Publications-Theses
Article View/Open
Publication Export
-
題名 以財稅資料分析臺灣地價稅資本化情形：縣市合併的準實驗
Land Value Tax Capitalization in Taiwan: A Quasi-Experiment of City-County Merger with Administrative Tax Data作者 李佳臻
Li, Jia-Jhen貢獻者 陳國樑
李佳臻
Li, Jia-Jhen關鍵詞 財稅資料
縣市合併
地價稅
租稅資本化
資本化程度
準實驗
Administrative tax data
City-county merger
Land value tax
Tax capitalization
Degree of capitalization
Quasi-experiment日期 2022 上傳時間 1-Aug-2022 18:30:04 (UTC+8) 摘要 本文使用財政部財政資訊中心 2007 年至 2015 年全國土地財產檔，以 2010 年底縣市合併升格後、2013 年重新規定累進起點地價作為準實驗 (quasi-experiment)，分析地價稅稅負外生變動對於土地價格的影響，進而探討我國地價稅租稅資本化 (capitalization) 現象與估算租稅資本化程度。縣市合併後，原縣 (原市) 累進起點地價上升 (下降)、地價稅稅負減輕 (加重)，若存在租稅資本化現象，原縣 (原市) 土地公告現值理應上升 (下降)。採差異中的差異法 (difference-in-differences, DID) 分析，研究結果顯示原臺中縣交界區與原高雄縣交界區存在租稅資本化現象，地價稅負擔與土地價值呈現負向關係，縣市合併後土地公告現值平均提升 5.81% 與 4.24%。本文另以兩種方式計算資本化程度，發現在我國一般房貸利率 2% 的折現率下，以 DID 估算之方法一指出原臺中縣交界區與原高雄縣交界區地價稅資本化程度約為 87.6% 與 67.3%，以連續 DID 估算之方法二指出約為 92.9% 與 41.4 %，較目前國內外多數財產稅文獻的資本化程度為高，隱含我國地價稅轉嫁予購屋者的比重低。考量土地價值在房地產價格中占有相當高的比重，如欲有效抑制不動產價格，建議可適度調整我國土地持有者之地價稅實質負擔。
We use administrative tax data from 2007 to 2015 to examine the capitalization of the land value tax in Taiwan, taking advantage of quasi-experiments created from three city-county mergers in 2010, and the associated re-assessment of the tax bases—the Starting Cumulative Values (SCV)—in 2013. Cities and counties in the mergers experienced opposite exogenous changes in the land value tax: after the mergers, the SCV in the cities went down, resulting in increases in the city land value tax, while the SCV in the counties went up, resulting in decreases in the county land value tax.Results from the difference-in-differences (DID) estimators provide robust evidence of capitalization in border districts of original Taichung and Kaohsiung counties. After the mergers, the values of county lands (as measured by the Assessed Present Values) increased by an average of 5.81% in Taichung county and by an average of 4.24% in Kaohsiung county. Two different approaches are imposed to calculate the degree of capitalization. Using the general mortgage interest rate of 2% as the discount rate, the usual DID imputation suggests the degrees of capitalization of land value taxes are 87.6% and 67.3% in Taichung and Kaohsiung counties, respectively, while the continuous DID imputation suggests the corresponding degrees of capitalization are 92.9% and 41.4%, respectively. Compared to existing evidence of tax capitalization using general property taxes, the degrees of capitalization of the land value tax are higher. Taking into account the lion’s share of the value of land in the real estate prices, our results point out that increasing the burden of the land value tax is an effective measure to lower the prices of real estate.參考文獻 丁書璿與張宮凰 (2012)，《降低縣市合併對地價稅衝擊之研究以臺中市為例》，臺中：臺中市地方稅務局。伍大開、陳翊芯、陳國樑與羅時萬，「財產稅租稅資本化—縣市合併升格的準實驗分析結果」，《人文及社會科學集刊》，即將出版。林子欽與林子雅 (2008)，「公部門不動產估價成效評估—公平性之觀點」，《住宅學報》，17(2)，63–80。林建甫與劉明德 (2010)，「高房價的成因與解決之道」，財團法人國家政策研究基金會 (2010/5/19)，檢自 https://www.npf.org.tw/3/7524。陳玠安 (2019)，《房屋稅有效稅率對建物價格之影響—以台北市萬華區為例》，國立政治大學財政學系研究所碩士論文。張金鶚 (2019)，「無殼蝸牛運動 30 年：僅 20% 台灣人擁超過兩房，為何卻能主導房屋政策？」，天下雜誌 (2019/7/1)，檢自 https://futurecity.cw.com.tw/article/748。陳國樑 (2021)，「此路不通？