==================== HES POSTING ===================== 
EH.NET BOOK REVIEW 
 
Published by EH.NET (June 1997) 
 
Glenn W. Fisher, _The Worst Tax?  A History of the Property Tax in 
America_.  Lawrence, KS: University Press of Kansas, 1996.  x + 244 pp.  
$35.00 (cloth), ISBN: 0700607536 
 
Reviewed for EH.NET by John Joseph Wallis, Department of Economics, 
University of Maryland.  <[log in to unmask]> 
 
 
        From the question mark in the title one might expect that this 
book would try to answer the question: is the property tax a good or a bad 
tax?  And from the remainder of the title one might expect a general 
history of the property tax throughout the nation and throughout the 
nation's history.  This very interesting book does not deliver on either 
of the implicit promises in its title, but it is worth a closer look in 
any event.  
 
        Fisher begins with a general discussion of the property tax and 
fiscal policy in late 18th and early 19th century America.  The focus then 
shifts to Kansas.  An intensive study of the property tax in Kansas makes 
up the bulk of the book.  In the last chapter and conclusion, the 
discussion shifts back to more general questions and a wider focus.  
 
        It is hard to fault the approach, however, since there is no 
"American property tax," there are only property taxes in the individual 
states and, as Fisher makes clear, there are really thousands of local 
property taxes administered under an umbrella of state supervision.  The 
nature of state administration varies widely from state to state and over 
time.  Making generalizations is, as a result, a hazardous business.  
 
        Fisher focuses on the implication of two common changes in the 
property tax structure in the middle part of the 19th century, and, by 
example, how those changes played out in Kansas.  These are constitutional 
or legislative provisions mandating uniformity and universality in 
property taxation.  Uniformity means that all property that is liable to 
the tax is taxed at a uniform rate.  Universality means that all valuable 
property in the state is subject to taxation.  Uniformity combined with 
universality implies that all property in a state, tangible and 
intangible, land, buildings, inventories, animals, equipment, etc. must be 
assessed and taxed at the same rate.  
 
        Uniformity and universality are important both as a reflection of 
the political climate of the mid-19th century, and for the confusion and 
difficulties they ultimately created in the administration of the property 
tax.  After the debt crisis of the early 1840s, when state governments 
began moving toward rather than away from the property tax as their main 
source of revenue, the property tax became the fiscal mainstay of both 
state and local governments.  It was at that point that uniformity and 
universality provisions were widely enacted as reform measures.  The 
essential idea behind them was that the wealthy and the privileged escaped 
property taxation through unfair assessment (uniformity) and their ability 
to transform their wealth into untaxed assets (universality). 
 
        The reforms opened up another can of worms, perhaps one bigger 
than the universe.  For uniformity and universality to work, there had to 
be a system of state-wide assessment on all property.  In most states, 
assessment was a function of local governments with some state cooperation 
and supervision.  Full implementation of the reforms would have required 
complete centralization of the revenue system at the state level, which 
nobody wanted.  This federalism issue was further complicated by the 
intractable difficulties in assessing many types of intangible property.  
 
        Ultimately, the general uniform and universal property tax was 
replaced by a more specific and well defined property tax, which in most 
states became a tax on real estate.  The real estate tax was easier to 
define and administer and easier to equalize across local governments, 
although it is still plagued with problems of assessment.  The change 
occurred in the 20th century at the same time that state governments were 
moving away from property taxes towards sales and income taxes.  The shift 
was underway before the 1930s, picked up speed during the depression, and 
was complete by the middle years of the 20th century.  Today, state 
governments collect a very small share of property taxes and property 
taxes are a very small share of total state revenues. 
 
        Fisher's study illuminates clearly how these forces were at work 
in Kansas.  Whether Kansas accurately mirrors what happened in other 
states it unclear.  This book makes an important step in the right 
direction.  It awaits another 40 or so similar studies on property 
taxation in other states. 
 
John Joseph Wallis 
Department of Economics 
University of Maryland 
         
John Wallis is a student of the history of America.  Recent publications 
include (with Jac Heckelman) "Railroads and Property Taxes," _Explorations 
in Economic History_, 34 (1), January 1997; "The Impact of the New Deal on 
American Federalism," (with Wallace Oates), forthcoming in _The Defining 
Moment_, Michael Bordo, Claudia Goldin, and Eugene White, editors, NBER, 
University of Chicago Press; "Early American Federalism and Economic 
Development, 1790-1840," _ Public Finance and Environmental Economics: 
Essays in Honor of Wallace E. Oates_, Robert Schwab, editor, forthcoming, 
Edward Elgar. 
 
Copyright (c) 1997 by EH.Net and H-Net, all rights reserved.  This work 
may be copied for non-profit educational use if proper credit is given to 
the author and the list.  For other permission, please contact 
[log in to unmask] (Robert Whaples, Book Review Editor, EH.Net. 
Telephone: 910-759-4916. Fax: 910-759-6028.) 
 
============ FOOTER TO HES POSTING ============ 
For information, send the message "info HES" to [log in to unmask]