DOCSLIB.ORG

Progressive Policies for Raising Municipal Revenue

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Progressive Policies for Raising Municipal Revenue Progressive Policies for Raising Municipal Revenue April 2015 A Strategy Report From This report was co-authored by Shawn Sebastian and Karl Kumodzi of the Center for Popular Democracy. Local Progress is the policy network for elected officials from cities and counties around the country united by their commitment to shared prosperity, equal justice under law, sustainable and livable cities, and good government that serves the public interest. Hand-in-hand with community-based organizations and progressive unions committed to advancing a social justice agenda, the elected officials and staff of Local Progress are building the network to facilitate a genuine “inside/outside” strategy to reforming municipal policy and politics. LocalProgress.org The Center for Popular Democracy works to create equity, opportunity, and a dynamic democracy in partnership with high-impact base- building organizations, organizing alliances, and progressive unions. CPD strengthens our collective capacity to envision and win an innovative pro- worker, pro-immigrant, racial and economic justice agenda. PopularDemocracy.org TABLE OF CONTENTS I. Executive Summary ........................................................................................................ 1 II. Introduction ................................................................................................................... 3 A. The Current Crisis .......................................................................................................................................................... 3 B. The Long History of the Municipal Revenue Crisis .......................................................................................... 3 C. Who Pays The Most ....................................................................................................................................................... 5 D. The Promise of Cities .................................................................................................................................................... 6 E. Progressive Strategies to Raise Municipal Revenue ........................................................................................ 6 III. The Role of Municipalities in Building a Progressive Taxation System: Limited Tools, but Room to Grow ....................................................................................................................... 7 A. Legal Limitations Imposed by the State ............................................................................................................... 7 B. Budget Pressures Imposed by the State ............................................................................................................... 8 C. Trends in Progressivity and Geography ............................................................................................................... 9 D. Local Electeds and Communities Must Build Effective Political Movements to Save Our Cities 12 E. Leading with Needs, then Coupling with Means ............................................................................................. 13 F. Creating a Narrative Flexible Enough to Work Across Jurisdictions ...................................................... 14 G. Policy Fixes Require a Movement ......................................................................................................................... 15 IV. Municipal Income Taxes ............................................................................................ 16 A. State-Level Progressive Taxation with Earmarks for Municipalities ..................................................... 17 B. Reforming Income Taxes Where they Exist ...................................................................................................... 18 C. Local Earned Income Tax Credit ............................................................................................................................ 19 D. Occupational Privilege Taxes/Commuter Taxes ............................................................................................. 19 E. Remove Capital Gains Tax Loopholes at the State Level ............................................................................. 20 F. Statewide Corporate Tax Reform .......................................................................................................................... 21 V. Progressive Fees for Services and Well-Structured Fines ................................................ 22 A. Conservation Pricing .................................................................................................................................................. 23 B. General Transfer Fund Agreements ..................................................................................................................... 23 C. Stormwater Drainage Fees ...................................................................................................................................... 24 D. Sidewalk Utility Fees .................................................................................................................................................. 25 E. Landlord Permit Fees and Fire Assessment fees ............................................................................................ 25 F. Waste ................................................................................................................................................................................ 26 G. Development Impact Fees ........................................................................................................................................ 26 H. Service Fees Based on Income ................................................................................................................................ 27 I. Fines Based on Income .............................................................................................................................................. 27 VI. Sales Taxes ................................................................................................................ 