Impact fees and new housing cost: A comparative analysis of the empirical models

Developers and policy makers are consistently at odds over the debate as to whether impact fees increase house prices. This debate continues despite the extensive body of theoretical and empirical international literature that discusses the passing on to home buyers of impact fees, and the corresponding increase to housing prices. In attempting to quantify this impact, over a dozen empirical studies have been carried out in the US and Canada since the 1980’s. However the methodologies used vary greatly, as do the results. Despite similar infrastructure funding policies in numerous developed countries, no such empirical works exist outside of the US/Canada. The purpose of this research is to analyse the existing econometric models in order to identify, compare and contrast the theoretical bases, methodologies, key assumptions and findings of each. This research will assist in identifying if further model development is required and/or whether any of these models have external validity and are readily transferable outside of the US. The findings conclude that there is very little explicit rationale behind the various model selections and that significant model deficiencies appear still to exist.

Australia and its impact fees

Australia is a country, which has much of its legislative roots in its Commonwealth heritage. However due to its size and nature, its planning and development processes are more aligned to countries such as the United States. This paper will present an overview of the Australian urban land market, its infrastructure funding mechanisms (property taxes) and current provisions in each of Australia’s seven States and Territories that provide for developer contributions for local infrastructure (impact fees).

Data requirements of hedonic models in determining the impact of infrastructure charges on new housing costs

The use of hedonic models to estimate the effects of various factors on house prices is well established. This paper examines a number of international hedonic house price models that seek to quantify the effect of infrastructure charges on new house prices. This work is an important factor in the housing affordability debate, with many governments in high growth areas having user-pays infrastructure charging policies operating in tandem with housing affordability objectives, with no empirical evidence on the impact of one on the other. This research finds there is little consistency between existing models and the data sets utilised. Specification appears dependent upon data availability rather than sound theoretical grounding. This may lead to a lack of external validity with model specification dependent upon data availability rather than sound theoretical grounding.

The impact of infrastructure charges on house prices in Australia

Developer paid fees or charges are a commonly used mechanism for local governments to pay for new infrastructure. However, property developers claim that these costs are merely passed on to home buyers, with adverse effects to housing affordability. Despite numerous government reports and many years of industry advocacy, there remains no empirical evidence in Australia to confirm or quantify this passing on effect to home buyers. Hence there remains no data from which governments can base policy decision on, and the debate continues. This paper examines the question of the impact of infrastructure charges on housing affordability in Australia. It presents the findings of a hedonic house price model that provides the first empirical evidence that infrastructure charges do increase house prices in Australia. This research is consistent with international findings, that support the proposition that developer paid infrastructure charges are passed on to home buyers and are a significant contributor to increasing house prices and reduced housing affordability.

Who really pays for urban infrastructure? : the impact of developer infrastructure charges on housing affordability in Brisbane, Australia

This thesis advances the understanding of the impact of developer infrastructure charges on housing affordability in Brisbane, Australia through the development of an econometric model and empirical analysis. The results indicate substantial on-passing of these government charges to purchasers of both new and existing homes, thus negatively impacting housing affordability across the whole community. The results of this thesis will inform policy makers and assist in the development of evidence based policy related to housing affordability and funding of urban infrastructure. Being generic, the econometric model is expected to be a tool that is suitable for estimating similar house price effects in other housing markets.

Infrastructure charges and increases to new house prices : a preliminary analysis of the US empirical models

Sourcing appropriate funding for the provision of new urban infrastructure has been a policy dilemma for governments around the world for decades. This is particularly relevant in high growth areas where new services are required to support swelling populations. The Australian infrastructure funding policy dilemmas are reflective of similar matters in many countries, particularly the United States of America, where infrastructure cost recovery policies have been in place since the 1970’s. There is an extensive body of both theoretical and empirical literature from these countries that discusses the passing on (to home buyers) of these infrastructure charges, and the corresponding impact on housing prices. The theoretical evidence is consistent in its findings that infrastructure charges are passed on to home buyers by way of higher house prices. The empirical evidence is also consistent in its findings, with “overshifting” of these charges evident in all models since the 1980’s, i.e. $1 infrastructure charge results in greater than $1 increase in house prices. However, despite over a dozen separate studies over two decades in the US on this topic, no empirical works have been carried out in Australia to test if similar shifting or overshifting occurs here. The purpose of this research is to conduct a preliminary analysis of the more recent models used in these US empirical studies in order to identify the key study area selection criteria and success factors. The paper concludes that many of the study area selection criteria are implicit rather than explicit. By collecting data across the models, some implicit criteria become apparent, whilst others remain elusive. This data will inform future research on whether an existing model can be adopted or adapted for use in Australia.

The link between infrastructure charges and housing affordability in Australia: Where is the empirical evidence?

Developer paid charges or contributions are a commonly used infrastructure funding mechanism for local governments. However, developers claim that these costs are merely passed on to home buyers, with adverse effects to housing affordability. Despite a plethora of government reports and industry advocacy, there remains no empirical evidence in Australia to confirm or quantify this passing on effect to home buyers and hence no data for which governments to base policy decision upon. This paper examines the question of who really pays for urban infrastructure and the impact of infrastructure charges on housing affordability. It presents the findings of a number of international empirical studies that provide evidence that infrastructure charges do increase house prices. Based on international findings, and in the absence of any Australian research, then these findings suggest that if the international findings are transferable, then there is empirical evidence to support the proposition that developer paid infrastructure charges are a significant contributor to increasing house prices.

