Federal Incentives Research Articles

Federal incentives for energy development

This paper identifies and quantifies the incentives utilized by the Federal government to encourage the development of U.S. energy resources over the past half century. The incentives granted to the six major conventional sources of energy—nuclear energy, hydropower, coal, oil, natural gas, electricity—are categorized according to eight general types: creation (prohibition) of organizations, taxation, fees, disbursements, requirements, traditional government services, non-traditional government services, and market activity. It is found that through the fiscal year 1977 the Federal government has expended $211 billion for incentives to encourage energy resource development. These incentives were distributed in the following manner: commercial nuclear power, $18 billion; hydropower, $15 billion; coal, $10 billion; oil, $101 billion; natural gas, $16 billion; electricity transmission/distribution, $70 billion. The implications of these findings are discussed briefly.

Economic Feasibility of Solar Water and Space Heating

The economic feasibility in 1977 and 1978 of solar water and combined water and space heating is analyzed for single-family detached residences and multi-family apartment buildings in four representative U.S. cities: Boston, Massachusetts; Washington, D.C.; Grand Junction, Colorado; and Los Angeles, California. Three economic decision criteria are utilized: payback period, years to recovery of down payment, and years to net positive cash flow. The cost competitiveness of the solar systems compared to heating systems based on electricity, fuel oil, and natural gas is then discussed for each city, and the impact of the federal tax credit for solar energy systems is assessed. It is found that even without federal incentives some solar water and space heating systems are competitive. Enactment of the solar tax credit, however, greatly enhances their competitiveness. The implications of these findings for government tax and energy pricing policies are discussed.

General Revenue Sharing: Federal Incentives to Change Local Government?

Abstract The general revenue sharing program imposes no restrictions on the composition of local expenditure. However, the program is far from neutral with respect to other aspects of local government. For example, it penalizes tax reductions and the use of special districts and does not support intergovernmental cooperation or regional planning. Its incentives can range up to 50 percent of local taxation, so the impacts of contemplated local actions on revenue sharing receipts may be significant and should be estimated as part of the planning process. Also, strategies exist for increasing a local government's receipts. Perhaps more important, this analysis illustrates that possibly unintended incentives can be concealed in a formula allocation system, particularly when its equations are the result of numerous compromises within the political process.

Collective farming in northern and southern Yucatan, Mexico: ecological and administrative determinants of success and failure

Cross economic analyses that compare the productivity of Mexican collective ejidos (farms) with privately owned farms are insufficient to evaluate the success of Mexico's collective ejido program. They fail to account for differences in federal administrative incentives and constraints on the two sectors and differences in local ecologies. An anthropological comparison of local collective ejidos in the northern and southern zones of Yucatan state reveals that local variables are essential in determining the success or failure of ejidos. In both zones restrictive federal administrative policies inhibit the economic development of ejidos, but in zones where local ecological factors have encouraged rather than inhibited economic expansion, the ejidos show greater success.

Timber Management for Nonindustrial Forest Owners: A Matter of Perspective?

Abstract While federal and state incentive programs may be helpful in increasing future timber supplies, desired increases can be achieved only if forest management practices are made routine on small forest land ownerships and if greater consideration is given to the multiple goals of the nonindustrial private forest landowners. Research aimed at determining the physical tradeoffs between forest uses is needed so that intensive management practices can be tailored to landowner goals. Until such tradeoff information is available, unevenaged forest management is probably the most acceptable and compatible interim recommendation.

Fiscal Federalism in Health Care

Political choice, like economic life, has a circular flow.' During the past ten years, the federal government has taken certain initiatives in the development of health policy and programs in the United States because of pre-existing conditions, attitudes of the public and pressures from various interest groups. States and regions then responded to federal programs in terms of their perception of the incentives and cost of these programs, which in turn helped determine the new environment facing localities, individuals and institutions.2 After experiencing the new programs for a while, individuals, institutions and localities provided feedback to the larger arenas of government changing state and federal incentives so as to induce further change. This article will examine some of the likely outcomes of current schemes for rationalizing the system through the use of market mechanisms, especially as those mechanisms act on and through a mix of intergovernmental jurisdictions.

Equity and Medicaid

This paper is concerned with the differential impact of the Medicaid program on state incomes in 1967-68. Benefits and costs of the program are calculated for each state and the results are evaluated in terms of the perceived original intent of the program planners. It was found that although the program favors the poor in all states with Title XIX plans, it does so at the expense of extreme horizontal inequity. The conclusion is that federal incentives for the development of comprehensive state Medicaid programs are inadequate to insure an equitable system for the distribution of program benefits and costs.

The New Federal Incentive Awards Program

THE Government Employees' Incentive Awards Act (Title III of Public Law 763, 83d Congress) is a firm expression of the intent of the President and the Congress that there be established a governmentwide incentive awards program which will effectively encourage all civilian employees of the federal government to participate in the common task of improving the efficiency and economy of government operations. President Eisenhower in a memorandum on December 28, 1954, asked the heads of all agencies to give personal leadership to the incentive awards program in their agencies. The new program, which went into effect on November 30, 1954, establishes a single system of awards for suggestions, inventions, and superior accomplishments in place of several different systems of limited coverage. It also centralizes responsibility for administration of the system in the U. S. Civil Service Commission. i. Before the enactment of Public Law 763, incentive awards programs in the government were based upon a number of separate statutes. This situation resulted in some confusion, since control responsibilities were divided at the executive level. The Civil Service Commission, the Bureau of the Budget, and certain individual departments had responsibility for different types of awards. Under the new legislation the Civil Service Commission is made responsible for administering the governmentwide program. The commission has established an Incentive Awards Office that reports to the executive director and has issued regulations and instructions needed to implement the law. The regulations are broad, giving departments and agencies wide latitude to set up incentive awards plans to