29 A. Exemptions for Necessities ...................................................................................................................................... 30 B. Sales Tax Credit ............................................................................................................................................................ 30 C. Apply Sin Taxes According to Price not Excise ................................................................................................ 30 D. Luxury Tax ...................................................................................................................................................................... 30 E. Transient Occupancy Tax ......................................................................................................................................... 30 F. Sales Tax For Services ................................................................................................................................................ 31 G. Sales Tax For Internet Sales .................................................................................................................................... 31 H. Earmarking Sales Tax Revenue for Progressive Purposes ......................................................................... 32 VII. Property Taxes .......................................................................................................... 33 A. The Context: Property Tax Caps or Overtaxing a Poor Base ...................................................................... 33 B. Wealth Taxes: Great in Theory, But Not Politically Realistic ..................................................................... 34 C. Eliminating Tax Breaks.............................................................................................................................................. 35 D. Property Tax Breaks Based on Income or “Circuit Breakers” ................................................................... 35 E. Homestead Exemptions ............................................................................................................................................ 36 F. Deferral Programs ....................................................................................................................................................... 36 G. Eliminating Business Improvement Districts and Special Economic Zones ....................................... 37 H. Eliminating or Reforming Tax-Increment Financing (TIFs) ...................................................................... 37 I. Payments in Lieu of Taxes (PILOTs) .................................................................................................................... 38 J. Pied-a-tierre tax ............................................................................................................................................................ 39 VIII. Regionalism: A Way Forward for St. Louis & Beyond .................................................. 40 A. Regional Governance .................................................................................................................................................. 40 B. Regional Land Use Planning .................................................................................................................................... 40
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 06Dem Internationalen Steuerwettbewerb Begegnen
    DEM INTERNATIONALEN STEUERWETTBEWERB 06BEGEGNEN I. Motivation II. Der Tax Cuts and Jobs Act und seine Auswirkungen 1. Wesentliche Elemente der Steuerreform 2. Makroökonomische Auswirkungen der Steuerreform III. Deutschland im internationalen Steuerwettbewerb 1. Gewinnsteuersätze international im Abwärtstrend 2. Diskriminierende Besteuerung von mobilen und immobilen Aktivitäten IV. Herausforderungen bei der internationalen Besteuerung 1. Prinzipien zur Festlegung der Besteuerungsrechte 2. Besteuerung der Digitalwirtschaft als Herausforderung 3. Alternative Harmonisierungsbestrebungen V. Steuerpolitische Optionen zur Förderung privater Investitionen 1. Moderate Senkung der Steuerbelastung 2. Abbau von Verzerrungen Eine andere Meinung Literatur Dem internationalen Steuerwettbewerb begegnen – Kapitel 6 DAS WICHTIGSTE IN KÜRZE Zu Beginn des Jahres 2018 wurde in den Vereinigten Staaten mit dem Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) eine umfangreiche Steuerreform umgesetzt, die zum einen die Steuersätze auf Arbeits- und Kapi- taleinkommen deutlich reduziert hat, zum anderen die Besteuerung multinationaler Unternehmen neu ordnet. Dies ist die größte Steuerreform seit dem Tax Reform Act 1986 und dürfte sich in viel- facher Hinsicht auf die Wirtschaft in den Vereinigten Staaten auswirken. Es ist eine zusätzliche Belebung des US-amerikanischen Wirtschaftswachstums zu erwarten, was wiederum das deut- sche Wirtschaftswachstum anregen dürfte. Mit Belgien, Frankreich und Italien haben Staaten mit ehemals höheren Steuersätzen als Deutsch- land ebenfalls die Steuersätze gesenkt und weitere Senkungen angekündigt. Bei den tariflichen Gewinnsteuersätzen rückt Deutschland damit allmählich wieder an die Spitze der OECD-Länder. Die Steuertarife sind jedoch nur ein Bestandteil eines Steuersystems. Die Bemessungsgrundlage, auf die der Steuersatz angewandt wird, ist gleichermaßen von Bedeutung. In diesem Kontext wird unter dem Begriff „Smart Tax Competition“ diskutiert, inwieweit steuerliche Anreize gezielt gesetzt werden können, um bestimmte, sehr mobile Aktivitäten anzuziehen.
    [Show full text]
  • The Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center Microsimulation Model: Documentation and Methodology for Version 0304