居住正義須走出房屋稅的死巷」，聯合報 (2021/7/25)，檢自 https://udn.com/news/story/7241/5625938。陳翊芯 (2020)，《累進起點地價與租稅資本化關聯—縣市合併升格的實驗》，國立政治大學財政學系研究所碩士論文。彭建文、吳森田與吳祥華 (2007)，「不動產有效稅率對房價影響分析—以台北市大同區與內湖區為例」，《台灣土地研究》，10(2)，49–66。黃耀輝、陳清秀與羅時萬 (2018)，「我國不動產持有稅負擔之研究」，《財稅研究》，47(5)，62–104。蔡吉源與林健次 (1999)，「我國土地稅制下地價稅與土地增值稅對地價的影響」，《財稅研究》，31(5)，1–19。Black, S. E. (1999), “Do Better Schools Matter? Parental Valuation of Elementary Education,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, 114(2), 577–599.Bradley, S. (2017), “Inattention to Deferred Increases in Tax Bases: How Michigan Home Buyers Are Paying for Assessment Limits,” Review of Economics and Statistics, 99(1), 53–66.Chen, Y. L. (2020), ““Housing Prices Never Fall”: The Development of Housing Finance in Taiwan,” Housing Policy Debate, 30(4), 623–639.Chinloy, P. (1978), “Effective Property Taxes and Tax Capitalization,” Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d`Economique, 11(4), 740–750.Edel, M. and E. Sclar (1974), “Taxes, Spending, and Property Values: Supply Adjustment in a Tiebout-Oates model,” Journal of Political Economy, 82(5), 941–954.Elinder, M. and L. Persson (2017), “House Price Responses to a National Property Tax Reform,” Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 144, 18–39.Follain, J. R. and S. Malpezzi (1981), “The Flight to the Suburbs: Insights Gained from an Analysis of Central-city vs Suburban Housing Costs,” Journal of Urban Economics, 9(3), 381–398.Goodman, A. C. and T. G. Thibodeau (1998), “Housing Market Segmentation,” Journal of Housing Economics, 7(2), 121–143.Gronberg, T. J. (1978), “The Interaction of Markets in Housing and Local Public Goods: A Simultaneous Equations Approach,” Southern Economic Journal, 46(2), 445–459.Haurin, D. R. and D. Brasington (1996), “School Quality and Real House Prices: Inter-and Intrametropolitan Effects,” Journal of Housing Economics, 5(4), 351–368.Hilber, C. A. L. (2017), “The Economic Implications of House Price Capitalization: A Synthesis,” Real Estate Economics, 45(2), 301–339.Hodge, T. R. and T. M. Komarek (2016) “Capitalizing on Neighborhood Enterprise Zones: Are Detroit Residents Paying for the NEZ Homestead Exemption?” Regional Science and Urban Economics, 61, 18–22.Høj, A. K., M. R. Jørgensen, and P. Schou (2018), “Land Tax Changes and Full Capitalisation,” Fiscal Studies, 39(2), 365–380.Hyman, D. N. and E. C. Pasour (1973), “Real Property Taxes, Local Public Services, and Residential Property Values,” Southern Economic Journal, 39(4), 601–611.Johnson, M. S. and M. J. Lea (1982), “Differential Capitalization of Local Public Service Characteristics,” Land Economics, 58(2), 189–203.King, A. T. (1977), “Estimating Property Tax Capitalization: A Critical Comment,” Journal of Political Economy, 85(2), 425–431.Krantz, D. P., R. D. Weaver, and T. R. Alter (1982), “Residential Property Tax Capitalization: Consistent Estimates Using Micro-Level Data,” Land Economics, 58(4), 488–496.Livy, M. R. (2018), “Intra-school District Capitalization of Property Tax Rates,” Journal of Housing Economics, 41, 227–236.McMillan, M. and R. Carlson (1977), “The Effects of Property Taxes and Local Public Services upon Residential Property Values in Small Wisconsin