Browsing by Author "Junge, Jason"
Now showing 1 - 6 of 6
Results Per Page
Sort Options
Item Financing transportation with land value taxes: Effects on development intensity(Journal of Transport and Land Use, 2012) Junge, Jason; Levinson, DavidA significant portion of local transportation funding comes from the property tax. The tax is conventionally assessed on both land and buildings, but transportation increases only the value of the land. A more direct and efficient way to fund transportation projects is to tax land at a higher rate than buildings. The lower tax on buildings would allow owners to retain more of the profits of their investment in construction, and would be expected to lead to higher development intensity. A partial equilibrium simulation is created for Minneapolis, Richfield and Bloomington, Minnesota to determine the intensity effects of various levels of split-rate property taxes for both residential and nonresidential development. The results indicate that split-rate taxes would lead to higher densities for both types of development in all three cities.Item Financing transportation with land value taxes: Effects on development intensity(2012) Junge, Jason; Levinson, David MA significant portion of local transportation funding comes from the property tax. The tax is conventionally assessed on both land and buildings, but transportation increases only the value of the land. A more direct, efficient way to fund transportation projects is to tax land at a higher rate than buildings. The lower tax on buildings would allow owners to retain more of the profits of their investment in construction, and have the expected side effect of increased development intensity. A partial equilibrium simulation is created for three sample cities to determine the magnitude of the intensity increase for both residential and nonresidential development if various levels of split rate property taxes were enacted.Item Property Tax on Privatized Roads(2013) Junge, Jason; Levinson, David MRoads cover a significant fraction of the land area in many municipalities. The public provision of roads means this land is exempt from the local property tax. Transferring roads from public to private ownership would not only remove maintenance costs from city budgets, but increase potential property tax revenue as well. This paper calculates the value of the land occupied by roads in sample cities and determines the potential revenue increase if they were subject to property tax. Further calculation computes the extent to which the property tax rate could be reduced if the land value of roads were added to the tax base.Item Prospects for transportation utility fees(Journal of Transport and Land Use, 2012) Junge, Jason; Levinson, DavidTransportation utility fees are a transportation financing mechanism in which the network is treated as a utility and properties are charged fees in proportion to their network use, rather than according to their monetary value as in property taxation. This mechanism connects the costs of maintaining the infrastructure more directly to the benefits received from mobility and access to the system. The fees are based on the number of trips generated and vary with land use. This paper evaluates transportation utility fees as an alternative funding source in terms of efficiency, equity, revenue adequacy and political and administrative feasibility. The experiences of cities currently using utility fees for transportation are discussed. Calculations are included to determine the fee levels necessary for transportation maintenance budget needs in three sample cities and a county in the Minneapolis-St. Paul (USA) metropolitan area. Proposed fees for each property type are compared to current property tax contributions toward transportation. The regressive effects of the fees and the effect of adjusting for the length of trips generated are also quantified.Item Prospects for transportation utility fees(University of Minnesota, 2012) Junge, Jason; Levinson, David MTransportation utility fees are a financing mechanism for transportation that treats the network as a utility and bills properties in proportion to their use, rather than their value as with the property tax. This connects the costs of maintaining the infrastructure more directly to the benefits received from mobility and access to the system. The fees are based on trips generated and vary with land use. This paper evaluates the fees as an alternative funding source in terms of economic, equity and administrative effects. The experiences of cities currently using utility fees for transportation are discussed. Calculations are included to determine the fee levels necessary for transportation maintenance budget needs in three sample cities and a county in the Twin Cities metropolitan area. Proposed fees for each property type are compared to current property tax contributions toward transportation. The regressive effects of the fees and the effect of adjusting for the length of trips generated are also quantified.Item Value Capture for Transportation Finance: Technical Research Report(Center for Transportation Studies, University of Minnesota, 2009-06) Lari, Adeel; Levinson, David; Zhao, Zhirong (Jerry); Iacono, Michael; Aultman, Sara; Vardhan, Das; Junge, Jason; Larson, Kerstin; Scharenbroich, MichaelAs vehicles become more fuel-efficient and overall levels of travel stagnate in response to increases in fuel prices, conventional sources of revenue for transportation finance such as taxes on motor fuels have been put under increasing pressure. One potential alternative as a source of revenue is a set of policies collectively referred to as value capture policies. In contrast to fuel taxes and other instruments that impose charges on users of transportation networks, value capture policies seek to generate revenue by extracting a portion of the gains in the value of land that result from improvements to transportation networks. In this report we identify a set of eight policies that contain elements of the value capture approach. These policies include land value taxes, tax increment financing, special assessments, transportation utility fees, development impact fees, negotiated exactions, joint development, and air rights. We evaluate each of the policies according to four criteria: 1) efficiency, which relates to how well the policies allocate scarce resources, 2) equity, which describes the fairness of resource allocation among different strata of society, 3) sustainability, which refers to the ability of the policy to serve as an adequate, reliable source of transportation revenue, and 4) feasibility, which refers to the degree of political and administrative difficulty associated with each policy. Since these policies are targeted toward use at the state and local level in Minnesota, we conclude by examining some legal and administrative issues related to the implementation of each policy with special reference to Minnesota.