Local Homeownership Research Articles

Do local governments tax homeowner communities differently?

AbstractThis article investigates whether and how strongly the share of homeowners in a community affects residential property taxation by local governments. Different from renters, homeowners bear the full property tax burden, irrespective of local market conditions, and the tax is more salient to them. “Homeowner communities” may hence oppose high property taxes in order to protect their housing wealth. By merging granular spatial data from a complete housing inventory in the 2011 German Census with historical homeownership rates and housing damages during the Second World War as sources of exogenous variation in local homeownership, we provide empirical evidence that otherwise identical jurisdictions charge significantly lower property taxes when the share of homeowners in their population is higher. This result is invariant to local market conditions, which suggests tax salience is the key mechanism behind this effect. Moreover, we find positive spatial dependence on tax multipliers, indicative of property tax mimicking by local governments.

The Influence of Institutional Single-Family Rental Investors on Homeownership: Who Gets Targeted and Pushed Out of the Local Market?

The emergence of institutional single-family rental investors in local housing markets is increasingly concerning to policymakers and planners. This study examines how their rising presence in the single-family housing market has impacted homeownership. Leveraging both granular spatial and temporal variations in large investment firms’ transaction activities over 800 neighborhoods in the Atlanta metropolitan area between 2007 and 2016, I find that their concentrated investment in single-family rentals weakened local homeownership, mainly for Black. In contrast, evidence does not support the claim that smaller scale corporate investors dampened homeownership. The institutional scale matters in explaining a significantly diminished homeownership during this period.

Homeownership and voter turnout in u.s. local elections

This paper provides evidence that economic self-interest associated with homeownership affects voter turnout in local elections in the United States. Compared to renters, homeowners are financially invested in their communities and are less mobile. Therefore, homeowners should care more about local policies and have incentives to engage actively in local politics. The disparity in political participation between homeowners and renters, however, should diminish in presidential elections for which policy discussions are more targeted at the national-level. These hypotheses are tested using census block group-level election panel data. Fixed effects models and a control function approach are used to identify the effect of homeownership on voter turnout in off-year mayoral elections relative to presidential elections. Results show that mayoral election voter turnout increases with the local homeownership rate. This suggests that local policies may tend to cater to the tastes of homeowners over renters.

Why do migrant households consume so little?

Exploring data from the migrant and urban household surveys of the Chinese Household Income Project, this paper dissects the underlying causes of the depressing effect of the hukou system on migrant household consumption to two channels. On one hand, migrants' disentitlement to local urban hukou creates financial insecurity through barriers to employment, social welfare, medical insurance, etc., thereby encouraging precautionary saving. On the other hand, it promotes temporary migration, allows divergence in tastes and values from local urban residents to persist, and incentivizes migrant households to save their transitory income. Factors reflecting these two channels, such as medical and pension insurances, the duration of migration, and local homeownership, are specifically modeled, and they are found to contribute to the discrepancies in consumption between migrant and local urban households, among other factors. In addition, the marginal propensity to consume exhibits heterogeneity across migrant households; it is higher with a longer duration of migration, local homeownership, and self-employment. The lack of these attributes further reinforces the reluctance of migrant households to consume.

Do Local Governments Tax Homeowner Communities Differently?

This paper investigates whether and how strongly the share of homeowners in a community affects residential property taxation by local governments. Different from renters, homeowners bear the full property tax burden irrespective of local market conditions, and the tax is more salient to them. Homeowner communities may hence oppose high property taxes in order to protect their housing wealth. Using granular spatial data from a complete housing inventory in the 2011 German Census and historical war damages as a source of exogenous variation in local homeownership, we provide empirical evidence that otherwise identical jurisdictions charge significantly lower property taxes when the share of homeowners in their population is higher. This result is invariant to local market conditions, which suggests tax salience as the key mechanism behind this effect. We find positive spatial dependence in tax multipliers, indicative of property tax mimicking by local governments.

Why Do Migrant Households Consume So Little?

