Dinamizam reformi oporezivanja imovine u Srbiji - administrativni i fiskalni aspekti

reschovsky@lafollette.wisc.edu The property tax is the mainstay of local K–12 education revenue. Public schools derive over 80 percent of their local own-source revenue from the property tax (Reschovsky 2014). At the same time, nearly half of total property tax dollars collected in the United States is used to finance public elementary and secondary education (U.S. Census Bureau 2013, 2014). This close link between property taxation and school finance is one motivation for this special issue. Another motivation is the state and local fiscal aftermath of the Great Recession. Over the past few years the financing of public elementary and secondary education has become particularly challenging. In real per pupil terms, total revenues devoted to public education fell by 6.2 percent between the 2008–09 and 2011–12 school years.2 Although comprehensive revenue data are not yet available for the most recent years, existing evidence points to a continued decline in financial support for public education. Data from the U.S. Census Bureau’s Quarterly Summary of State and Local Tax Revenue indicate that per capita real local government property tax revenues (for school and non-school purposes) declined by 3 percent between fiscal years 2011 and 2013 (Collins and Langley 2014). And a survey conducted by the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities found that in 33 states, real

<p>The economics of taxes and tax behaviour has generally been a focal point of tax literature and property tax literature has been no exception. A subset of property tax literature investigates the benefits of land value taxation and its revenue earning potential. Research has generally, focused on the potential and performance of land value taxation. However, the implications of this tax in developing countries have been ignored. Likewise, research into the relationship between the tax structure, its governance and tax payer behaviour has also been side-lined. Given the fact that land value taxation is regarded as the most efficient property tax but is only utilised in four countries and has been replaced by capital value taxation in several developed countries, is an indication that there are innate characteristics of the tax that affect its performance. Of equal importance, is the mechanism by which the tax operates.</p><p>Since 1957, Jamaica has been utilising land value taxation as its property tax and since its implementation, there has consistently been an issue of (relatively) low compliance rates. According to the current Minister of Local Government, Noel Arscott (2013) cited by McIntosh (2013), the payment of property taxes has been woefully inadequate. This view was supported by Matalon (2012) cited in Dunkley (2012) who described Jamaica’s property tax compliance rate as a “national disgrace.”</p><p>Given the island’s current economic structural reform programme with the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the anticipated launch of the property tax reform programme in FY 2016/17, research on the property tax system is critical to improving compliance rates. As a result, this research will investigate how Jamaica’s property tax system shapes compliance by exploring the relationship between the structure of the system, its role in socialising the system’s actors and taxpayer behaviour. A taxpayer’s tax liability is a function of three things – the tax rate, land value and a person’s ability to pay. Thus, in order to understand the system, the relation between all three must be investigated. This paper therefore seeks to answer the following questions:</p><p>1.What are the implications of land value taxation for Jamaica and other developing countries?</p><p>2.What is the role of planning in land value taxation?</p><p>3.How does Jamaica’s tax system encourage or discourage property tax compliance?</p><p>4.To what extent is land value taxation regressive/progressive?</p>

The property tax has become more important in the structure of the local government revenues in Serbia, since it has been collected by local tax administrations. Despite of that, the local government revenues are still not sufficient to meet the basic needs of local citizens. Public revenues constitute the backbone of public finances. Local public finance is regulated by laws, acts and other regulations at the level of both local and central government. The Law on Financing of Local Self-Government defines property tax as a local-governmentsourced tax, while the local tax administration units are responsible for property tax collection. In this regard, local self-governemnt units have received a greater level of autonomy in tax administration and are obliged to follow the amendments to the Law on Property Taxes, as well as the Law on Tax Procedure and Tax Administration. In this paper, the analysis of accounting and the collection efficiency of property tax on both legal and natural persons in the muncipality of Smerevska Palanka is given.