Cities,” American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 59(1), 81–87.Oates, W. E. (1969), “The Effects of Property Taxes and Local Public Spending on Property Values: An Empirical Study of Tax Capitalization and the Tiebout Hypothesis,” Journal of Political Economy, 77(6), 957–971.Oliviero, T. and A. Scognamiglio (2019), “Property Tax and Property Values: Evidence from the 2012 Italian Tax Reform,” European Economic Review, 118, 227–251.Palmon, O. and B. A. Smith (1998), “A New Approach for Identifying the Parameters of a Tax Capitalization Model,” Journal of Urban Economics, 44(2), 299–316.Pollakowski, H. O. (1973), “The Effects of Property Taxes and Local Public Spending on Property Values: A Comment and Further Results,” Journal of Political Economy, 81(4), 994–1003.Reinhard, R. M. (1981), “Estimating Property Tax Capitalization: A Further Comment,” Journal of Political Economy, 89(6), 1251–1260.Richardson, D. H. and R. Thalheimer (1981), “Measuring the Extent of Property Tax Capitalization for Single Family Residences,” Southern Economic Journal, 47(3), 674–689.Rosen, S. (1974), “Hedonic Prices and Implicit Markets: Product Differentiation in Pure Competition,” Journal of Political Economy, 82(1), 34–55.Sirmans, S., D. Gatzlaff, and D. Macpherson (2008), “The History of Property Tax Capitalization in Real Estate,” Journal of Real Estate Literature, 16(3), 327–344.Stull, W. J. and J. C. Stull (1991), “Capitalization of Local Income Taxes,” Journal of Urban Economics, 29(2), 182–190.Tiebout, C. M. (1956), “A Pure Theory of Local Expenditures,” Journal of Political Economy, 64(5), 416–424.Wales, T. J. and E. G. Wiens (1974), “Capitalization of Residential Property Taxes: An Empirical Study,” Review of Economics and Statistics, 56(3), 329–333.Wing, C., K. Simon, and R. A. Bello-Gomez (2018), “Designing Difference in Difference Studies: Best Practices for Public Health Policy Research,” Annual Review of Public Health, 39, 453–469.Yinger, J., H. S. Bloom, A. Boersch–Supan, and H. F. Ladd (1988), Property Taxes and House Values: The Theory and Estimation of Intrajurisdictional Property Tax Capitalization,” Boston: Academic Press. 描述 碩士
國立政治大學
財政學系
109255004資料來源 http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0109255004 資料類型 thesis dc.contributor.advisor 陳國樑 zh_TW dc.contributor.author (Authors) 李佳臻 zh_TW dc.contributor.author (Authors) Li, Jia-Jhen en_US dc.creator (作者) 李佳臻 zh_TW dc.creator (作者) Li, Jia-Jhen en_US dc.date (日期) 2022 en_US dc.date.accessioned 1-Aug-2022 18:30:04 (UTC+8) - dc.date.available 1-Aug-2022 18:30:04 (UTC+8) - dc.date.issued (上傳時間) 1-Aug-2022 18:30:04 (UTC+8) - dc.identifier (Other Identifiers) G0109255004 en_US dc.identifier.uri (URI) http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/141259 - dc.description (描述) 碩士 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 國立政治大學 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 財政學系 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 109255004 zh_TW dc.description.abstract (摘要) 本文使用財政部財政資訊中心 2007 年至 2015 年全國土地財產檔，以 2010 年底縣市合併升格後、2013 年重新規定累進起點地價作為準實驗 (quasi-experiment)，分析地價稅稅負外生變動對於土地價格的影響，進而探討我國地價稅租稅資本化 (capitalization) 現象與估算租稅資本化程度。縣市合併後，原縣 (原市) 累進起點地價上升 (下降)、地價稅稅負減輕 (加重)，若存在租稅資本化現象，原縣 (原市) 土地公告現值理應上升 (下降)。