The Effect of Inflation on the Income Elasticity of Taxes
This paper defines the relationship between the nominal (or money) income elasticity and the real income elasticity of a tax system. Under most circumstances, the real and the nominal income elasticities differ. This difference has not been recognized by economists who rely strictly on nominal elasticities as an indicator of revenue adequacy or tax burden, a practice which can be misleading, especially under conditions of general price inflation. The income tax, sales tax and property tax are analyzed briefly in terms of their elasticity features.
ON THE ELASTICITY OF THE REAL PROPERTY TAX
IN HIS ESTIMATES OF the financial resources of state and local governments for the decade of the 1960's, Netzer assumes that the income elasticity of the property tax is unity.' Criticism has been directed against this assumption since it is considerably higher than the widely accepted value of elasticity of 0.22, derived by Groves and Kahn.2 The wide difference in 'the magnitude of the estimates, however, arises largely from the use of market value of taxable property to measure elasticity by Netzer as against assessed value by Groves and Kahn. Unfortunately, there are no adequate historical time series of the market value of taxable property available to verify the validity of Netzer's assumptions. Netzer bases his estimates on figures derived by bringing forward Goldsmith's estimates for residential non-farm real estate and on Department of Agriculture data for farm property. In addition, Mushkin3 has examined the income elasticity of the property tax base (full market value) in five states that have initiated market sales-ratio or appraisal studies for equalization purposes. The state data, however, are not completely satisfactory because they are of uneven quality over time-the more recent data being more accurate. Therefore, estimates reflect in part changes in the accuracy of measurement, in addition to elasticity. The author of this note has estimated, for the year 1956, in connection with another study,4 the full value of locally assessed
United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea 1982, A Commentary
Volume VI is the sixth substantive volume to be published in the series. It deals with the work of the First Committee at the Third UN Conference on the Law of the Sea, namely the international seabed area. The volume thus embraces the deep seabed mining regime set out in Part XI of the 1982 Convention on the Law of the Sea together with the 1994 Agreement on its implementation. Completion of this commentary was delayed first by the consultations and negotiations that commenced in 1990 and led to the 1994 Agreement and the entry into force of the Convention. It was further delayed until the Assembly of the International Seabed Authority approved the detailed mining regulations in 2000. Additional supplementary material can be found at UNCLOS 1982 Commentary: Supplementary Documents.