The extension of powers and functions of local self-government bodies in the context of financial decentralization should be accompanied by an appropriate increase of local taxes and fees to local budgets. Currently, property tax is a new element of the local taxation system and a financial tool for local governments. Since the property tax system is at an early stage in its development, there are a number of debatable issues, in particular, it is really necessary to assess the current system of property taxation in Ukraine, to investigate the fiscal role of property taxes and to outline directions for its improvement. The paper argues that in contrast to Ukraine, property taxes in many countries include the taxes on certain types of property, on net assets, on transfer of property ownership. The author proves that the taxation of property is based on the following principles: equivalence; solvency and equity; fiscal efficiency and financial capacity; security; performance. The analysis shows that since 2015, due to increased tax revenues, local taxes and fees have become the second largest source of local budgets. In 2015-2017 the largest share in the structure of property tax was paid for land 90-93%, the tax on real estate, other than land plot 4,6-8,3%, transport tax 0,8-2,7%. However, the greatest increase of revenues to local budgets accounted for the tax on real estate. The main factors of the growth of property tax since 2015 are due to the inclusion of land and transport taxes to property tax and the introduction of new ratios of indexation of normative monetary estimates for calculating land payments. The shortcomings of the system of property taxation are identified, namely: the level of urbanization of the territory where the object of taxation is located is not taken into account; the existing approach to taxing the area of immovable property, different from the land, does not take into account the degree of its physical depreciation; non-compliance with the principle of social equality and the imperfect mechanism of taxation of non-residential real estate of economic entities and individuals. The paper suggests to include irregular taxes into property taxes, that is, taxes on transfer of property: inheritance tax; gift tax. To determine the amount of real estate tax and land tax, the rates should be set as a percentage of the market value of the tax object, in order to simplify the process of taxes administering.

PURPOSE: Tax rating instruments play a vital role in determining the level of tax collection maximization. In Uganda for example, the Local Government Rating Act (2005) is the tool used by local government authorities to execute their duties; tax administration and enforcement. Thus; this study examined the effectiveness of Local Government Rating Act (2005) on the property tax collection maximization in Wakiso District, Uganda. The key areas of interest in the Local Government Rating Act (2005) that have been examined in this study included property tax coverage and tax administrative costs while tax collection maximization is determined in terms of revenue inflow and compliance.DESIGN/METHODOLOGY: Causal research design and linear multiple regression as the underlying statistical tests was employed. The sample size was 48 tax administrators and this was determined from target population of 55 through Sample Size Determination by Krejcie and Morgan (1970). Close-ended questionnaires and interview guides were used as data collection techniques. The validity and reliability of research instruments was determined using Content Validity Index and test and pretest respectively. Data analysis and processing was done through SPSS where frequencies, percentages, mean value, correlation and regression matrixes were employed.RESULTS: This study found out that Uganda’s Local Government Rating Act (2005) remains ineffective as it makes property tax coverage very limited; and the administrative costs are generally high. The study also found out that property tax inflow and compliance as elements of property tax collection maximization are relatively low in Wakiso District. Ineffectiveness in LGRA as regards to property tax coverage and administration costs was found to be closely associated with low tax collection maximization in the District. The result is that the property tax collection of the district remains minimal and there are always deficits as the district fails to achieve planned revenue targets.PRACTICAL IMPLICATION: Better accessibility and utility of socio-economic services is key and paramount to all property owners especially in urban areas. To ensure that property owners enjoy the best of these services, local governments need to improve on socio-economic infrastructure development. This requires high levels and equitable tax collection maximization covering the areas of property tax collection maximization. In this regard, the recommendations in this study will be significant to the local governments such that they can enhance tax planning, control and bridge the existing gaps in the LGRA, thus, improving the revenue collection maximization; the recommendations will also help to reduce cases of unfair assessment that sometimes affect compliant taxpayers.

Узагальнено повноваження органів місцевого самоврядування та ресурсне забезпечення їх реалізації. Розглянуто напрями державної фінансової підтримки розвитку громад в умовах децентралізації влади. Визначено можливості економічного розвитку громад за рахунок державної підтримки. Обґрунтовано необхідність стимулювання створення та розвитку економічно спроможних громад.

This report looks at local governments’ biggest source of revenue: property taxes. The authors provide a primer on how the taxes are calculated, and new formulas for understanding an individual’s tax share. The authors also propose an alternative format for local property tax statements that can be used to better communicate answers to taxpayers who wonder why their property tax liability has changed. Local governments in Illinois rely heavily on property taxes as a source of revenue—governments collected approximately $23.4 billion in property taxes. Illinois has the fourth highest property tax burden in the United States. The property tax base in Illinois is determined using a four-step process based on the property’s fair cash value. The sum of the tax bases of all individual properties within a taxing district creates the total tax base. The tax share is the ratio of a property’s taxable equalized assessed value to the total tax base in the taxpayer’s jurisdiction. The authors present a new property tax statement that conveys the changes in tax liability by including information on the jurisdictions’ revenue and tax bases and the taxpayer’s tax shares.

