IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/pubfin/v51y2023i5p619-648.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Partisanship and Property Tax Redistribution: Evidence From Repealing Colorado's Gallagher Amendment

Author

Listed:
  • Geoffrey Propheter

Abstract

In November 2020, Colorado voters were asked to repeal the state's Gallagher Amendment, a constitutional redistributive policy in effect since 1983 that shifted the local property tax burden away from residential property on to nonresidential property. This study explores how partisanship predicts support for repealing Gallagher. Republican and Democrat platforms both entail sociotropic messages to support repeal, but following through on these political ideals carries a salient and nontrivial pocketbook cost to residential property owners. If voters aligned with one party or another are more likely to support repeal, it follows that these voters are more willing to put their money where their mouth is, so to speak. Using election precinct voting data, I find that Democrat-leaning voters were more likely to support repeal than otherwise similar Republican-leaning voters.

Suggested Citation

  • Geoffrey Propheter, 2023. "Partisanship and Property Tax Redistribution: Evidence From Repealing Colorado's Gallagher Amendment," Public Finance Review, , vol. 51(5), pages 619-648, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:pubfin:v:51:y:2023:i:5:p:619-648
    DOI: 10.1177/10911421231171760
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/10911421231171760
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/10911421231171760?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Michael B. Berkman & Eric Plutzer, 2004. "Gray Peril or Loyal Support? The Effects of the Elderly on Educational Expenditures," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 85(5), pages 1178-1192, December.
    2. Prior, Markus & Sood, Gaurav & Khanna, Kabir, 2015. "You Cannot be Serious: The Impact of Accuracy Incentives on Partisan Bias in Reports of Economic Perceptions," Quarterly Journal of Political Science, now publishers, vol. 10(4), pages 489-518, December.
    3. Sobel, Russell S, 1998. "The Political Costs of Tax Increases and Expenditure Reductions: Evidence from State Legislative Turnover," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 96(1-2), pages 61-79, July.
    4. Stefanie Stantcheva, 2021. "Understanding Tax Policy: How do People Reason?," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 136(4), pages 2309-2369.
    5. Roosmarijn A. de Geus, 2019. "When Partisan Identification and Economic Evaluations Conflict: A Closer Look at Conflicted Partisans in the United States," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 100(5), pages 1638-1650, August.
    6. Anne Brown & Jaimee Lederman & Brian D. Taylor & Martin Wachs, 2021. "Analyzing voter support for California’s local option sales taxes for transportation," Transportation, Springer, vol. 48(4), pages 2103-2125, August.
    7. Dan Fuller & Doris Geide-Stevenson, 2007. "Consensus on Economic Issues: A Survey of Republicans, Democrats, and Economists," Eastern Economic Journal, Eastern Economic Association, vol. 33(1), pages 81-94, Winter.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Francesco Capozza & Ingar Haaland & Christopher Roth & Johannes Wohlfart, 2021. "Studying Information Acquisition in the Field: A Practical Guide and Review," CEBI working paper series 21-15, University of Copenhagen. Department of Economics. The Center for Economic Behavior and Inequality (CEBI).
    2. Collewet, Marion & Fairley, Kim & Kessels, Roselinde & Knoef, Marike & van Vliet, Olaf, 2024. "The design of welfare: unraveling taxpayers' preferences," OSF Preprints 4am7e, Center for Open Science.
    3. Tetsuro Kobayashi & Fumiaki Taka & Takahisa Suzuki, 2021. "Can “Googling” correct misbelief? Cognitive and affective consequences of online search," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(9), pages 1-16, September.
    4. Robbett, Andrea & Matthews, Peter Hans, 2018. "Partisan bias and expressive voting," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 157(C), pages 107-120.
    5. Jordi Brandts & Isabel Busom & Cristina Lopez-Mayan & Judith Panadés, 2022. "Images Say More Than Just Words: Effectiveness of Visual and Text Communication in Dispelling the Rent–Control Misconception," Working Papers 1322, Barcelona School of Economics.
    6. Philip Schnorpfeil & Michael Weber & Andreas Hackethal & Michael Weber, 2023. "Households’ Response to the Wealth Effects of Inflation," CESifo Working Paper Series 10648, CESifo.
    7. Jäger, Simon & Roth, Christopher & Roussille, Nina & Schoefer, Benjamin, 2021. "Worker Beliefs about Outside Options," IZA Discussion Papers 14963, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    8. Cotofan, Maria & Matakos, Konstantinos, 2023. "Adapting or compounding? The effects of recurring labour shocks on stated and revealed preferences for redistribution," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 121297, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    9. Ingar Haaland & Christopher Roth & Johannes Wohlfart, 2023. "Designing Information Provision Experiments," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 61(1), pages 3-40, March.
    10. Cars Hommes & Julien Pinter & Isabelle Salle, 2023. "What People Believe about Monetary Finance and What We Can(‘t) Do about It: Evidence from a Large-Scale, Multi-Country Survey Experiment," CESifo Working Paper Series 10574, CESifo.
    11. Heap, Shaun P. Hargreaves & Koop, Christel & Matakos, Konstantinos & Unan, Asli & Weber, Nina Sophie, 2021. "We Cannot Disagree Forever! Reality Polarization and Citizens’ Post-Pandemic Fiscal Adjustment Preferences," SocArXiv 69tup, Center for Open Science.
    12. Javier Olivera & Philippe Kerm, 2022. "Public support for tax policies in COVID-19 times: evidence from Luxembourg," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 29(6), pages 1395-1418, December.
    13. Shapiro, Jesse M., 2016. "Special interests and the media: Theory and an application to climate change," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 91-108.
    14. Kurban, Haydar & Gallagher, Ryan M. & Persky, Joseph J., 2012. "Estimating Local Redistribution Through Property-Tax-Funded Public School Systems," National Tax Journal, National Tax Association;National Tax Journal, vol. 65(3), pages 629-651, September.
    15. Hendrik P. van Dalen, 2019. "Values of Economists Matter in the Art and Science of Economics," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 72(3), pages 472-499, August.
    16. Bellani, Luna & Berriochoa, Kattalina & Kapteina, Mark & Schwerdt, Guido, 2024. "Information Provision and Support for Inheritance Taxation: Evidence from a Representative Survey Experiment in Germany," IZA Discussion Papers 17099, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    17. Löffler, Max & Siegloch, Sebastian, 2015. "Property Taxation, Local Labor Markets and Rental Housing," VfS Annual Conference 2015 (Muenster): Economic Development - Theory and Policy 112967, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    18. Jason Giersch, 2014. "Effects of vacation properties on local education budgets," Cogent Economics & Finance, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 2(1), pages 1-9, December.
    19. Lobeck, Max & Morten.Stostad@nhh.no, Morten Nyborg, 2023. "The Consequences of Inequality: Beliefs and Redistributive Preferences," Discussion Paper Series in Economics 17/2023, Norwegian School of Economics, Department of Economics.
    20. Ingar Haaland & Christopher Roth, 2023. "Beliefs about Racial Discrimination and Support for Pro-Black Policies," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 105(1), pages 40-53, January.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    property tax; partisanship; tax redistribution; Colorado; JEL: H71; R28; H30;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • H71 - Public Economics - - State and Local Government; Intergovernmental Relations - - - State and Local Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue
    • R28 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - Household Analysis - - - Government Policy
    • H30 - Public Economics - - Fiscal Policies and Behavior of Economic Agents - - - General

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:pubfin:v:51:y:2023:i:5:p:619-648. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.