Payments in Lieu of Taxes

Payments in Lieu of Taxes

Author: Dayton Hall

Publisher:

Published: 2013

Total Pages: 0

ISBN-13:

DOWNLOAD EBOOK

The federal government makes Payments in Lieu of Taxes (“PILT”) to local governments to help ease the tax burden of federal ownership of land. Because federally owned land is nontaxable, PILT payments are intended to compensate local governments for losses in property taxes due to federal ownership of land within local governments' boundaries. This Article explains the history and application of the PILT program, analyzes the equity and efficiency of the legislation, concludes that certain aspects of the PILT Act are both inequitable and inefficient, and proposes appropriate revisions. Specifically, this Article concludes and proposes the following: (1) shifting to a tax equivalency payment system based on states' property valuation laws would be too complicated and inefficient, despite the benefit that such a program would provide more consistent, foreseeable payments to local governments; (2) PILT payments unjustifiably discriminate against less populated counties that contain substantial federal acreage, so the PILT calculation method should be revised to remedy this discrimination; (3) PILT distribution methods creates an inefficient incentive for states to form alternative political subdivisions to maximize payments, so this incentive should be eliminated; and (4) Congress must find a long-term funding solution so that local governments can rely on PILT payments in their long-term planning endeavors.


Payments in Lieu of Taxes

Payments in Lieu of Taxes

Author: Daphne A. Kenyon

Publisher:

Published: 2010

Total Pages: 0

ISBN-13: 9781558442160

DOWNLOAD EBOOK

Charitable nonprofit organizations, including private universities, nonprofit hospitals, museums, soup kitchens, churches, and retirement homes, are exempt from property taxation in all 50 states. At the same time, these nonprofits impose a cost on municipalities by consuming public services, such as police protection and roads. Payments in lieu of taxes (PILOTs) are payments made voluntarily by these nonprofits as a substitute for property taxes. In recent years, municipal revenue pressures have led to heightened interest in PILOTs, and over the last decade they have been used in at least 117 municipalities in at least 18 states. Large cities collecting PILOTs include Baltimore, Boston, Philadelphia, and Pittsburgh. Boston has one of the longest standing and the most revenue productive PILOT program in the United States. PILOTs are a tool to address two problems with the property tax exemption provided to nonprofits. First, the exemption is poorly targeted, since it mainly benefits nonprofits with the most valuable property holdings, rather than those providing the greatest public benefit. Second, a geographic mismatch often exists between the costs and benefits of the property tax exemption, since the cost of the exemption in terms of forgone tax revenue is borne by the municipality in which a nonprofit is located, but the public benefits provided by the nonprofit often extend to the rest of the state or even the whole nation. PILOTs can provide crucial revenue for certain municipalities, and are one way to make nonprofits pay for the public services they consume. However, PILOTs are often haphazard, secretive, and calculated in an ad hoc manner that results in widely varying payments among similar nonprofits. In addition, a municipality's attempt to collect PILOTs can prompt a battle with nonprofits and lead to years of contentious, costly, and unproductive litigation. For this policy focus report, authors Daphne A. Kenyon and Adam H. Langley have researched the continuing policy debate over property tax exemptions among municipalities and nonprofit organizations, and they offer the following recommendations. PILOTs are one revenue option for municipalities. They are most appropriate for municipalities that are highly reliant on the property tax and have a significant share of total property owned by nonprofits. For example, a Minnesota study found that while PILOTs could increase property tax revenue by more than ten percent in six municipalities, there was negligible revenue potential from PILOTs for the vast majority of Minnesota cities and towns. Similarly, PILOTs are not appropriate for all types of nonprofits. PILOTs are most suitable for nonprofits that own large amounts of tax-exempt property and provide modest benefits to local residents relative to their tax savings. Municipalities should work collaboratively with nonprofits when seeking PILOTs. The best PILOT initiatives arise out of a partnership between the municipality and local nonprofit organizations, because both sectors serve the general public and have an interest in an economically and fiscally healthy community. In some cities, case-by-case negotiation with one or several nonprofits is best, as is the case between Yale University and New Haven. In cities with a large number of nonprofits, such as Boston, creating a systematic PILOT program can promote horizontal equity among tax-exempt nonprofits and raise more revenue than negotiating individual agreements.