採差異中的差異法 (difference-in-differences, DID) 分析，研究結果顯示原臺中縣交界區與原高雄縣交界區存在租稅資本化現象，地價稅負擔與土地價值呈現負向關係，縣市合併後土地公告現值平均提升 5.81% 與 4.24%。本文另以兩種方式計算資本化程度，發現在我國一般房貸利率 2% 的折現率下，以 DID 估算之方法一指出原臺中縣交界區與原高雄縣交界區地價稅資本化程度約為 87.6% 與 67.3%，以連續 DID 估算之方法二指出約為 92.9% 與 41.4 %，較目前國內外多數財產稅文獻的資本化程度為高，隱含我國地價稅轉嫁予購屋者的比重低。考量土地價值在房地產價格中占有相當高的比重，如欲有效抑制不動產價格，建議可適度調整我國土地持有者之地價稅實質負擔。 zh_TW dc.description.abstract (摘要) We use administrative tax data from 2007 to 2015 to examine the capitalization of the land value tax in Taiwan, taking advantage of quasi-experiments created from three city-county mergers in 2010, and the associated re-assessment of the tax bases—the Starting Cumulative Values (SCV)—in 2013. Cities and counties in the mergers experienced opposite exogenous changes in the land value tax: after the mergers, the SCV in the cities went down, resulting in increases in the city land value tax, while the SCV in the counties went up, resulting in decreases in the county land value tax.Results from the difference-in-differences (DID) estimators provide robust evidence of capitalization in border districts of original Taichung and Kaohsiung counties. After the mergers, the values of county lands (as measured by the Assessed Present Values) increased by an average of 5.81% in Taichung county and by an average of 4.24% in Kaohsiung county. Two different approaches are imposed to calculate the degree of capitalization. Using the general mortgage interest rate of 2% as the discount rate, the usual DID imputation suggests the degrees of capitalization of land value taxes are 87.6% and 67.3% in Taichung and Kaohsiung counties, respectively, while the continuous DID imputation suggests the corresponding degrees of capitalization are 92.9% and 41.4%, respectively. Compared to existing evidence of tax capitalization using general property taxes, the degrees of capitalization of the land value tax are higher. Taking into account the lion’s share of the value of land in the real estate prices, our results point out that increasing the burden of the land value tax is an effective measure to lower the prices of real estate. en_US dc.description.tableofcontents 第壹章 緒論 1第一節 研究背景 1第二節 研究動機與目的 6第三節 研究架構 9第貳章 文獻回顧 10第一節 無租稅資本化現象 11第二節 部分租稅資本化 12第三節 完全或超額租稅資本化 15第四節 方法論 16第參章 制度背景 20第一節 地價稅制度 20第二節 縣市合併 26第肆章 研究方法 32第一節 資料特性 32一、資料來源 32二、樣本篩選 34第二節 實證模型 41一、研究設計 41二、迴歸模型 54三、平行趨勢假設 58第三節 敘述性統計 60第伍章 實證結果 72第一節 租稅資本化現象 72一、縣交界區 72二、原縣 78三、原市 80四、小結 84第二節 資本化程度計算 86一、方法一 86二、方法二 92三、小結 97第陸章 結論與建議 100參考文獻 102附錄 107 zh_TW dc.format.extent 2957353 bytes - dc.format.mimetype application/pdf - dc.source.uri (資料來源) http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0109255004 en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) 財稅資料 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 縣市合併 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 地價稅 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 租稅資本化 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 資本化程度 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 準實驗 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) Administrative tax data en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) City-county merger