Direct Versus Indirect Federal Bond Subsidies: New Evidence on Cost of Capital

The longstanding debate surrounding the most effective way for the U.S. federal government to subsidize state and local government capital‐raising received renewed attention in recent years due to the passage and subsequent expiration of the taxable Build America Bond (BAB) program. Recent academic studies, as well as reports from the U.S. Treasury Department, claim that the direct subsidy approach as evidenced by the BAB program provides greater bond borrowing cost benefits to state and local governments compared to traditional tax‐exempt bonds. This research investigates the extent to which such borrowing cost benefits may be overstated since it appears previous studies did not adequately account for the early call optionality of tax‐exempt bonds.     

Public Opinion on U.S. Federal and Intergovernmental Issues in 2006: Continuity and Change

A 2006 trend survey found that Americans most often select localgovernment as giving them the most for their money, followedby the federal and state governments. African Americans aremost supportive of the federal government as giving them themost for their money; Hispanics are most supportive of localgovernment. As in many previous years, the local property taxwas viewed as the worst tax, followed by the federal incometax, state sales tax, and state income tax. Americans displayedreduced trust and confidence in the federal government; however,trust in all three spheres of government—federal, state,and local—dropped between 2004 and 2006, possibly reflectiveof the poor response of all governments to Hurricane Katrina.Analysis of surveys since 1972 reveals that there has been along-term decline in the public's support for the federal governmentand a corresponding increase in support of state and especiallylocal governments.     

Protecting Local Governments from Arbitrary State and Federal Interference: What Prospects for the 1990s?

The number of local governments in Nigeria has been fixed at453 by the 1989 Constitution. The key purpose of this provisionis to prevent state governments from creating local governmentsand altering local-government boundaries for political purposes.The provision is part of a larger program of localgovernmentreform undertaken by the federal military government to ensurethe integrity and autonomy of democratically elected local governmentsunder the Third Republic. States are limited in their abilityto intervene in local government affairs, and the federal governmenthas certain direct powers and responsibilities for local governments.Whether these reforms will achieve their intended objectives,however, is arguable.     

Municipal Debt Issues in Foreign Markets: Managing Currency and Interest Rate Risk

Since the mid-1980s, there has been an acceleration of state and local government interest in the taxable bond market as a source of capital. This has resulted from, among other factors, restrictions imposed on economic and industrial development loan programs resulting from the passage of the Tax Reform Act of 1986. Increased state and local government involvement in the taxable bond markets has increased competition for such capital between the public and the private sectors. In turn, the developing capital competition has expanded into overseas securities markets. Private sector corporations have frequently accessed foreign capital markets to take advantage of lower interest rates and reduced financing costs. By contrast, state and local governments have accessed such markets only recently. This article discusses the policy issues considered by a state or local government entity when it decides to borrow funds in foreign markets and discusses the issues involved in managing currency and interest rate risk when issuing municipal bonds in foreign markets. It includes a review of the hedging techniques used by the Kentucky Development Finance Authority (KDFA) to protect against changes in the Yen/Dollar exchange relationship on a recent Samurai bond issue sold by KDFA as an example of such a transaction.     

Incentivizing self‐regulation: Federal vs. state‐level voluntary programs in US climate change policies

How does program sponsorship influence the design of voluntary programs? Why and how do voluntary programs on climate change sponsored by the state and federal governments in the United States vary in their institutional design? Scholars emphasize the signaling role of voluntary programs to outside stakeholders, and the excludable benefits that induce firms to take on non‐trivial costs of joining voluntary programs. Scholars have noted several types of benefits, particularly reputational benefits programs provide, but have not systematically studied why different programs emphasize different types of benefits. We suggest that excludable benefits are likely to take different forms depending on the institutional context in which program sponsors function. We hypothesize that federal programs are likely to emphasize less tangible reputational benefits while state programs are likely to emphasize more tangible benefits, such as access to technical knowledge and capital. Statistical analyses show the odds of a voluntary program emphasizing tangible benefits increases by several folds when the program is sponsored by the state as opposed to federal government.     

Federal Preemption Under Reagan's New Federalism

Ronald Reagan defined his federalism program in terms of returningpolitical power to state and local governments. In practice,he was Janus-faced with respect to his views on domestic policyissues. His "public" face emphasized initiatives promoting areturn of political power to the states and local governments.His "silent" face encouraged additional centralization of politicalpower in several functional areas, and he signed bills prohibitingstate economic regulation of certain industries. Most of Reagan'sinitiatives were administrative, and increased to a limitedextent the discretionary authority of states. In general, thepresident favored a smaller federal regulatory role but notnecessarily a larger state and local government role. He signedtotal preemption bills granting greater freedom of action tothe banking, communications, and transportation industries,and tax sanction and crossover sanction bills. At the closeof his administration, intergovernmental relations were morecoercive than they had been in 1980.     

