| Working
Paper 95-8
by Peter Fortune
The Traditional View of municipal investment holds
that the federal tax-exemption of interest payments
by state and local (municipal) governments provides
a capital cost subsidy to municipal investment. Recently
a New View has emerged which argues that tax-exemption
plays a minor role, if any, in shaping municipal investment
decisions. In its simplest version (with municipal debt
issued at a constant interest rate), the New View argues
that tax-exemption plays a role only for municipalities
in which the representative individual has an income
tax rate lower than the implicit tax rate on municipal
bonds. An extended version of the New View, in which
municipal bonds are sold at interest rates which increase
with leverage, predicts that all communities will choose
tax finance at the margin. Thus, the New View holds
that local taxes should be the dominant form of finance
for municpal investment at the margin, except perhaps,
in communities represented by people with income tax
rates at or above the implicit tax rate on municipal
bonds. The New View rests on an assumption of unlimited
borrowing power with constant interest rates in the
taxable bond market. However, virtually all agents face
debt capacity limits which prevent them from using taxable
debt to finance all capital investment, both private
and municipal. This paper examines the implications
of debt capacity limits and concludes that when they
are effective, all municipalities should treat the municipal
bond rate as the marginal cost of funds except those
very rare communities in which the representative citizen
has both a high income tax rate and an extremely high
capacity to borrow in the private debt market. This
study also finds that leverage-related interest rates
strengthen rather than weaken the case for the Traditional
View. In short, we conclude that the New View applies
only to communities whose representative citizens are
extremely affluent. If less-than-affluent communities
choose different mixes of tax and debt finance, the
effect is not on the marginal cost of capital or on
the volume of municipal investment. Rather, it is on
the average cost of capital, and on the distribution
of income.
PDF version of paper  |