Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://hdl.handle.net/10419/126422 
Authors: 
Year of Publication: 
2013
Citation: 
[Journal:] Wirtschaftsdienst [ISSN:] 1613-978X [Volume:] 93 [Issue:] 10 [Publisher:] Springer [Place:] Heidelberg [Year:] 2013 [Pages:] 710-715
Publisher: 
Springer, Heidelberg
Abstract: 
Die kommunale Straßensanierung wird in der Regel von den Anliegern finanziert. Widersprüche dagegen haben Verwaltungsgerichte mit der Begründung, die Hauseigentümer hätten durch die Sanierung besondere Vorteile, abgewiesen. Aus finanzwissenschaftlicher Sicht muss die Erhebung von Beiträgen danach beurteilt werden, ob es diese Vorteile wirklich gibt und das Äquivalenzprinzip überhaupt anwendbar ist.
Abstract (Translated): 
The common German practice of financing the renovation of municipal streets via contributions from home owners is based on the assumption of special advantages for the home owners. But there are no such special advantages. These assumed advantages are wrongly constructed by the courts, and thus this form of financing is totally arbitrary. Generally, the charging of contributions and fees - based on the principle of equivalence - is not applicable for the financing of street renovations. Municipal streets are 'public goods'. Renovating them must be financed by taxes.
JEL: 
A12
H54
K34
Persistent Identifier of the first edition: 
Document Type: 
Article
Document Version: 
Published Version

Files in This Item:
File
Size
159.39 kB





Items in EconStor are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.