Abstract
Voters who support tax limitations measures such as California's Proposition 13 seem to feel that their expected gains more than compensate for whatever costs may follow from a successful tax revolt. Costs can arise from a decline in government services or from an increase in some replacement tax if service levels are maintained. This paper estimates the perceived and actual incidence of a property tax revolt under alternative assumptions about voter perceptions and eventual outcomes. Our results suggest that the most visible benefits of a tax cut favor low‐income homeowners. In the event of government budget cutbacks, it is possible that the distribution of services is sufficiently skewed toward low‐income groups to reverse the incidence of a property tax revolt.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
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 callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
