unimproved land falls by the amount of the annual tax and its price by the capitalized value of this tax. This paper shows that these conclusions are false, that the tax on pure land rents is at least partly shifted, and that the price of land may be increased by the imposition of a tax. Implications are suggested for the analysis of the corporate income tax and the taxation of natural resources.

        [From: "The Surprising Incidence of a Tax on Pure Rent: A New Answer to an Old Question," The Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 85, No. 2 (Apr., 1977), pp. 349-360. Quoted in Land & Liberty, November 12, 1994]

      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.