en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) Land value tax en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) Tax capitalization en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) Degree of capitalization en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) Quasi-experiment en_US dc.title (題名) 以財稅資料分析臺灣地價稅資本化情形：縣市合併的準實驗 zh_TW dc.title (題名) Land Value Tax Capitalization in Taiwan: A Quasi-Experiment of City-County Merger with Administrative Tax Data en_US dc.type (資料類型) thesis en_US dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 丁書璿與張宮凰 (2012)，《降低縣市合併對地價稅衝擊之研究以臺中市為例》，臺中：臺中市地方稅務局。伍大開、陳翊芯、陳國樑與羅時萬，「財產稅租稅資本化—縣市合併升格的準實驗分析結果」，《人文及社會科學集刊》，即將出版。林子欽與林子雅 (2008)，「公部門不動產估價成效評估—公平性之觀點」，《住宅學報》，17(2)，63–80。林建甫與劉明德 (2010)，「高房價的成因與解決之道」，財團法人國家政策研究基金會 (2010/5/19)，檢自 https://www.npf.org.tw/3/7524。陳玠安 (2019)，《房屋稅有效稅率對建物價格之影響—以台北市萬華區為例》，國立政治大學財政學系研究所碩士論文。張金鶚 (2019)，「無殼蝸牛運動 30 年：僅 20% 台灣人擁超過兩房，為何卻能主導房屋政策？」，天下雜誌 (2019/7/1)，檢自 https://futurecity.cw.com.tw/article/748。陳國樑 (2021)，「此路不通？居住正義須走出房屋稅的死巷」，聯合報 (2021/7/25)，檢自 https://udn.com/news/story/7241/5625938。陳翊芯 (2020)，《累進起點地價與租稅資本化關聯—縣市合併升格的實驗》，國立政治大學財政學系研究所碩士論文。彭建文、吳森田與吳祥華 (2007)，「不動產有效稅率對房價影響分析—以台北市大同區與內湖區為例」，《台灣土地研究》，10(2)，49–66。黃耀輝、陳清秀與羅時萬 (2018)，「我國不動產持有稅負擔之研究」，《財稅研究》，47(5)，62–104。蔡吉源與林健次 (1999)，「我國土地稅制下地價稅與土地增值稅對地價的影響」，《財稅研究》，31(5)，1–19。Black, S. E. (1999), “Do Better Schools Matter? Parental Valuation of Elementary Education,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, 114(2), 577–599.Bradley, S. (2017), “Inattention to Deferred Increases in Tax Bases: How Michigan Home Buyers Are Paying for Assessment Limits,” Review of Economics and Statistics, 99(1), 53–66.Chen, Y. L. (2020), ““Housing Prices Never Fall”: The Development of Housing Finance in Taiwan,” Housing Policy Debate, 30(4), 623–639.Chinloy, P. (1978), “Effective Property Taxes and Tax Capitalization,” Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d`Economique, 11(4), 740–750.Edel, M. and E. Sclar (1974), “Taxes, Spending, and Property Values: Supply Adjustment in a Tiebout-Oates model,” Journal of Political Economy, 82(5), 941–954.Elinder, M. and L. Persson (2017), “House Price Responses to a National Property Tax Reform,” Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 144, 18–39.Follain, J. R. and S. Malpezzi (1981), “The Flight to the Suburbs: Insights Gained from an Analysis of Central-city vs Suburban Housing Costs,” Journal of Urban Economics, 9(3), 381–398.Goodman, A. C. and T. G. Thibodeau (1998), “Housing Market Segmentation,” Journal of Housing Economics, 7(2), 121–143.Gronberg, T. J. (1978), “The Interaction of Markets in Housing and Local Public Goods: A Simultaneous Equations Approach,” Southern Economic Journal, 46(2), 445–459.Haurin, D. R. and D. Brasington (1996), “School Quality and Real House Prices: Inter-and Intrametropolitan Effects,” Journal of Housing Economics, 5(4), 351–368.Hilber, C. A. L. (2017), “The Economic Implications of House Price Capitalization: A Synthesis,” Real Estate Economics, 45(2), 301–339.Hodge, T. R. and T. M. Komarek (2016) “Capitalizing on Neighborhood Enterprise Zones: Are Detroit Residents Paying for the NEZ Homestead Exemption?” Regional Science and Urban Economics, 61, 