Was Proposition 4 Really a Tax Reduction Mirage? A Correction and Reinterpretation of Earlier Findings

Cebula, Richard (1985): Was Proposition 4 Really a Tax Reduction Mirage? A Correction and Reinterpretation of Earlier Findings. Published in: The Americam Journal of Economics and Sociology , Vol. 46, No. 1 (30 January 1987): pp. 107-108.

Abstract

An earlier study published in this Journal by Cebula and Chevlin finds that the passage of a tax-expenditure limitation (TEL) statute in all of the 50 states would not have resulted in a reduction in the per capita levels of both spending and taxes. The present study takes issue with this finding. In particular, using the same data as Cebula and Chevlin, it is demonstrated here that, by applying the formula for statistically significant means, the existence of Proposition 4 or its equivalent in each of the 50 states would have, in theory, resulted in a statistically significant reduction in both per capita nominal state plus local government spending and taxes.

• Item Type: MPRA Paper
• Language: English
• Keywords: public spending; tax burdens; Proposition 4; tax-expenditure limitation legislation
• Subjects: H - Public Economics > H2 - Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue > H24 - Personal Income and Other Nonbusiness Taxes and Subsidies; H - Public Economics > H7 - State and Local Government ; Intergovernmental Relations > H71 - State and Local Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue; H - Public Economics > H7 - State and Local Government ; Intergovernmental Relations > H72 - State and Local Budget and Expenditures

References

Cebula, R.J. and L. Chevlin, 1981, "Proposition 4, Tax Reduction Mirage: An Exploratory Note on Its Potential Spending and Tax Impacts," The American Journal of Economics and Sociology, Vol. 40, No. 4, pp. 343-348.

Cebula, R.J. and L. Chevlin, 1983, "Reply," The American Journal of Economics and Sociology, Vol. 42, No. 1, pp. 122-124.