Abstract

Prior to the passage of Proposition 13, local governments in California set their own property tax rates and received the revenues. California's Proposition 13, enacted in June 1978, severely limits the state's ad valorem real property tax. The measure limits the real property tax to one percent of the purchase price, and also limits the annual increase to two percent until the title is transferred. The proposition also shifted the allocation of the revenues from the counties to the state.However, state laws and local initiatives have enabled cities and counties to circumvent the limitations of Proposition 13 to extract revenue from real estate with parcel taxes, special assessment districts, developer charges, and other charges. Real estate is also tapped privately to by homeowner association assessments, which play an increasingly important role in providing civic services. This paper analyzes the impact of Proposition 13 and examines these statewide and local measures to get around the tax limitation.While the initial impact of Proposition 13 was a reduction in the state's fisc, increases in the sales and other taxes as well as local revenue sources have now restored the tax burden of Californians to slightly above the national average. Thus, the proposition has been largely an exercise in futility, centralizing government, greatly increasing the complexity of its public finances, and ultimately failing to constrain the size of government.

Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call