The aim of the article is to study the problematic aspects of property tax administration and identify approaches to its improvement. It is found that property tax revenues in Ukraine are at a low level relative to GDP, their share in GDP does not exceed 1%, while the level of this ratio in the EU Member States is on average 2.2%. During the period under analysis, there is a tendency to a slow reduction in the share in GDP of both local taxes and fees, as well as property tax, which makes local budgets dependent on transfers from the State budget and the shares of national taxes and fees assigned to them. There is a steady tendency to reduce the share of property tax in the tax revenues of local budgets of Ukraine in recent years, which is associated with the full-scale war in Ukraine and the tax benefits for the payment of property taxes adopted by the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine. It is determined that the largest share in the structure of property taxes falls on land payments, while the share of transport tax is very low due to the limited list of objects that are liable to taxation. The main problems of property tax regulation in Ukraine have been allocated as follows: insufficient level of effectiveness in the administration of real estate tax, imperfect process of determining the property tax base, unreasoned establishment of property tax benefits, centralized administration of property taxes. Different approaches to tax administration and foreign experience on this issue are analyzed. The expediency of transferring the powers to administer property taxes to local self-government bodies in order to strengthen the financial capacity of communities and reduce public expenditures is substantiated. It is defined that local self-government bodies represent the most interested subject in the formation of a self-sufficient system of local finances, and tax service bodies have insufficient resources and have low motivation to administer property taxes. The problems for local authorities in case of obtaining powers to administer property tax are outlined. A new model of property tax administration has been proposed, in which local self-government bodies exercise the entire set of powers to administer property taxes. Directions for improving the property tax administration system in Ukraine are also proposed.

Property Tax (PT) is chargeable on real property on an annual basis. Worldwide, PT has been a subject of political debate as it plays a vital role in the area of political, social and economic activities. Property taxes evasion are very high in developing countries and perceived to have adversely affects Local Government (LG) revenues. Many studies have been conducted on taxpayers’ compliance behaviour, but not many focused on PT, taxpayer voices and Tax Compliance (TC). This study examined PT, taxpayers’ voices and TC in LGs using Land Use Charge (LUC) in Lagos State, Nigeria as case study. The study employed explanatory research design. Secondary data on LUC collections shared to LGs from 2011-2021 were used. Descriptive statistics of data analysis was adopted. The study revealed that the power of citizens’ voices against government policies and unfriendly laws has negative impact on tax revenues and compliance, this leads to citizens’ apathy, non-compliance and loss of tax revenues. The study also revealed that there are less TC to PT due to few numbers of properties enumerated and taxpayers’ compliance rate. The study recommends that PT laws should be friendly, just and fair while a good PT administration with the use of modern technology of Geographic Information Systems mapping for property identification and tax collections be enhanced. Government should also promote public awareness on PT payment while LG legitimacy and accountability to taxpayers would enhance climate of trust, minimized fraud, eradicate corruption and ensure voluntary tax compliance.

