財產稅的租稅歸宿一直是地方財政學中最 / 受爭議的議題之一。主流財政理論中對於財產稅之租稅歸宿問題，主要包括以下三種觀點：「傳統觀點」視財產稅為一種消費稅；「受益觀點」認為財產稅不過只是對地方公共財所付出的一種使用者付費；而「新觀點」則視財產稅為一種對資本使用具有扭曲效果的資本稅。雖然學界一般已有共識，認為傳統的觀點不過是新觀點下的一個特例。但是，對於新觀點與受益觀點何者較為接近現實，卻仍爭議不休。由於此二觀點各有其理論基礎，而目前的實證文獻並未提供足夠的證據支持其中任何一種觀點。本文的主要目的就是要對此一議題提供新的證據，檢驗此二觀點的有效性。本文依據台北市地區之租屋市場及房地產市場的資料，發現 (1)資本密度將隨房屋稅有效稅率的提高而增加，而地價稅對資本密度的影響並不顯著，支持新觀點的看法； (2)在 Hedonic 模型中，房屋稅有過度轉嫁給租屋者的現象，而地價稅的轉嫁效果則不顯著，也傾向支持新觀點的看法； (3)而根據 Palmon and Smith (1998b) 的修正資本化模型所估計的資本化程度，則發現房屋稅及地價稅都有過度資本化的情形，同樣也無法拒絕新觀點的看法。 The incidence of the property tax is still one of the more controversial issue in local public finance. The three mainstream views of the incidence of the property tax include-the tradition view which treats the tax as an excise tax, the benefit view which argues that the property tax is simply a user charge for local public services, and the new view which treats the property tax as a tax on capital with a distortionary effect on the use of capital. Although it is easy to show that the traditional view is simply a special case of the new view, it is, however, difficult to choose between the new view and the benefit view in that both views have their own theoretical underpinnings and current empirical studies in the literature provide little evidence to support either view. The purpose of this paper is to provide such empirical evidence, using data from the rental housing and real estate markets of Taipei city, to distinguish between these two views. We found that (1) capital intensity is increasing in effective ax rate of house tax and is insignificant in the change of effective tax rate of land value tax; (2) according to the hedonic regression model, the house tax will over-shift forward to tenants and tax on land value has no significant impact on rent; and (3) by Palmon and Smith's (1998b) modified capitalization model, both taxes are overcapitalized into house values. All of these results suggest that the evidence seem to favor the new view.