Federal tax reform and the financing of state and local governments

Although the Reagan Administration tax reform proposals would reduce federal income tax liabilities for most taxpayers, federal tax reform would also create strong pressures on state and local governments to cut taxes and public services. These pressures would arise primarily because itemizers would no longer be able to deduct state and local taxes in determining their federal income tax liabilities. In New York City and Boston, it is likely that the Administration's tax reform would induce cuts in spending that range from 2.5 to 7.5 percent. While the elimination of state and local tax deductibility may promote allocative efficiency in the provision of local public goods, the cost would be a decline in the degree of redistribution through the state and local public sector, and a reduction in local public services for the poor.     

Effects of Federal Tax Reform on Local Finances

The federal Tax Reform Act of 1986 promised to be fair, simple,and revenue neutral to the federal treasury. Tax reform, however,was not revenue neutral with respect to all state and localtreasuries. Indeed, tax reform entailed a restructuring of thebalance of power in federal-state-local relations. In particular,new restrictions on the tax-exempt bond authority of state andlocal governments are requiring significant shifts in traditionallocal debt policy. Furthermore, the Supreme Courts recent decision,South Carolina v. Baker, raises additional concerns about thestatus of state and local tax-exempt bond issues. The natureof future relations between the federal government and localgovernments is likely to be molded more by the federal tax codeand by erosion in state authority over fiscal matters than byfederal grant-in-aid programs of the kind that have characterizedthe past quarter century of intergovernmental relations.     

Do State Bond Banks Have Cost Advantages for Municipal Bond Issuance?

State bond banks are created to extend management expertise, subsidies, and economies of scale to local government issuers, but bond banks incur issuance and program costs. This research examines whether state bond banks appear to achieve lower than average borrowing costs, once the costs of issuance are controlled for. We find that bond banks are associated with significantly lower borrowing costs for two of the three programs we examine, and determine that these savings are due largely to reductions in costs of issuance.     

State Infrastructure Banks and Intergovernmental Subsidies for Local Transportation Investment

This study reviews State Infrastructure Banks (SIBs) as an innovative financing mechanism for federal and state governments to support transportation financing for local governments, and determines the cost savings realized by local governments from receiving SIB loans rather than financing through the municipal bond market. The study finds that SIBs provide a mechanism through which local governments receive subsidized loans for their transportation investments. With the Ohio SIB, localities realized average borrowing cost savings between 34 and 184 basis points. Under the worst‐ and best‐case scenarios, 83 and 98 percent of projects, respectively, benefited from lower borrowing costs.     

Fiscal Institutions,Credit Ratings,and Borrowing Costs

This paper investigates the impact of fiscal institutions on state government borrowing costs. We find that institutions have both a direct and indirect effect on interest costs paid by state governments. Revenue limits are associated directly with higher interest costs; expenditure limits, stricter balanced budget rules, and restrictions on state debt issuance are indirectly associated with lower interest costs because they lead to higher credit ratings. It appears that investors and bond raters incorporate information on fiscal institutions into their assessment of state government credit quality.     

The Federal, and the State and Local Roles in Government Expenditures

This article compares government expenditures by functional category of the federal government relative to state and local governments and the changes in their respective roles since 1955. The article includes a review of the federal role relative to the state and local role on a function-by-function basis for these three and a half decades. This analysis demonstrates considerable stability in the federal sector and the state and local sector, but also the capacity for change.     

Federal dynamics in times of economic and financial crisis

The global economic and financial crisis is a challenge for all governments, but particularly for federal states because divided and/or shared territorial powers make federations susceptible to coordination problems in fiscal policy making. This article explores the effects of the ongoing crisis on federal relations. Three kinds of problems that may become the cause of federal tensions and conflicts are evoked: opportunism of subgovernments, centralisation and erosion of solidarity among members of the federation. Our analysis of fiscal policies and federal conflicts of 11 federations between 2007 and the present reveals three kinds of coordination problems: shirking in the use of federal government grants, rent‐seeking in equalisation payments, and over‐borrowing and over‐spending. Our results show that shirking remained limited to few cases and occurred only in the first part of the crisis. However, rent‐seeking and over‐borrowing and over‐spending led to a reduction of solidarity among subgovernments and to increased regulation of the fiscal discretion of the members of the federation. Subsequently, tensions in federal relations increased – although only in one case did this challenged the federal order.     

Two Cheers for Paperwork: The Value and Burden of Federal Reporting

In principle, reporting by state and local governments to thefederal government is essential to the design and implementationof national policy. In practice, reporting often engenders resentmentof federal intrusion and is often dismissed as a waste of stateand local resources. Is reporting useless? Does it strengthenthe federal government at the expense of state and local governments?We asked federal, state, local, and site officials about thevalue and burden of five specific reporting systems in elementaryand secondary education. Common assumptions about reportingdid not correspond to respondent reactions. Both value and burdencascade through the intergovernmental system, reaching policymakersin all governments. Although critics seldom discriminate betweentypes of reporting, we found that reporting designed to improvecompliance with federal standards evoked different judgmentsof value and burden than reporting designed for assistance.These results suggest some new approaches to federal policygoverning the collection of information and to the design ofindividual reporting systems.     