18–22.Høj, A. K., M. R. Jørgensen, and P. Schou (2018), “Land Tax Changes and Full Capitalisation,” Fiscal Studies, 39(2), 365–380.Hyman, D. N. and E. C. Pasour (1973), “Real Property Taxes, Local Public Services, and Residential Property Values,” Southern Economic Journal, 39(4), 601–611.Johnson, M. S. and M. J. Lea (1982), “Differential Capitalization of Local Public Service Characteristics,” Land Economics, 58(2), 189–203.King, A. T. (1977), “Estimating Property Tax Capitalization: A Critical Comment,” Journal of Political Economy, 85(2), 425–431.Krantz, D. P., R. D. Weaver, and T. R. Alter (1982), “Residential Property Tax Capitalization: Consistent Estimates Using Micro-Level Data,” Land Economics, 58(4), 488–496.Livy, M. R. (2018), “Intra-school District Capitalization of Property Tax Rates,” Journal of Housing Economics, 41, 227–236.McMillan, M. and R. Carlson (1977), “The Effects of Property Taxes and Local Public Services upon Residential Property Values in Small Wisconsin Cities,” American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 59(1), 81–87.Oates, W. E. (1969), “The Effects of Property Taxes and Local Public Spending on Property Values: An Empirical Study of Tax Capitalization and the Tiebout Hypothesis,” Journal of Political Economy, 77(6), 957–971.Oliviero, T. and A. Scognamiglio (2019), “Property Tax and Property Values: Evidence from the 2012 Italian Tax Reform,” European Economic Review, 118, 227–251.Palmon, O. and B. A. Smith (1998), “A New Approach for Identifying the Parameters of a Tax Capitalization Model,” Journal of Urban Economics, 44(2), 299–316.Pollakowski, H. O. (1973), “The Effects of Property Taxes and Local Public Spending on Property Values: A Comment and Further Results,” Journal of Political Economy, 81(4), 994–1003.Reinhard, R. M. (1981), “Estimating Property Tax Capitalization: A Further Comment,” Journal of Political Economy, 89(6), 1251–1260.Richardson, D. H. and R. Thalheimer (1981), “Measuring the Extent of Property Tax Capitalization for Single Family Residences,” Southern Economic Journal, 47(3), 674–689.Rosen, S. (1974), “Hedonic Prices and Implicit Markets: Product Differentiation in Pure Competition,” Journal of Political Economy, 82(1), 34–55.Sirmans, S., D. Gatzlaff, and D. Macpherson (2008), “The History of Property Tax Capitalization in Real Estate,” Journal of Real Estate Literature, 16(3), 327–344.Stull, W. J. and J. C. Stull (1991), “Capitalization of Local Income Taxes,” Journal of Urban Economics, 29(2), 182–190.Tiebout, C. M. (1956), “A Pure Theory of Local Expenditures,” Journal of Political Economy, 64(5), 416–424.Wales, T. J. and E. G. Wiens (1974), “Capitalization of Residential Property Taxes: An Empirical Study,” Review of Economics and Statistics, 56(3), 329–333.Wing, C., K. Simon, and R. A. Bello-Gomez (2018), “Designing Difference in Difference Studies: Best Practices for Public Health Policy Research,” Annual Review of Public Health, 39, 453–469.Yinger, J., H. S. Bloom, A. Boersch–Supan, and H. F. Ladd (1988), Property Taxes and House Values: The Theory and Estimation of Intrajurisdictional Property Tax Capitalization,” Boston: Academic Press. zh_TW dc.identifier.doi (DOI) 10.6814/NCCU202200918 en_US