TAE-IL LEE [*] FROM AS EARLY as 50 B.C. (the Three Kingdom period), payment of land tax has been one of the basic duties Korean citizens have had to perform, along with military service and service for public works. The ownership of land was traditionally considered to be in the hands of the royal dynasty and the king, and the land tax was an in-kind charge for the right to cultivate assigned farmlands. Although the structures and the implementation schemes differed substantially from dynasty to dynasty, and even during different periods of the same dynasty, a similar principle more or less persisted until the end of the l9th century. With the opening of the 20th century, modern techniques of land resource management were eventually introduced to Korea by the Japanese colonial government (from its own motives of pillage); these include a cadastral survey of the entire country, land-value taxation, and a land use planning system. In the course of the first national cadastral survey (1910-1918), the primitive, loosely organized land ownership pattern that had prevailed previously virtually disintegrated, and a clearer land title concept was enforced, with corresponding tax liability. In this modern concept of real-estate as introduced to Korea, the land and its improvements were treated as separate entities, and property taxes thus levied separately upon them. I Land-Related Tax System in Modern Korea [1] A. An Overview of Land Taxes As is the case for most other countries, land taxes by the central government in Korea are basically imposed on the income stream from the property and the capital gains realized at the time of transaction, while the local property taxes are levied on acquisition and registration, and on ownership. Table 1 shows the array of different land taxes currently being imposed on Korea in each sequential stage of land ownership cycle. It should be noted that, before the beginning of the local autonomous political system in 1995, the central government made virtually all the rules in Korea. Instead of having governors, mayors, and county heads appointed by the Ministry of Home Affairs (MOHA), local citizens now elect their administrators through direct vote. Besides these elections, however, not many changes have been made yet in overall local administration. B. Administration of Property Tax MOHA is the central government agency responsible for overseeing the activities of the local governments, and even for taxes labeled as local taxes. Tax codes used to be and are still largely established by MOHA, which defines the details of tax bases, rate structures, exemptions and reductions, and collections as well as appeal procedures. Formerly, local property taxation in Korea was simply an extension of the central government's activities, part of it (e.g., collection) being delegated to municipalities and counties. The levying and management of property taxation, which usually constitutes a major portion of any local government's revenues, [2] did not at all reflect each locality's distinctive financial situation. As has already been pointed out, all the property-related local taxes in Korea make a clear distinction between land and buildings. The distinction apparently is not derived from the influence of Henry George, since buildings are also taxed, possibly at even higher rates, by the same property taxes as those on land. Currently, the land portions of the property tax are levied in the spring of each year and the building portions in the autumn. II Public Concept in Land (To-Ji-Gong-Gac-Nyom) A. Background The bad memories of nation-wide land speculation in the late 1970s had scarcely faded when land prices soared again in the late 1980s. Although the rate of increase was not the highest Korea had ever seen, the absolute level of prices was such that the social and political problems generated posed a serious potential threat to the national integrity. …

The study is based on assessing the effective implementation of property tax system. It is conducted in Dodoma Municipal Council. This study specifically focus on two issues which are to analyze the extent of property tax systems implementation in Tanzania economy, and the property tax systems operating in local government Authorities in Tanzania. The study employs a cross sectional design with a case study meant to get in depth data. Respondents in this study such as property tax collectors like Dodoma Municipal staff, Ward Executive Officers, Village Executive Officers, Mtaa Executive Officers were selected by judgmental selection, and Dodoma Municipality dwellers who in this study are termed as taxpayers were randomly selected.Data gathering has done through multiple methods: interview, questionnaire and literature review. Quantitative data derived from questionnaire were analyzed by means of descriptive statistics while the qualitative data were coded, transcribed, categorized and summarized into relevant emerging themes in relation to the research questions.The findings show that property tax system in Dodoma Municipal Council is not effectively implemented because the council lack updated property register, lack of property valuation, insufficient staffs for valuation, lack of E- Taxation technology and weak property tax administration.Based on the findings, the study recommends that: The council to invest more in property tax administration, Conducting property census, Valuation of the taxable properties, Develop mechanisms to enhance tax collection, Use E-taxation systems in implementation and enforce property tax system. Keywords: Property tax, Implementation, Tax base, Local Authority, Property Rights DOI: 10.7176/JAAS/61-05 Publication date: February 29 th 2020

