Download Free Taxation Of Property In Ohio Book in PDF and EPUB Free Download. You can read online Taxation Of Property In Ohio and write the review.

This is the first collection of records the researcher should turn to in any genealogical investigation in the Buckeye State. Taking the place of pre-1820 census records, this work presents a county-by-county list of Ohio settlers and residents from about 1800 to 1825. Along with the 1801 tax list of the Virginia Military District, it contains the names of taxpayers listed in various county tax rolls, and it also contains lists of original proprietors and settlers (taken from other sources), names of holders of military warrants, voters' lists, householders' lists, occasional lists of Revolutionary soldiers, and lists of resident proprietors. The work is arranged by county, with multiple tax lists arranged chronologically thereunder. There is at least one tax list given for each of the seventy-five counties covered, the combined lists naming about 50,000 taxpayers. Each county tax list is accompanied by a brief history of the county's formation. Researchers should note that tax lists were not available for the following counties: Auglaize, Carroll, Erie, Fulton, Lake, Lucas, Noble, Ottawa, Paulding, Summit, Vinton, and Wyandot. Our reprint combines the original 1971 publication and the 1973 index, both first published by the Ohio Genealogical Society.
In A Good Tax, tax expert Joan Youngman skillfully considers how to improve the operation of the property tax and supply the information that is often missing in public debate. She analyzes the legal, administrative, and political challenges to the property tax in the United States and offers recommendations for its improvement. The book is accessibly written for policy analysts and public officials who are dealing with specific property tax issues and for those concerned with property tax issues in general.
'The chapters in this book explore in detail the choices regarding both the structure and administration of the property tax, drawing on the extensive knowledge the authors have acquired in studying property taxes around the world. The chapters provide a wide-ranging treatment of the design choices and administrative tasks, both in terms of the breadth of design options and administrative tasks covered and the depth of the discussion. The authors describe the range of design choices, discuss the associated issues and the advantages and disadvantages for each, and present the criteria to help choose among the options.’ From the book’s Foreword by David L. Sjoquist, Professor of Economics and Dan E. Sweat Scholar Chair in Educational and Community Policy, Georgia State University Property taxation is a key element in providing a solid foundation and a stable funding source for basic public services. Developing and implementing a property tax system is a complex task. This complexity is compounded by the diversity of legal, cultural and historical contexts of policymakers and tax administrators. The World Development Report (1999-2000), Entering the 21st Century puts fiscal decentralization at the top of the development agenda. This makes local taxation - and especially the property tax option - of critical importance to both tax and land policy, as well as the broader development agenda. A Primer on Property Tax: Administration and Policy provides the reader with an analysis of issues surrounding property tax, including economics, law, public finance, decentralisation, valuation, GIS and property tax reform. A key strength of the book lies in the vast international experience of the authors and the book will provide for the first time material which is topical, cutting-edge and highly relevant to many of the disciplines involved in property taxation. The authors examine the criteria applied to evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of property tax, discuss the main valuation methods and the economic principles underpinning them and review the legal and administrative aspects of property tax worldwide.