Exploring data from the migrant and urban household surveys of the Chinese Household Income Project, this paper dissects the underlying causes of the depressing effect of the hukou system on migrant household consumption to two channels. On one hand, migrants’ disentitlement to local urban hukou creates financial insecurity through barriers to employment, social welfare, medical insurance, etc., thereby encouraging precautionary saving. On the other hand, it promotes temporary migration, allows divergence in tastes and values from local urban residents to persist, and incentivizes migrant households to save their transitory income. Factors reflecting these two channels, such as medical and pension insurances, the duration of migration, and local homeownership, are specifically modeled, and they are found to contribute to the discrepancies in consumption between migrant and local urban households, among other factors. In addition, the marginal propensity to consume exhibits heterogeneity across households; it is higher with a longer duration of migration, local homeownership, and self-employment. The lack of these attributes further reinforces the reluctance of migrant households to consume.

Do Local Governments Tax Homeowner Communities Differently?

This paper investigates whether and how strongly the share of homeowners in a community affects residential property taxation by local governments. Different from renters, homeowners bear the full property tax burden irrespective of local market conditions, and the tax is more salient to them. Homeowner communities may hence oppose high property taxes in order to protect their housing wealth. Using granular spatial data from a complete housing inventory in the 2011 German Census and historical war damages as a source of exogenous variation in local homeownership, we provide empirical evidence that otherwise identical jurisdictions charge significantly lower property taxes when the share of homeowners in their population is higher. This result is invariant to local market conditions, which suggests tax salience as the key mechanism behind this effect. We find positive spatial dependence in tax multipliers, indicative of property tax mimicking by local governments.

Are Rising College Premiums Capitalized into House Prices? Evidence from China

AbstractMany areas in China experienced steeply rising house prices beginning in 2003. We test whether a change in local residency requirements may have played a role in driving up house prices in some places by tying access to Chinese universities to local homeownership status in the presence of a rising college premium. We generate a novel dataset that combines China housing market and neighborhood data with household and university admission data. We find evidence of capitalization effects and a sizable increase in the likelihood of homeownership postpolicy change in places with the greatest preferential access to China's elite universities.

When fiscal recentralisation meets urban reforms: Prefectural land finance and its association with access to housing in urban China

By retrieving household-level information from 127,938 household heads and fiscal data from 177 prefectures located in eastern and central China, this research quantifies the net association between land finance and urban housing tenure. While the results demonstrate that in 2005 China’s urban housing market remained stratified and simultaneously favoured individuals possessing economic, political and human capital, the key finding is that, net of other household- and prefecture-level effects, land finance is significantly and negatively associated with local homeownership. Moreover, both the demand and supply sides of the urban housing market contribute to such net association. By demonstrating the internal links between urban housing and local finance, this research not only provides a more holistic view of housing stratification during institutional changes but also lends empirical support to conceptual frameworks that explain a territory-based coalition between local governments and selective enterprises.

The downside of marketization: A multilevel analysis of housing tenure and types in reform-era urban China

Based on data from the 2005 National Population Sample Survey and compiled covariates of 205 prefectures, this research adopted principal-component and multilevel-logistic analyses to study homeownership in urban China. Although the housing reform has severed the link between work units and residence, working in state sectors (government, state-owned enterprises and collective firms) remained significant in determining a household’s entitlement to reform-era housing with heavy subsidies or better qualities. While the prefecture-level index of marketization reduced local homeownership of self-built housing, affordable housing and privatized housing, its effect is moderated by cross-level interactions with income, education and working in state sectors across different types of housing. Meanwhile, the index of political and market connections promoted all types of homeownership except for self-built housing. By situating the downside of marketization within a context of urban transformation, this research not only challenges the teleological premise of the neoliberal market transition theory but calls for research on institutional dynamics and social consequences of urban transformation in China.

Does Owner-Occupied Housing Affect Neighbourhood Crime?

Economic as well as sociological theory bring some support to the hypothesis that personal home ownership per se makes individuals more responsible to society values and hence less inclined to commit offences against property or commit other kinds of crimes. Departing from this hypothesis, the present study seeks to provide empirical evidence for a link between levels of crime and local residential ownership rates. In the framework of a linear regression model and based on Danish municipality data, we establish empirical evidence for a negative relationship between local home ownership rates and local crime rates even when controlling for a broad range of economic and demographic variables.

How are social ties formed? Interaction of neighborhood and individual immobility

Using individual data from Japan, this paper investigates how a neighbor's immobility is associated with individual investment in social capital. It is found that local homeownership has a positive effect on individual investment and that this effect for individual homeowners is about 2.5 times larger than for renters.