An analysis of factors affecting differential assessment legislation

Rod Ziemer, Fred White and Ivery Clifton

Public Choice, 1981, vol. 36, issue 1, 43-52

Abstract: This paper has attempted to identify the factors affecting agricultural differential assessment legislation. State characteristics that were determined to be important in determining the type of legislation enacted were population density, amount of land in farms, level of property taxes, median income, farm income, age distribution, education, and recreational and other personal travel. Discriminant analysis based on these factors allowed correct classification of eighty percent of all states with one of the three types of differential assessment laws. High levels of farm income and education were found to be associated with preferential assessment laws. High levels of property taxes, median income, percentage of the population over sixty-five, and in-state household trips appeared associated with restrictive agreement laws. Predictions of the most likely type of law to be adopted by the six states without differential assessment laws as of 1977, were also presented. Results indicated that among these states, the four southeastern ones, Alabama, Georgia, Mississippi and West Virginia, would most likely adopt deferred taxation laws while preferential assessment and restrictive agreement laws were predicted for Kansas and Wisconsin respectively. The analysis presented deos suffer some shortcomings. First, most of the data were for 1975, while differential assessment laws have been passed in various years, beginning in 1956. However, the majority of the variables used in the analysis are not highly sensitive to time and more importantly, relative differences in their values among states probably do not vary significantly over time. Second, this study has only attempted to determine and analyze factors affecting the type of differential assessment law a state is most likly to prefer. No attempt was made to determine the reasons why, as of 1977, six states had not adopted differential assessment legislation. Rather, predictions were made as to the type of law these states would most likely prefer. Further research would be necessary to determine the reasons these states had not adopted any form of differential assessment law as of 1977. Copyright Martinus Nijhoff Publishers bv 1981

Date: 1981
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/BF00163769 (text/html)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:kap:pubcho:v:36:y:1981:i:1:p:43-52

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.springer. ... ce/journal/11127/PS2

DOI: 10.1007/BF00163769

Access Statistics for this article

Public Choice is currently edited by WIlliam F. Shughart II

More articles in Public Choice from Springer
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sonal Shukla () and Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing ().