Municipal Enterprises and Taxing and Spending Policies: Public Avoidance and Fiscal Illusions
研究了市政企业（政府拥有并运营、靠收费维持的公共服务企业）对市政预算和公共服务的影响，发现不同城市利用企业利润的方式各异，有的增加服务支出，有的降低财产税，表明需要更多研究。
Municipalities provide some public services through business-type enterprises which are owned and run by government and which are financed by fees or charges for the services. These activities differ from other types of municipal services in that they commonly support themselves and they sometimes generate revenues beyond their costs. They are usually set apart from the rest of the government's activities by fund accounting techniques as separate funds, usually called enterprise funds. The impact of such funds has received increasing attention in the literature on municipal government and finance and on public budgeting generally.1 Rubin, for example, using Illinois as a case study, has discussed the possible impact of municipal enterprises generally. Vogt has examined North Carolina cities, DeHoog and Swanson have reported on Florida's cities, and DeLorenzo has looked at New York municipalities. The results of these studies are mixed. DeLorenzo found some evidence existed that New York cities with enterprise funds tended to spend more on public services than other cities, suggesting that enterprise profits were transferred to general fund activities to enhance services over and beyond what municipal taxes would support. Vogt concluded that North Carolina cities with electric utilities used their profits to keep property taxes lower than they would otherwise have been. DeHoog and Swanson concluded that Florida cities used enterprise fund profits, primarily electricity funds, to compensate for lower tax bases and therefore did not follow the pattern found in either New York or North Carolina. Hence, the literature to date suggests that such enterprises may have varied impacts on municipal budgets and services, and it indicates that more research is needed on this dimension of public finance.