Payments in Lieu of Taxes

Payments in Lieu of Taxes

Author: United States. Congress. House. Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs. Subcommittee on Energy and the Environment

Publisher:

Published: 1976

Total Pages: 344

ISBN-13:

DOWNLOAD EBOOK


A Good Tax

A Good Tax

Author: Joan Youngman

Publisher:

Published: 2016

Total Pages: 260

ISBN-13: 9781558443426

DOWNLOAD EBOOK

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.


PILT (Payments in Lieu of Taxes): Somewhat Simplified

PILT (Payments in Lieu of Taxes): Somewhat Simplified

Author: Congressional Research Congressional Research Service

Publisher: CreateSpace

Published: 2014-12-10

Total Pages: 28

ISBN-13: 9781505589153

DOWNLOAD EBOOK

Under federal law, local governments (usually counties) are compensated through various programs for reductions to their property tax bases due to the presence of most federally owned land. These lands cannot be taxed, but may create a demand for services such as fire protection, police cooperation, or longer roads to skirt the federal property. Some compensation programs are run by specific agencies and apply only to that agency's land. The most widely applicable program, administered by the Department of the Interior (DOI), is called "Payments in Lieu of Taxes" (PILT, 31 U.S.C. §§6901-6907). Under the statute, eligible lands consist of those in the National Park System, National Forest System, or Bureau of Land Management; lands in the National Wildlife Refuge System if they are withdrawn from the public domain; lands dedicated to the use of federal water resources development projects; dredge disposal areas under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers; lands located in the vicinity of Purgatory River Canyon and Piñon Canyon, Colorado, that were acquired after December 31, 1981, to expand the Fort Carson military reservation; lands on which are located semi-active or inactive Army installations used for mobilization and for reserve component training; and certain lands acquired by DOI or the Department of Agriculture under the Southern Nevada Public Land Management Act (P.L. 105-263). This report addresses only the PILT program administered by DOI. The authorized level of PILT payments is calculated under a complex formula. No precise dollar figure can be given in advance for each year's PILT authorized level. Five factors affect the calculation of a payment to a given county: the number of acres eligible for PILT payments, the county's population, payments in prior years from other specified federal land payment programs, state laws directing payments to a particular government purpose, and the Consumer Price Index as calculated by the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Before 2008, annual appropriations were necessary to fund PILT. However, beginning with the FY2008 payment and continuing through FY2012, a provision in P.L. 110-343 for mandatory spending ensured that all counties would receive 100% of the authorized payment. P.L. 112-141 extended mandatory spending to FY2013, though there was a later sequestration of 5.1% for that year. PILT's mandatory spending was renewed for another year in P.L. 113-79, resulting in an FY2014 payment of $436.9 million. As yet, Congress has not passed a measure for the FY2015 payment, normally expected to be dispersed in June 2015. However, the House amended H.R. 3979 to include the National Defense Authorization Act. The amendment included a provision (Section 3096) for $33 million in mandatory spending for PILT in FY2015. In addition, a December 10, 2014, draft of the Continuing Appropriations Act of FY2015 contained $372 million in discretionary spending. In total, these two figures would provide slightly less than full funding. Over the next few years, the broader debate for Congress might then be summarized as three decisions: (1) whether to approve full funding of PILT through future extensions of mandatory spending (either temporary or permanent); (2) whether instead to reduce the payments, perhaps through the annual appropriations process or by changing the PILT formula; and (3) whether to add or subtract any lands to the list of those now eligible for PILT payments. Since the creation of PILT in 1976, various other changes in the law have been proposed. One proposal has been to include additional lands under the PILT program, particularly Indian lands. Other lands are also mentioned for inclusion, such as those of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration and the Departments of Defense and Homeland Security.