    The Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center Microsimulation Model: Documentation and Methodology for Version 0304 Jeffrey Rohaly Adam Carasso Mohammed Adeel Saleem January 10, 2005 Jeffrey Rohaly is a research associate at the Urban Institute and director of tax modeling for the Tax Policy Center. Adam Carasso is a research associate at the Urban Institute. Mohammed Adeel Saleem is a research assistant at the Urban Institute. This documentation covers version 0304 of the model, which was developed in March 2004. The authors thank Len Burman and Kim Rueben for helpful comments and suggestions and John O’Hare for providing background on statistical matching. Views expressed are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Urban Institute, the Brookings Institution, their boards, or their sponsors. Documentation and Methodology: Tax Model Version 0304 A. Introduction.................................................................................................................... 3 Overview................................................................................................................................. 3 History..................................................................................................................................... 5 B. Source Data .................................................................................................................... 7 SOI Public Use File ...............................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • A Proposal for a Simple Average-Based Progressive Taxation System
    A proposal for a simple average-based progressive taxation system DIRK-HINNERK FISCHER, Ph.D.* SIMONA FERRARO, Ph.D.* Preliminary communication** JEL: H21, H24 https://doi.org/10.3326/pse.43.2.2 * We would like to thank the participants of the FairTax special session of the conference “Enterprise and Competitive Environment 2017” for their comments on a draft of this paper. We would also like to thank Ton Notermans of Tallinn University of Technology for his advice on the paper as well as the two anonymous referees. ** Received: January 9, 2019 Accepted: April 1, 2019 Dirk-Hinnerk FISCHER Tallinn University of Technology, Akadeemia tee 3, 12611 Tallinn, Estonia e-mail: [email protected] ORCiD: 0000-0002-1040-8347 Simona FERRARO Tallinn University of Technology, Akadeemia tee 3, 12611 Tallinn, Estonia e-mail: [email protected] ORCiD: 0000-0001-5175-5348 Abstract 142 This paper is a first theoretical presentation of a simple progressive taxation sys- tem. The system is based on two adaptations of one easily calculable formula that is based on the societal average income of the previous year. The system contrib- utes to academic discussions as it is a novel approach. It is a progressive tax that 43 (2) 141-165 (2019) ECONOMICS PUBLIC does not discriminate against anyone as the progression increases continuously SECTOR and the increase in tax payment does not go beyond the additional income. The analysis in the paper shows that the core advantage of the system is its simple, transparent and adaptable mechanism. Keywords: taxation, flat tax, progressive tax, taxation efficiency 1 INTRODUCTION A DIRK PROPOSAL Complicated taxation systems do not only lead to a significant increase in admin- - HINNERK istrative costs for all parties involved, but they can also lead to unjustified tax FOR exemptions and loopholes.
    [Show full text]
  • Regressive Sin Taxes
    NBER WORKING PAPER SERIES REGRESSIVE SIN TAXES Benjamin B. Lockwood Dmitry Taubinsky Working Paper 23085 http://www.nber.org/papers/w23085 NATIONAL BUREAU OF ECONOMIC RESEARCH 1050 Massachusetts Avenue Cambridge, MA 02138 January 2017 We thank Hunt Allcott, Alan Auerbach, Raj Chetty, Stefano DellaVigna, Emmanuel Farhi, Xavier Gabaix, Nathaniel Hendren, Louis Kaplow, David Laibson, Erzo F.P. Luttmer, Matthew Rabin, Alex Rees-Jones, Emmanuel Saez, Jim Sallee, Florian Scheuer, Stefanie Stantcheva, Matthew Weinzierl, and participants at seminars and conferences for helpful comments and discussions. The views expressed herein are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Bureau of Economic Research. NBER working papers are circulated for discussion and comment purposes. They have not been peer- reviewed or been subject to the review by the NBER Board of Directors that accompanies official NBER publications. © 2017 by Benjamin B. Lockwood and Dmitry Taubinsky. All rights reserved. Short sections of text, not to exceed two paragraphs, may be quoted without explicit permission provided that full credit, including © notice, is given to the source. Regressive Sin Taxes Benjamin B. Lockwood and Dmitry Taubinsky NBER Working Paper No. 23085 January 2017 JEL No. H0,I18,I3,K32,K34 ABSTRACT A common objection to “sin taxes”—corrective taxes on goods like cigarettes, alcohol, and sugary drinks, which are believed to be over-consumed—is that they fall disproportionately on low-income consumers. This paper studies the interaction between corrective and redistributive motives in a general optimal taxation framework. On the one hand, redistributive concerns amplify the corrective benefits of a sin tax when sin good consumption is concentrated on the poor, even when bias and demand elasticities are constant across incomes.
    [Show full text]
  • Tax Reform in Oregon
    Portland State University PDXScholar City Club of Portland Oregon Sustainable Community Digital Library 4-19-2002 Tax Reform in Oregon City Club of Portland (Portland, Or.) Follow this and additional works at: https://pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu/oscdl_cityclub Part of the Urban Studies Commons, and the Urban Studies and Planning Commons Let us know how access to this document benefits ou.y Recommended Citation City Club of Portland (Portland, Or.), "Tax Reform in Oregon" (2002). City Club of Portland. 507. https://pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu/oscdl_cityclub/507 This Report is brought to you for free and open access. It has been accepted for inclusion in City Club of Portland by an authorized administrator of PDXScholar. Please contact us if we can make this document more accessible: [email protected]. The City Club of Portland Tax Reform Task Force Presents Its Report : TAX REFORM IN OREGON The City Club membership will vote on this report on Friday, April 19, 2002. Until the membership vote, the City Club of Portland does not have an official position on this report. The outcome of this vote will be reported in the City Club Bulletin dated May 3, 2002. The City Club of Portland Mission To inform its members and the community in public matters and to arouse in them a realization of the obligations of citizenship. Layout and design: Stephanie D. Stephens Printing: Ron Laster, Print Results Copyright (c) City Club of Portland, 2002. TAX REFORM IN OREGON EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Oregon's state and local tax system is precariously unbalanced, not well structured to assure sufficient revenue to meet costs of public services approved by law.
