Latest news with #MichaelManville
Time of India
19 hours ago
- Automotive
- Time of India
California, the world's fourth largest economy, to charge road tax as people go electric, citizens furious
California, the fourth largest economy in the world, is planning to introduce a new road charge that would charge drivers per mile driven, a plan that has drawn criticism from California residents and politicians throughout the state, as per a report. California Eyes Per-Mile Road Tax The new proposal comes as California is expected to have a $5 billion shortfall in gas tax revenue over the next decade, according to a CBS8 News report. This is because electric and hybrid cars are quickly taking over from gasoline-powered vehicles, as per the report. The state's main source of revenue to fund about 80% of the roadwork, like highway maintenance, is funded via a 59-cent per gallon gas tax, which is the highest in the country, and is slipping away, as per the CBS8 News report. ALSO READ: FDA issues new heart risk warnings for Pfizer, Moderna COVID vaccines - should you be worried? by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Unwind in elegant bedrooms with private decks at Sunteck City Sunteck City Learn More Undo What Is the State Testing? With the aim of addressing the funding gap, the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) has recently tried a pilot program to understand this potential new fee system, which could replace the current gas tax, as reported by CBS8 News. During the trial program, many approaches were tested, like a flat fee of 2.8 cents per mile and an individualised fee based on a vehicle's fuel economy, as reported by CBS8 News. Even different methods of reporting mileage to the state were also considered, such as odometer readings and special plug-in devices to measure miles travelled, according to the report. Live Events ALSO READ: Meet Trapit Bansal, Meta's new AI superintelligence team hire - Is Meta poaching top talent from OpenAI? Why the Road Charge Now? Chair of UCLA's Department of Urban Planning, Michael Manville, explained that, "The purchasing power of the fuel tax, which is the main way we finance transportation infrastructure has been steadily declining," as quoted in the report. Manville also pointed out that, "We have a lot more electric cars, we have a lot more hybrid cars, and just the typical new car gets better gas mileage," quoted CBS8 News. Californians Push Back However, the latest proposal faced disapproval from many Californians, like a San Diegan, Gail Hofilena expressed her opposition, by saying, "Not for it. I'm a hard 'no' on everything. I got to save my money where I can," as quoted in the report. While, assembly member Carl DeMaio, who previously had led the opposition to a local mileage fee, criticised the state-wide proposal, saying, "A mileage tax in California is a money grab, let's just be very clear," as quoted by the CBS8 News report. ALSO READ: After Canada, now US: College graduates face the toughest job market in decades – what's gone wrong? DeMaio estimated that the average Californian might have to pay $900 to $1200 per year under this new system and argued that it would disproportionately affect working and lower-income families with longer commutes, as reported by the CBS8 News report. He explained that, "A lot of working families, poorer, families, have a longer commute, so they will actually pay a higher mileage tax," adding, "It's very regressive. It's unfair," as quoted in the report. DeMaio also voiced out his scepticism regarding the state's claim that the road charge would replace the existing gas tax, as he said, "That's nonsense," adding, "These people would never give up a tax. They're just going to add an additional one," as quoted in the report. What's Next? However, it will be decided by the State Legislature whether the road charge would replace the fuel tax, reported CBS8 News. According to the report, Caltrans is expected to release the results of its recent pilot program later this year, which will likely inform the ongoing debate over this controversial proposal. FAQs How much tax could I be charged under this plan? Estimates suggest anywhere from $900 to $1,200 per year, depending on how much a person drives, as reported by CBS8 News. Why is California proposing a road charge now? Because the gas tax is no longer bringing in enough money, mainly due to more electric and fuel-efficient cars on the road, as per the CBS8 News report.
Yahoo
04-04-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
UCLA report claims the 'mansion tax' stifles commercial development in L.A.
