2011
DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.1914468
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Rethinking the Federal Bias Toward Homeownership

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
27
0
1

Year Published

2011
2011
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 24 publications
(29 citation statements)
references
References 34 publications
(46 reference statements)
1
27
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…First, the result could be the true causal effect, so that in multi‐storey buildings, the homeowners' net effect on the neighborhood amenity level and house prices is indeed negative (e.g., δ>0 and α<0). One possible mechanism is outlined in Linneman (1986), Glaeser and Shapiro (), and Glaeser (). Multiple owners in a building create a common‐pool problem in investment decisions concerning building‐specific projects, and in neighborhoods with high homeownership rates, buildings could be in worse conditions.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…First, the result could be the true causal effect, so that in multi‐storey buildings, the homeowners' net effect on the neighborhood amenity level and house prices is indeed negative (e.g., δ>0 and α<0). One possible mechanism is outlined in Linneman (1986), Glaeser and Shapiro (), and Glaeser (). Multiple owners in a building create a common‐pool problem in investment decisions concerning building‐specific projects, and in neighborhoods with high homeownership rates, buildings could be in worse conditions.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Furthermore, residents in a multi‐unit building face a common‐pool problem because major maintenance problems are building‐specific, not unit‐specific (Linneman, ; Glaeser and Shapiro, ; Glaeser, ). The owners of individual units in a multi‐unit building have an incentive to free‐ride at the expense of other owners in the building when it comes to investments in common facilities and building maintenance.…”
Section: Econometric Modelmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…11 Another reason for the low level of additional homebuilding rests in the stability-oriented German mortgage market. German housing loans are still characterized by comparatively low loan-to-value ratios, long-term fixed interest rates, and practically no secondary mortgages (Maennig, 2012 In stark contrast to other countries which treat homeownership more favorably (see, e.g., Glaeser (2011) for the US), the German tax code neither allows mortgage interest deduction nor the deduction of depreciation or running expenses.…”
Section: National Trends In New Homebuildingmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In some countries, e.g., in the USA, it "is often seen as an integral part of the American dream, and encouraging homeownership has historically been an important feature of U.S. public policy", see Haughwout et al (2010). Glaeser (2011) points to federal policies such as home mortgage deductions as well as local regulations that prohibit tall buildings. The latter boosts the HOR because rental units are much more likely to be in multifamily structures than in single houses.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%