    [Show full text]
  • Keeping the Government Whole: the Impact of a Cap-And-Dividend
    RESEARCH INSTITUTE POLITICAL ECONOMY Keeping the Government Whole: The Impact of a Cap-and-Dividend Policy for Curbing Global Warming on Government Revenue and Expenditure James K. Boyce & Matthew Riddle November 2008 Gordon Hall 418 North Pleasant Street Amherst, MA 01002 Phone: 413.545.6355 Fax: 413.577.0261 [email protected] www.peri.umass.edu WORKINGPAPER SERIES Number 188 KEEPING THE GOVERNMEGOVERNMENTNT WHOLE: The Impact of a CapCap----andandand----DividendDividend Policy for Curbing Global Warming on Government Revenue and Expenditure James K. Boyce & Matthew Riddle Political Economy Research Institute University of Massachusetts, Amherst November 2008 ABSTRACT When the United States puts a cap on carbon sure that additional revenues to government emissions as part of the effort to address the compensate adequately for the additional costs problem of global climate change, this will in- to government as a result of the carbon cap. We crease the prices of fossil fuels, significantly compare the distributional impacts of two policy impacting not only consumers but also local, alternatives: (i) setting aside a portion of the state, and federal governments. Consumers can revenue from carbon permit auctions for gov- be “made whole,” in the sense that whatever ernment, and distributing the remainder of the amount the public pays in higher fuel prices is revenue to the public in the form of tax-free recycled to the public, by means of a cap-and- dividends; or (ii) distributing all of the carbon dividend policy: individual households will come revenue to households as taxable dividends. out ahead or behind in monetary terms depend- The policy of recycling 100% of carbon revenue ing on whether they consume above-average or to the public as taxable dividends has the below-average amounts of carbon.
    [Show full text]
  • A Study and Comparison of the Consumption Basis of Taxation
    W&M ScholarWorks Dissertations, Theses, and Masters Projects Theses, Dissertations, & Master Projects 1964 A Study and Comparison of the Consumption Basis of Taxation Douglas Wayne Blevins College of William & Mary - Arts & Sciences Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.wm.edu/etd Part of the Finance Commons Recommended Citation Blevins, Douglas Wayne, "A Study and Comparison of the Consumption Basis of Taxation" (1964). Dissertations, Theses, and Masters Projects. Paper 1539624554. https://dx.doi.org/doi:10.21220/s2-n8af-t738 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Theses, Dissertations, & Master Projects at W&M ScholarWorks. It has been accepted for inclusion in Dissertations, Theses, and Masters Projects by an authorized administrator of W&M ScholarWorks. For more information, please contact [email protected]. A STUDY AND COMPARISON OF THE CONSUMPTION BASIS OF TAXATION 1 FOREWORD This treatise is a study and comparison ©f the three measures of economic well-being and their use as bases far financing govern­ ment. Particular emphasis is given to the study ©f the consumption basis ef taxation. Submitted in compliance with the requirements for the Master ef Arts degree in Taxation. Douglas W. Blevins 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS Foreword Part I. Introduction. A. Sources of Revenue. B. Principles ef taxation. 1. Canons ef Adam Smith. 2* Characteristics ef tax systems. % Economic effects. 4. E quity. 5. Compliance. 6. Shifting and incidence. Part II. Measures ef Economic Well-Being. A. Current income as a measure. 1. Income. 2. Definition ef income. a. The economic definition. b. The tax definition.