Depending on who you ask, Measure ULA has been a godsend or a disaster for L.A.'s real estate market. A new report suggests the latter. A new analysis from UCLA's Lewis Center for Regional Policy Studies authored by Michael Manville and Mott Smith claims that the so-called "mansion tax" has slowed down sales, especially for commercial properties. Measure ULA was passed in 2022 and took effect in April 2023, bringing a 4% charge to all L.A. property sales above $5 million and a 5.5% charge to sales above $10 million. The proceeds fund affordable housing and homelessness prevention initiatives; roughly two years in, the transfer tax has raised more than $632 million. But the report — published Tuesday and titled "The Unintended Consequences of Measure ULA" — suggests the tax has chilled a once-robust market in L.A., while sales above $5 million have remained steady in other markets across L.A. County not affected by the tax. The study analyzed 338,000 property sales over the last five years and found that the drop is most acute on the commercial side. Under ULA, non-single-family transactions fell 7-15% per month in L.A. ZIP Codes, a trend that compounded to 30-50% over the course of two years. "The hardest-hit properties are not luxury homes, but multifamily, commercial and industrial buildings — the very types we need to support housing production and job growth," Smith said. A commercial decline hurts the city in two ways, the report argues. First, commercial properties often sell for significantly more than single-family homes, so even a slight decrease in sales leads to a large drop in tax revenue. In addition, commercial sales typically lead to new multifamily development, which the city desperately needs in the midst of a housing crisis. Smith said the decline led to a $25-million annual loss in property tax revenue, and that loss will compound over the next few years. In a decade, the loss in revenue could exceed the funds brought in by the tax. Property taxes are different from money brought in by ULA's transfer tax. Property taxes flow into the city's general budget, while ULA taxes are specifically earmarked for affordable housing and homelessness initiatives. Smith and Manville suggested reforming the tax to only affect properties that haven't been reassessed in 20 years, which could exempt multifamily developers while still targeting luxury homeowners whose property values have soared over the years. Joe Donlin, who serves as director of United to House L.A., the organization behind Measure ULA, said the tax is doing what it set out to do. "On its second anniversary, Measure ULA is already producing hundreds of units of affordable housing, protecting tens of thousands of renters and creating thousands of construction jobs," Donlin said. "Its initial dip in revenue owes more to developers and the real estate lobby hoping to overturn it in court or at the ballot box — and losing." The tax has survived multiple legal challenges in the last few years from the luxury real estate community, who sought to declare the measure unconstitutional. In addition, revenue sputtered in the first year of the program as property owners either sold off homes in the days before the tax took effect or found loopholes to avoid paying it. Revenue and sales have both increased year over year as legal challenges fade. The tax raised roughly $296 million in fiscal year 2024 and has raised $320 million so far in fiscal year 2025. But the numbers still fall well short of initial projections of $900 million per year. Sign up for Essential California for news, features and recommendations from the L.A. Times and beyond in your inbox six days a week. This story originally appeared in Los Angeles Times.
Los Angeles Times
04-04-2025
- Business
- Los Angeles Times
Report claims the 'mansion tax' stifles commercial development in L.A.
Depending on who you ask, Measure ULA has been a godsend or a disaster for L.A.'s real estate market. A new report suggests the latter. A new analysis from UCLA's Lewis Center for Regional Policy Studies authored by Michael Manville and Mott Smith claims that the so-called 'mansion tax' has slowed down sales, especially for commercial properties. Measure ULA was passed in 2022 and took effect in April 2023, bringing a 4% charge to all L.A. property sales above $5 million and a 5.5% charge to sales above $10 million. The proceeds fund affordable housing and homelessness prevention initiatives; roughly two years in, the transfer tax has raised more than $632 million. But the report — published Tuesday and titled 'The Unintended Consequences of Measure ULA' — suggests the tax has chilled a once-robust market in L.A., while sales above $5 million have remained steady in other markets across L.A. County not affected by the tax. The study analyzed 338,000 property sales over the last five years and found that the drop is most acute on the commercial side. Under ULA, non-single family transactions fell 7-15% per month in L.A. ZIP Codes, a trend that compounded to 30-50% over the course of two years. 'The hardest-hit properties are not luxury homes, but multi-family, commercial and industrial buildings — the very types we need to support housing production and job growth,' Smith said. A commercial decline hurts the city in two ways, the report argues. First, commercial properties often sell for significantly more than single-family homes, so even a slight decrease in sales leads to a large drop in tax revenue. In addition, commercial sales typically lead to new multi-family development, which the city desperately needs in the midst of a housing crisis. Smith said the decline led to a $25-million annual loss in property tax revenue, and that loss will compound over the next few years. In a decade, the loss in revenue could exceed the funds brought in by the tax. Property taxes are different from money brought in by ULA's transfer tax. Property taxes flow into the city's general budget, while ULA taxes are specifically earmarked for affordable housing and homelessness initiatives. Smith and Manville suggested reforming the tax to only affect properties that haven't been reassessed in 20 years, which could exempt multi-family developers while still targeting luxury homeowners whose property values have soared over the years. Joe Donlin, who serves as director of United to House L.A., the organization behind Measure ULA, said the tax is doing what it set out to do. 'On its second anniversary, Measure ULA is already producing hundreds of units of affordable housing, protecting tens of thousands of renters and creating thousands of construction jobs,' Donlin said. 'Its initial dip in revenue owes more to developers and the real estate lobby hoping to overturn it in court or at the ballot box — and losing.' The tax has survived multiple legal challenges in the last few years from the luxury real estate community, who sought to declare the measure unconstitutional. In addition, revenue sputtered in the first year of the program as property owners either sold off homes in the days before the tax took effect or found loopholes to avoid paying it. Revenue and sales have both increased year-over-year as legal challenges fade. The tax raised roughly $296 million in fiscal year 2024 and has raised $320 million so far in fiscal year 2025. But the numbers still fall well short of initial projections of $900 million per year.