The use of property tax incentives for business by local governments throughout the United States has escalated over the last 50 years. While there is little evidence that these tax incentives are an effective instrument to promote economic development, they cost state and local governments $5 to $10 billion each year in forgone revenue. Three major obstacles can impede the success of property tax incentives as an economic development tool. First, incentives are unlikely to have a significant impact on a firm's profitability since property taxes are a small part of the total costs for most businesses--averaging much less than 1 percent of total costs for the U.S. manufacturing sector. Second, tax breaks are sometimes given to businesses that would have chosen the same location even without the incentives. When this happens, property tax incentives merely deplete the tax base without promoting economic development. Third, widespread use of incentives within a metropolitan area reduces their effectiveness, because when firms can obtain similar tax breaks in most jurisdictions, incentives are less likely to affect business location decisions. This report reviews five types of property tax incentives and examines their characteristics, costs, and effectiveness: property tax abatement programs; tax increment finance; enterprise zones; firm-specific property tax incentives; and property tax exemptions in connection with issuance of industrial development bonds. Alternatives to tax incentives should be considered by policy makers, such as customized job training, labor market intermediaries, and business support services. State and local governments also can pursue a policy of broad-based taxes with low tax rates or adopt split-rate property taxation with lower taxes on buildings than land.State policy makers are in a good position to increase the effectiveness of property tax incentives since they control how local governments use them. For example, states can restrict the use of incentives to certain geographic areas or certain types of facilities; publish information on the use of property tax incentives; conduct studies on their effectiveness; and reduce destructive local tax competition by not reimbursing local governments for revenue they forgo when they award property tax incentives.Local government officials can make wiser use of property tax incentives for business and avoid such incentives when their costs exceed their benefits. Localities should set clear criteria for the types of projects eligible for incentives; limit tax breaks to mobile facilities that export goods or services out of the region; involve tax administrators and other stakeholders in decisions to grant incentives; cooperate on economic development with other jurisdictions in the area; and be clear from the outset that not all businesses that ask for an incentive will receive one.Despite a generally poor record in promoting economic development, property tax incentives continue to be used. The goal is laudable: attracting new businesses to a jurisdiction can increase income or employment, expand the tax base, and revitalize distressed urban areas. In a best case scenario, attracting a large facility can increase worker productivity and draw related firms to the area, creating a positive feedback loop. This report offers recommendations to improve the odds of achieving these economic development goals.
States experiencing taxpayer revolts among homeowners are tempted to reduce reliance on the property tax to fund schools. But a more targeted approach can provide property tax relief and improve state funding for public education. This policy focus report includes a comprehensive review of recent research on both property tax and school funding, and summarizes case studies of seven states-- California, Massachusetts, Michigan, New Hampshire, New Jersey, Ohio and Texas. The majority of these states are heavily reliant on property tax revenues to fund schools. While there is no one-size-fits-all solution, the report recommends addressing property taxes and school funding separately.
The land value tax is the focus of this Policy Focus Report, Assessing the Theory and Practice of Land Value Taxation. A concept dating back to Henry George, the land value tax is a variant of the property tax that imposes a higher tax rate on land than on improvements, or taxes only the land value. Many other types of changes in property tax policy, such as assessment freezes or limitations, have undesirable side effects, including unequal treatment of similarly situated taxpayers and distortion of economic incentives. The land value tax can enhance both the fairness and the efficiency of property tax collection, with few undesirable effects; land is effectively in fixed supply, so an increase in the tax rate on land value will raise revenue without distorting the incentives for owners to invest in and use their land. A land value tax has also been seen as a way to combat urban sprawl by encouraging density and infill development. Authors Richard F. Dye and Richard W. England examine the experience of those who have implemented the land value tax -- more than 30 countries around the world, and in the United States, several municipalities dating back to 1913, when the Pennsylvania legislature permitted Pittsburgh and Scranton to tax land values at a higher rate than building values. A 1951 statute gave smaller Pennsylvania cities the same option to enact a two-rate property tax, a variation of the land value tax. About 15 communities currently use this type of tax program, while others tried and rescinded it. Hawaii also has experience with two-rate taxation, and Virginia and Connecticut have authorized municipalities to choose a two-rate property tax. The land value tax has been subjected to studies comparing jurisdictions with and without it, and to legal challenges. A land value tax also raises administrative issues, particularly in the area of property tax assessments. Land value taxation is an attractive alternative to the traditional property tax, especially to much more problematic types of property tax measures such as assessment limitations, the authors conclude. A land value tax is best implemented if local officials use best assessing practices to keep land and improvement values up to date; phase in dual tax rates over several years; and include a tax credit feature in those communities where land-rich but income-poor citizens might suffer from land value taxation.