    [Show full text]
  • Master 202 Property Profile with Council Member District Final For
    NYC HUD 202 Affordable Senior Housing Buildings Affordable Senior Housing Property Address Borough Total Building Council District Council Member Name Name Units Open Door Senior Citizens Apartment 50 NORFOLK STREET MN 156 1 Margaret Chin Chung Pak 125 WALKER STREET MN 104 1 Margaret Chin St. Margarets House 49 FULTON STREET MN 254 1 Margaret Chin Bridge House VI 323 EAST HOUSTON STREET MN 17 1 Margaret Chin David Podell 179 HENRY STREET MN 51 1 Margaret Chin Nysd Forsyth St Ii 184 FORSYTH STREET MN 21 1 Margaret Chin Ridge Street Housing 80 RIDGE STREET MN 100 1 Margaret Chin Tanya Towers II 174 FORSYTH STREET MN 40 1 Margaret Chin Two Bridges Senior Apartments 80 RUTGERS SLIP MN 109 1 Margaret Chin Ujc Bialystoker Synagogue Houses 16 BIALYSTOKER PLACE MN 128 1 Margaret Chin Independence House 165 EAST 2 STREET MN 21 2 Rosie Mendez Cooper Square Elderly Housing 1 COOPER SQUARE MN 151 2 Rosie Mendez Access House 220 EAST 7 STREET MN 5 2 Rosie Mendez Alliance Apts For The Elderly 174 AVENUE A MN 46 2 Rosie Mendez Bridge House IV 538 EAST 6 STREET MN 18 2 Rosie Mendez Bridge House V 234 EAST 2 STREET MN 15 2 Rosie Mendez Casa Victoria Housing For The Elderly 308 EAST 8 STREET MN 80 2 Rosie Mendez Dona Petra Santiago Check Address 143 AVENUE C MN 57 2 Rosie Mendez Grand Street Senior Housing 709 EAST 6 STREET MN 78 2 Rosie Mendez Positively 3Rd Street 306 EAST 3 STREET MN 53 2 Rosie Mendez Cabrini Senior Housing 220 EAST 19 STREET MN 12 2 Rosie Mendez Renwick Gardens Apts 332 EAST 28 STREET MN 224 2 Rosie Mendez Securitad I 451 3 AVENUE MN 15 2 Rosie Mendez Postgraduate Center Residence 516 WEST 50 STREET MN 22 3 Corey Johnson Associated Blind 137 WEST 23 STREET MN 210 3 Corey Johnson Clinton Gardens 404 WEST 54 STREET MN 99 3 Corey Johnson Encore West Residence 755 10 AVENUE MN 85 3 Corey Johnson Fountain House 441 WEST 47 STREET MN 21 3 Corey Johnson Capitol Apartments 834 8 AVENUE MN 285 3 Corey Johnson Yorkville Gardens 225 EAST 93 STREET MN 133 4 Daniel R.
    [Show full text]
  • BROKEN PROMISES: Continuing Federal Funding Shortfall for Native Americans
    U.S. COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS BROKEN PROMISES: Continuing Federal Funding Shortfall for Native Americans BRIEFING REPORT U.S. COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS Washington, DC 20425 Official Business DECEMBER 2018 Penalty for Private Use $300 Visit us on the Web: www.usccr.gov U.S. COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION The U.S. Commission on Civil Rights is an independent, Catherine E. Lhamon, Chairperson bipartisan agency established by Congress in 1957. It is Patricia Timmons-Goodson, Vice Chairperson directed to: Debo P. Adegbile Gail L. Heriot • Investigate complaints alleging that citizens are Peter N. Kirsanow being deprived of their right to vote by reason of their David Kladney race, color, religion, sex, age, disability, or national Karen Narasaki origin, or by reason of fraudulent practices. Michael Yaki • Study and collect information relating to discrimination or a denial of equal protection of the laws under the Constitution Mauro Morales, Staff Director because of race, color, religion, sex, age, disability, or national origin, or in the administration of justice. • Appraise federal laws and policies with respect to U.S. Commission on Civil Rights discrimination or denial of equal protection of the laws 1331 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW because of race, color, religion, sex, age, disability, or Washington, DC 20425 national origin, or in the administration of justice. (202) 376-8128 voice • Serve as a national clearinghouse for information TTY Relay: 711 in respect to discrimination or denial of equal protection of the laws because of race, color, www.usccr.gov religion, sex, age, disability, or national origin. • Submit reports, findings, and recommendations to the President and Congress.