Developer charges and housing affordabilty in Brisbane, Australia

Purpose - This paper empirically examines the effect of developer charges on housing affordability in Brisbane, Australia. Developer paid fees or charges are a commonly used mechanism for local governments to pay for new urban infrastructure. Despite numerous government reports and many years of industry advocacy, there remains no empirical evidence in Australia to confirm or quantify passing on of these charges to home buyers. Design/methodology/approach - This research applies a hedonic house price model to 4,699 new and 25,053 existing house sales in Brisbane from 2005 to 2011. Findings – The findings of is research are consistent with international studies that support the proposition that developer charges are over passed. This study has provided evidence that suggest developer charges are over passed to both new and existing homes in the order of around 400%. Research limitations/implications - These findings suggest that developer charges are thus a significant contributor to increasing house prices and reduced housing affordability. Practical/Social Implications: By testing this effect on both new and existing homes, this research provides evidence in support of the proposition that not only are developer charges over passed to new home buyers but also to buyers of existing homes. Thus the price inflationary effect of these developer charges are being felt by all home buyers across the community, resulting in increased mortgage repayments of close to $1000 per month. Originality/value - This is the first study to empirically examine the impact of developer charges on house prices in Australia. These results are important as they will inform governments on the outcomes of growth management strategies on housing affordability, providing the first evidence of its kind in Australia.

Infrastructure charges and residential land prices in Brisbane, Australia

This paper examines the question of whether the imposition of developer infrastructure charges on housing developers affects the price of residential land. Developer paid fees or charges are a commonly used mechanism for local governments to fund new infrastructure as a “user pays” method of funding new urban infrastructure. Some argue these costs are passed back to the original land owner by way of lower land prices. However, property developers claim these charges are added on to new land prices, with flow on negative impact to housing affordability. This paper presents the findings of a hedonic land price model that provides the first empirical evidence that infrastructure charges do increase residential land prices in Brisbane, Australia. This research is consistent with international findings and supports the proposition that developer paid infrastructure charges are over-passed to home buyers and are a significant contributor to reduced housing affordability.

Estimating the potential impact of entry fees for marine parks on dive tourism in South East Asia

Marine reserves are increasingly being established as a mechanism to protect marine biodiversity and sensitive habitats. As well as providing conservation benefits, marine reserves provide benefits to recreational scuba divers who dive within the reserve, as well as to recreational and commercial fishers outside the reserve through spill-over effects. To ensure benefits are being realised, management of marine reserves requires ongoing monitoring and surveillance. These are not costless, and many marine reserve managers impose an entry fee. In some countries, dive tourism is major income source to coastal industries, and a concern is that high entry fees may dissuade divers. In this paper, the price elasticity of demand for dive tourism in three countries in South East Asia – Indonesia, Thailand and Malaysia – is estimated using a travel-cost model. From the model, the total non-market use value associated with diving in the area is estimated to be in the order of US$4.5 billion a year. The price elasticity of demand in the region is highly inelastic, such that increasing the cost of diving through a management levy would have little impact on total diver numbers.

The impact of tenure type on the desire for retirement village living

In 2005 17.3% of Australians were aged 60 years and older (Australian Bureau of Statistics). A consequence of this aging population is the increased use of self-contained independent living units (SCILU) in Retirement Villages by older Australians. The retirement village sector has thus become a significant sector within the residential property market. In seeking to determine the impact of tenure type on the desirability of RV living this paper first profiles a typical SCILU in Australia, before explaining and examining the various tenure types offered by the market. This paper concludes that the multiplicity of offerings of the SCILU product with respect to tenure type, when combined with deferred management fees and participation in capital gains/losses, may be contributing to a lack of clarity in what the SCILU product entails and the security of investment it offers. This perception is supported by litigated disputes and may be damaging the reputation, ongoing viability and desirability of SCILUs.

Do the best scholars attract the highest speaking fees? An exploration of internal and external influence

This study investigates whether academics can capitalize on their external prominence (measured by the number of pages indexed on Google, TED talk invitations or New York Times bestselling book successes) and internal success within academia (measured by publication and citation performance) in the speakers’ market. The results indicate that the larger the number of web pages indexing a particular scholar, the higher the minimum speaking fee. Invitations to speak at a TED event, or making the New York Times Best Seller list is also positively correlated with speaking fees. Scholars with a stronger internal impact or success also achieve higher speaking fees. However, once external impact is controlled, most metrics used to measure internal impact are no longer statistically significant.

The effect of governance mechanism and structure on fees and performance of Mutual Funds in Canada

Taking advantage of the unique Canadian setting, this study empirically analyzes the impact of presence of the board of directors, as an internal governance mechanism, on fees and performance of mutual funds. Further, the impact of the board structure on fees and performance of corporate class funds is analyzed. We find that corporate class funds, which have a separate board of directors for the fund, charge higher fees; however, they also provide superior performance than trust funds. Furthermore, we find that for corporate class funds, smaller board, with higher percentage of independent directors, and with the fund CEO acting as the chairman of the board is likely to charge lower fees. Also, more independent boards are strongly associated with superior fee-adjusted performance.

The Impact of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act on the Cost of Going Public

This paper examines the impact of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (SOX), a legal framework intended to increase transparency and accountability of listed companies, on the cost of going public in the US. We expect SOX to increase the direct cost of going public, but decrease the underpricing because of reduced asymmetric information. Our main results corroborate these hypotheses. First, we find an increase in the cost of going public of 90 bp of gross proceeds. Second, we record a reduction in underpricing of 6 pp, which is related to a reduced offer price adjustment. This supports our hypothesis that SOX represents a mechanism to reduce asymmetric information.

Rangeland reform '94 : draft environmental impact statement : executive summary /

"This document summarizes the impacts of five management alternatives and seven alternative fee formulas analyzed in the Draft EIS, including a summary of impacts"--Transmittal letter.