Comment on Jack Goodman's “houses,apartments, and the incidence of property taxes”

Abstract

Goodman finds from his analysis of the 2001 Residential Finance Survey that multifamily housing bears a higher effective property tax rate (EPTR) than single‐family owner‐occupied housing and argues that much of the differential is associated with the lower average property value of apartments. We offer comments on how this important research can be enhanced and analyze the EPTR by using a different database, the Public Use Microdata Sample (PUMS) of the decennial census.

Like Goodman, we find from the PUMS that the EPTR of multifamily housing is high relative to that of single‐family detached housing and that lower‐value multifamily housing has a higher EPTR relative to that of higher‐value multifamily units. We offer preliminary findings from the PUMS on the implications of the EPTR for development patterns (it may discourage smart growth), equity (the poor and minorities bear a higher tax burden), and housing (high EPTRs challenge affordability).     

Nonprofit housing and neighborhood spillovers

Nonprofit organizations play a critical role in U.S. housing policy, a role typically justified by the claim that their housing investments produce significant neighbor‐hood spillover benefits. However, little work has actually been done to measure these impacts on neighborhoods. This paper compares the neighborhood spillover effects of city‐supported rehabilitation of rental housing undertaken by nonprofit and for‐profit developers, using data from New York City. To measure these benefits, we use increases in neighboring property values, estimated from a difference‐in‐difference specification of a hedonic regression model. We study the impacts of about 43,000 units of city‐supported housing completed during the 1980s and 1990s, and our sample of property transactions includes nearly 300,000 individual sales. We find that both nonprofit and for‐profit projects generate significant, positive spillover effects. This finding in itself is significant, given the widespread skepticism about the impact of subsidized housing on neighborhoods. We also find some differences across sectors. First, the impact of nonprofit housing remains stable over time, whereas the effect of for‐profit housing declines slightly with time. Second, while large for‐profit and nonprofit developments deliver similar benefits, in the case of small projects, for‐profit developments generate greater impacts than their nonprofit counterparts. These differences are consistent with theoretical predictions. In particular, in the presence of information asymmetries with respect to housing quality, the non‐distribution constraint should lead nonprofits to invest more than for‐profits in developing and maintaining features that benefit the broader community. Meanwhile, the fact that scale makes a difference to nonprofit impacts may reflect the capacity constraints often faced by smaller nonprofits. ©2006 by the Association for Public Policy Analysis and Management     

The potential and limitations of mortgage innovation in fostering homeownership in the United States

Abstract

This article presents an empirical analysis of mortgage innovation as a vehicle to enable renters, especially those from traditionally underserved populations, to realize home‐ownership. It examines the financial and underwriting criteria of a typology of mortgage products, from those adhering to historical standards to some of today's most liberal loans, and develops synthetic models to account for all direct purchase costs. These models are calibrated using 1995 data on renter demographic and financial characteristics from the Survey of Income and Program Participation.

Compared with historical mortgages, today's more innovative loans increase the number of renters who could hypothetically qualify for homeownership by at least a million and expand potential home‐buying capacity by $300 billion. Certain policies could greatly expand the potential gains. Nevertheless, even the most aggressive innovations can play only a limited role in efforts to deliver the material benefits of homeownership to underserved populations.     

Selective or Generic Activism? Types of Participants,Political Action Repertoires and Mobilisation Capacity in a Post-Communist Society

This study develops and tests two arguments for how repertoires of political action are reconfigured in post-communist Romania. Using multivariate statistical analysis, it examines whether citizens' engagement in post-communist politics is linked with generic socioeconomic and attitudinal traits or, alternatively, if it is connected with selective mobilisation opportunities provided by social networks and organisations. The findings reveal that while most Romanians are politically inactive two decades after the fall of communism, those who engage in politics do so selectively and their political action repertoires are largely influenced by four mobilising agents: trade unions; political parties; social networks; and civil society organisations.     

New methods for examining expertise in burglars in natural and simulated environments: preliminary findings

Expertise literature in mainstream cognitive psychology is rarely applied to criminal behaviour. Yet, if closely scrutinised, examples of the characteristics of expertise can be identified in many studies examining the cognitive processes of offenders, especially regarding residential burglary. We evaluated two new methodologies that might improve our understanding of cognitive processing in offenders through empirically observing offending behaviour and decision-making in a free-responding environment. We tested hypotheses regarding expertise in burglars in a small, exploratory study observing the behaviour of ‘expert’ offenders (ex-burglars) and novices (students) in a real and in a simulated environment. Both samples undertook a mock burglary in a real house and in a simulated house on a computer. Both environments elicited notably different behaviours between the experts and the novices with experts demonstrating superior skill. This was seen in: more time spent in high value areas; fewer and more valuable items stolen; and more systematic routes taken around the environments. The findings are encouraging and provide support for the development of these observational methods to examine offender cognitive processing and behaviour.