    [Show full text]
  • Historical Tax Law Changes Luxury Tax on Liquor
    Historical Tax Law Changes Luxury Tax on Liquor Laws 1933, 1st Special Session, Chapter 18 levied the first Arizona state Luxury Tax on Liquor. The tax rates established by this law are shown below: 10¢ on each 16 ounces, or fractional part thereof, for malt extracts 10¢ on each container of spirituous liquor containing 16 ounces or less 10¢ on each 16 ounces of spirituous liquor in containers of more than 16 ounces 3¢ on each container of vinous liquor containing 16 ounces or less 3¢ on each 16 ounces of vinous liquor in containers of more than 16 ounces 5¢ on each gallon of malt liquor The tax was paid by the purchase of stamps affixed to each container of liquor and malt extract and canceled prior to sale. Taxes were payable to the State Tax Commission, prior to or at the time of the sale of the product. Of the total receipts collected, 96% was dedicated to the Board of Public Welfare and the remaining 4% was appropriated for the use of the State Tax Commission. The tax was a temporary tax and expired on March 1, 1935. (Effective June 28, 1933) Laws 1935, Chapter 14 extended the provisions of Laws 1933, 1st Special Session, Chapter 18 to May 1, 1935. (Effective February 20, 1935) Laws 1935, Chapter 78 permanently enacted the provisions of Laws 1933, 1st Special Session, Chapter 18, with respect to the Luxury tax on Liquor. The tax rates levied on containers of spirituous liquor and vinous liquor were replaced with the rates shown below: 5¢ on each container of spirituous liquor containing 8 ounces or less 5¢ on each 8 ounces of spirituous
    [Show full text]
  • Disabled Students Letter to Mayor
    THE LEGISLATURE STATE OF NEW YORK ALBANY January 14, 2021 Honorable Bill de Blasio Mayor of the City of New York City Hall, New York, NY 10007 Dear Mayor de Blasio: In these diffiCult times, we applaud you and the Chancellor for starting the hard work of developing a proaCtive plan to Close the “COVID aChievement gap” experienced by many students throughout the City. We reCognize that the details of this plan are still being determined. We write today to make several recommendations for you to consider as you work to address both the achievement gap in academic, social and physical skill areas and the regression of life among the approximately 200,000 students with Individualized Education Programs (IEPs). Unlike other students, this population of Children may never catch up on what was lost during the days of remote learning. With regard to the effort to provide families the option of blended or remote instruction models, appropriate staffing has beCome a Challenge, partiCularly for students with IEPs. This has been detailed in the press and in testimony from parents and other stakeholders at the joint Committee hearing of the New York City Council on the reopening of sChools (10/23/20). Additionally, parent-led advocaCy Consulting group, SpeCial Support ServiCes reCently released a report that surveyed 1,100 parents whose Children require speCial education serviCes during the initial sChools reopening, OCtober 7-26. In this report, parents desCribed numerous ways in whiCh IEP serviCes were not provided or partially provided. The following issues were identified: 1. Large Classes and Less Staffing have caused Integrated Co-Teaching Service to be Delivered Poorly: 1 ● Large sizes are over the UFT ContraCtual limit: Highest reported Blended remote ICT had 80 students.
    [Show full text]
  • ACEA Tax Guide 2018.Pdf
    2018 WWW.ACEA.BE Foreword The 2018 edition of the European Automobile Manufacturers’ Association’s annual Tax Guide provides an overview of specific taxes that are levied on motor vehicles in European countries, as well as in other key markets around the world. This comprehensive guide counts more than 300 pages, making it an indispensable tool for anyone interested in the European automotive industry and relevant policies. The 2018 Tax Guide contains all the latest information about taxes on vehicle acquisition (VAT, sales tax, registration tax), taxes on vehicle ownership (annual circulation tax, road tax) and taxes on motoring (fuel tax). Besides the 28 member states of the European Union, as well as the EFTA countries (Iceland, Norway and Switzerland), this Tax Guide also covers countries such as Brazil, China, India, Japan, Russia, South Korea, Turkey and the United States. The Tax Guide is compiled with the help of the national associations of motor vehicle manufacturers in all these countries. I would like to extend our sincere gratitude to all involved for making the latest information available for this publication. Erik Jonnaert ACEA Secretary General Copyright Reproduction of the content of this document is not permitted without the prior written consent of ACEA. Whenever reproduction is permitted, ACEA shall be referred to as source of the information. Summary EU member countries 5 EFTA 245 Other countries 254 EU member states EU summary tables 5 Austria 10 Belgium 19 Bulgaria 42 Croatia 48 Cyprus 52 Czech Republic 55 Denmark 65 Estonia 79 Finland 82 France 88 Germany 100 Greece 108 Hungary 119 Ireland 125 Italy 137 Latvia 148 Lithuania 154 Luxembourg 158 Malta 168 Netherlands 171 Poland 179 Portugal 184 Romania 194 Slovakia 198 Slovenia 211 Spain 215 Sweden 224 United Kingdom 234 01 EU summary tables Chapter prepared by Francesca Piazza [email protected] ACEA European Automobile Manufacturers’ Association Avenue des Nerviens 85 B — 1040 Brussels T.
    [Show full text]