Recent California legislation extends the application of prevailing wage regulations to construction workers building subsidized low-income residential projects. Econometric evidence based on micro data covering 205 residential projects subsidized by the California Low Income Housing Tax Credit since 1996 and completed by mid-2002 demonstrates that construction costs increased substantially under prevailing wage requirements. Estimates of additional construction costs in the authors' most extensive models range from 9% to 37%. The analysis controls for variations in cost by geographical location and for differences in project characteristics, financing, and developer attributes. The authors estimate the effect of uniform imposition of these regulations on the number of new dwellings for low-income households produced under the tax credit program in California. Under reasonable assumptions, the mid-range estimate of the prospective decrease exceeds 3, 100 units per year.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AllenSteven G.1983. “Much Ado about Davis-Bacon: A Critical Review and New Evidence.”Journal of Law and Economics, Vol. 26, No. 2 (October), pp. 707–36.
2.
Azari-RadHamidPhilipsPeterPrusMark J., 2002. “Making Hay When It Rains: The Effect Prevailing Wage Regulations, Scale Economies, Seasonal, Cyclical, and Local Business Patterns Have on School Construction Costs.”Journal of Education Finance, Vol. 27, No. 4 (Spring), pp. 997–1012.
3.
Azari-RadHamidPhilipsPeterPrusMark J., 2003. “State Prevailing Wage Laws and School Construction Costs.”Industrial Relations, Vol. 42, No. 3 (July), pp. 445–57.
4.
BilginsoyCihanPhilipsPeter. 2000. “Prevailing Wage Regulations and School Construction Costs: Evidence from British Columbia.”Journal of Education Finance, Vol. 24, No. 3 (Winter), pp. 415–32.
5.
California Tax Credit Allocation Committee. 2000–2002. Annual Report. Sacramento: State Treasurer's Office.
6.
CardDavidKruegerAlan B., 1995. Myth and Measurement: The New Economics of the Minimum Wage. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.
7.
CummingsJean L.DiPasqualeDenise. 1999. “The Low-Income Housing Tax Credit: An Analysis of the First Ten Years.”Housing Policy Debate, Vol. 10, No. 2, pp. 251–307.
8.
FraundorfMartha NorbyFarrellJohn P.MasonRobert. 1984. “The Effects of the Davis-Bacon Act on Construction Costs in Rural Areas.”Review of Economics and Statistics, Vol. 66, No. 1 (February), pp. 142–46.
9.
General Accounting Office/HEHS-99-21. 1999. “Davis-Bacon Act: Labor Now Verifies Wage Data, but Verification Process Needs Improvement.”Washington, D.C., January.
10.
General Accounting Office/HRD-79-18. 1979. “The Davis-Bacon Act Should Be Repealed.”Washington, D.C., April 27.
11.
GoldfarbRobert S.MorrallJohn F.III, 1978. “Cost Implications of Changing Davis-Bacon Administration.”Policy Analysis, Vol. 1, No. 2 (Fall), pp. 439–53.
12.
GoldfarbRobert S.MorrallJohn F.III, 1981. “The Davis-Bacon Act: An Appraisal of Recent Studies.”Industrial and Labor Relations Review, Vol. 34, No. 2 (January), pp. 191–206.
13.
GouldJohn P.BittlingmayerGeorge. 1980. The Economics of the Davis-Bacon Act: An Analysis of Prevailing Wage Laws. Washington, D.C.: American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research.
14.
HirschBarry T.MacphersonDavid A., 2003. “Union Membership and Coverage Database from the Current Population Survey: Note.”Industrial and Labor Relations Review, Vol. 56, No. 2 (January), pp. 349–54.
15.
HUD (U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development). 1981. “Housing under the Davis Bacon Act.” Mimeo. Prepared for the President's Commission on Housing, November.
16.
Kentucky Legislative Research Commission. 2001. “An Analysis of Kentucky's Prevailing Wage Laws and Procedures.” Research Report No. 304, December 13.
17.
KesslerDaniel P.KatzLawrence F., 2001. “Prevailing Wage Laws and Construction Labor Markets.”Industrial and Labor Relations Review, Vol. 54, No. 2 (January), pp. 259–74.
NewmanMatthewBlosserShawn. 2003. “An Analysis of Market and Prevailing Wage Rates for the Construction Trades in California.” Mimeo. Sacramento, California Institute of County Government.
20.
Ohio Legislative Service Commission. 2002. “SB 102 Report: The Effects of the Exemption of School Construction Projects from Ohio's Prevailing Wage Law.” Staff Research Report No. 149, May 20.
21.
PhilipsPeter. 1998. “Kansas and Prevailing Wage Legislation.” Prepared for the Kansas Senate Labor and Industries Committee, February 20. Available at http://www.faircontracting.org.
22.
PhilipsPeter. 1999. “Kentucky's Prevailing Wage Law: Its History, Purpose, and Effect.”University of Utah Department of Economics, October.
23.
PhilipsPeter. 2001. “A Comparison of Public School Construction Costs in Three Midwestern States That Have Changed Their Prevailing Wage Laws in the 1990s: Kentucky, Ohio, and Michigan.” February.
24.
PhilipsPeterMangumGarthWaitzmanNormYeagleAnne. 1995. “Losing Ground: Lessons from the Repeal of Nine Little Davis-Bacon Acts.” Working paper, University of Utah Economics Department, February.
25.
PrusMark J.1996. “The Effect of State Prevailing Wage Laws on Total Construction Costs.”State University of New York at Cortland, January. Available at http://www.faircontracting.org.
26.
PrusMark J.1999. “Prevailing Wage Laws and School Construction Costs.”Prepared for Prince George's County Council, Maryland, January.
27.
ThieblotArmand J.1975. The Davis-Bacon Act. Labor Relations and Public Policy Series, Report No. 10. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
28.
ThieblotArmand J.1996. “A New Evaluation of Effects of Prevailing Wage Law Repeal.”Journal of Labor Research, Vol. 17, No. 2 (Spring), pp. 297–322.
29.
ThieblotArmand J.1997. “Prevailing Wage Laws and Market Recovery Strategies of Construction Unions.”Journal of Labor Research, Vol. 18, No. 1 (Winter), pp. 31–46.
30.
ThieblotArmand J.1999. “Prevailing Wage Laws and Black Employment in the Construction Industry.”Journal of Labor Research, Vol. 20, No. 1 (Winter), pp. 155–59.
31.
ThieblotArmand J.1995. “State Prevailing Wage Laws.”Prepared for Associated Builders and Contractors, Inc.