Turning Up the Heat: The Impact of Electric Utility Competition on K–12 Education Funding in Ohio

Ohio, like many states, is currently-considering deregulation of the retail electric power industry. This issue is made more complex in Ohio because structural change in the delivery of electric power is also likely to have a negative effect on state and local government revenues. This effect occurs because of three main forces: the elimination of differential property tax treatment of utilities relative to general businesses, the likely decrease in state electricity excise tax revenues as a result of falling power prices and administrative difficulty in taxing out of state providers, and the potential for stranded costs to diminish the taxable value of electric generating equipment. This article provides an overview of these issues and a brief analysis of the extent to which these problems will be shared by other states. The article then demonstrates the impact of deregulation-induced tax changes on both state and local school district revenues in Ohio and concludes with a discussion of how the state's ability to insulate local governments from these adverse fiscal effects is made both more imperative and more difficult by a recent Supreme Court Ruling on school funding Finally, the issues discussed in the article are placed in a more general context of the challenges of adjusting tax policy to changing circumstances     

Financing the German Federal System in the 1980s

Public finance is a crucial issue in any federation. In thesystem of shared public financing in Germany, no unit of governmentis fiscally dependent on the other. The federal and Land governmentsshare the personal income tax, the corporation tax, and thevalue-added sales tax. Because the Bundesrat approves of theshares of these tax yields granted the federal and Land governments,the Länder are deeply involved in the public finance system.Fiscal equalization occurs both vertically and horizontally.The federal government provides the Länder with grants-in-aid,and also shares the financing of a number of "joint tasks."The Länder share their tax yields with their local governments.Fiscal transfers also take place among the richer and poorerLänder and among the municipalities within the boundariesof individual counties. Controversy exists over the shares tobe given the respective governments from the value-added taxand over fiscal equalization between the richer (South) andpoorer (North) Länder.     

The Fly Ball Effect: A Theoretical Framework for Understanding the Impacts of Short‐Term Seed Grants

The federal government has long used grants‐in‐aid to encourage state and local governments to carry out federal policies. Little research has been done that examines how short‐term seed grants affect program continuation. We propose the “fly ball effect” as a theoretical framework for understanding how seed money should impact program maintenance. Our theory suggests that short‐term seed grants by themselves should result in considerable funding uncertainty and program eliminations or stagnation once the initial grant money expires. We use data from drug court start‐ups in four states to provide empirical support for our theory. We argue that understanding the logic of the fly ball effect can help granting governments to improve the effectiveness of their grant funding systems, at least as measured by strong program continuation and expansion.     

Public Opinion and American Federalism: Perspectives on Taxes, Spending, and Trust--An ACIR Update

The research reported here updates for 1999 some public opiniondata previously provided by the U. S. Advisory Commission onIntergovernmental Relations. The 1999 survey results indicatea general continuation of opinion trends established by thelate 1970s to the mid-1980s. Local government is viewed as givingcitizens the most for their money, followed by state governmentand the federal government. Americans still regard the federalincome tax as the worst tax, followed by the local propertytax. Likewise, Americans express the most trust and confidencein local government and the least trust and confidence in thefederal government, although confidence in all governments increasedover comparable data for 1992. Race and party identificationand, in one case, region are significant factors differentiatingopinions about the federal, state, and local governments andtheir taxes.     

Subnational Taxes in Developing Countries: The Way Forward

Both theory and experience in a variety of circumstances around the world suggest strongly that if fiscal decentralization is to produce sustainable net benefits in developing countries, subnational governments require much more real taxing power than they now have. Students of public finance have studied the subject, and practitioners in developing countries have installed many different versions of subnational government tax. In most developing countries there are potentially sound and productive taxes that subnational governments could use: personal income tax surcharges, property taxes, taxes on the use of motor vehicles, payroll taxes, and even subnational value‐added taxes and local “business value” taxes may all be viable options in particular countries. Still, there is no general consensus about what works and what does not. In this review paper, we try and pull together enough evidence to suggest the way forward. We also develop the argument that given political realities one cannot usually decentralize significant revenues to subnational governments without having in place an intergovernmental transfer system to offset at least some of the disequalizing effects that would otherwise occur. Nor does it make sense to think of decentralizing exactly the same package of tax choices to all subnational governments regardless of their scale and scope of operations.     

Constitutional Dimensions of State and Local Tax Deductibility

President Reagan's proposal to eliminate the deduction of stateand local taxes for the purpose of assessing federal incometaxes will vastly enlarge the scope of the federal government,unduly burden state and local governments, and greatly harmthe federal system. The essence of the federal idea is thatthere are arenas of government that must not be invaded by othergovernments. Yet the Treasury Department would have us believethat the most fundamental activities of state and local governmentsare in some significant sense paid for by the federal governmentthrough "subsidies" provided by the federal tax code.