Summaries of Articles

With progress of the housing reform that started in the late 1990s, “home ownership” (with property rights and transferability on the market) among the Chinese people has been increasing rapidly. In the early years of this century, the Chinese government placed on its agenda a new reform to adopt the “real property tax”. At that time, the tax on “real property”, a concept in the Chinese context that covers the structure but not the land on which the structure stands, was called the wuye tax (物业税, which referred only to the structure on the land or the housing unit, for distinction from the real property tax). In October 2003, the Chinese ruling party made a decision “to reform current taxes and charges on real estate, and levy a wuye tax (real property tax) when it is necessary while eliminating related charges”. At that time, the goal of the wuye tax reform was to rearrange the taxes on transactions and possession of real properties. Also, the central government hoped to make the wuye tax an important revenue source for local governments and to rationalize intergovernmental fiscal relations between the central, provincial, and other local governments. From 2003, as China’s economy gradually steps out of the Asian economic downturn that started in 1998, the real property market entered a period of rapid expansion. However, speculation in real property was rampant. In the last 10 years, the price of real property in most cities more than tripled. This problem was more severe in metropolitan areas, such as Beijing, Shanghai, and Guangzhou. Meanwhile, local governments obtained large amounts of revenue from selling the use right of state-owned lands. In response to this abnormal market, the central government frequently adopted monetary, fiscal, and administrative measures as an effort to regulate/control the market. It was against this background that Shanghai and Chongqing, two metropolitan areas, began to levy a real property tax on residential housing from January 28, 2011. As expressed in official documents, the short-term goal of this new tax is to curb sky-rocketing housing prices. Beyond this apparent target, we assume the Chinese central government may be “muddling through” in an effort to determine whether the property tax can be a stone that shoots multiple birds. Among these birds are stable own-source revenue for localities, readjustment of intergovernmental relations, and improvement of local governance in the long term. If we are correct in making this assumption, then the pilot local tax prepares China for some fundamental reform in tax administration, local governance, and government structure in the next few decades in China.In this monograph we argue that the local property tax is one candidate as the “magic” stone; the installation of local property tax can help solve multiple problems that are deep rooted in the society and entangled with many previous reform measures. Our analyses unfold as follows. Section one offers a three-stage framework of China’s financial reforms. Its focal point is that China is now in the third stage wherein it needs to reform the underlying operating mechanisms in order to improve local governance. Section two defines modern real property tax and explains why China urgently needs to introduce this tax as an institution. Section three traces the history of real property taxes in China and compares them with modern real property tax in developed countries. Section four considers the requirements and background of implementing the modern real property tax. Section five analyzes the pilot real property tax in Shanghai and Chongqing and compares them with counterparts in China’s history and the modern real property tax. Section six describes the practice of pilot real property tax in the two metro cities and the effects of the pilot tax on fiscal revenue and housing price. Section seven offers the outcome and analysis on the surveys of residents and government officials on their perception of the pilot tax. Section eight highlights a comparison between two frameworks that have appeared in China. Under the first, local governments depend on land transfer fees to finance infrastructure, and under the second, localities shift to real property tax. Section nine conducts a simulation of real property tax that can be collected with a broader tax base and lower tax rate. Section ten concludes with policy recommendation for the Chinese government in its effort to conduct the third stage of financial reform and improve local governance.

This Comment argues that a co-tenant who improves a concurrent estate without the consent of the other co-tenant should be liable for the increased tax liability caused by the improvement. Part II surveys the current law surrounding concurrent estates, providing background to the common law rules on the various types of co-tenants. This will provide context for the subsequent argument about how property taxes could have a drastic effect on the current face of concurrent estates. The Author will overview property taxes as they relate to local property, delving into the property tax rates, in particular, and how they relate to concurrent estates. In Part III, the Author will discuss the principles of a sound state tax policy, and weigh those principles to determine what are the most important factors in creating a tax. This will illuminate the need for a concrete rule and what that rule should be. Part IV of this Comment will set up the central problem: whether a co-tenant can improve the concurrent estate to the extent that the property tax liability is too great for the other co-tenant, essentially improving the co-tenant out of the property. The problem poses related issues with the well-established case law. If the purpose of not allowing a co-tenant the right to contribution for improvements is to prevent a wealthier co-tenant from ousting his or her other co-tenants, then why can he or she currently do it through a loophole of creating tax liability? However, if the non-improving co-tenant is not liable for the property tax, is the purpose behind the required contribution for necessary costs void? Part V will offer a solution to the tax liability from improvements to concurrent property. The Author will propose to close the gap in the law consistent with the rule for improvements by a co-tenant. The improving co-tenant will be liable for the rise in tax liability for any improvement done without the consent of the non-improver. Ultimately, a co-tenant should not be in danger of being ousted from a concurrent estate by an increase in tax liability due to non-consented improvements to the property owned in joint tenancy. Therefore, the Author proposes the gap in the current law be addressed with the requisite legislation.

Foreclosures and local government revenues from the property tax: The case of Georgia school districts