Section 6: Comparisons with other jurisdictions

There are other municipalities in Southeastern Pennsylvania to which Lower Merion Township may be compared. In this case, an assessment was made of real estate taxes and EIT/NPT to determine the impact they have on Lower Merion Township residents in comparison with those who live elsewhere. [i] Most of the comparable municipalities do not levy an earned income tax on their residents at this time, but tend to have higher real estate tax rates as a proportion of market value. The comparison in Table 6.1 uses Taxpayer B as the benchmark.

Table 6.1 – Comparison of Real Estate Tax and Earned Income Tax Burden (Selected Municipalities)
Township	2002 Resident EIT/NPT %	2001 Real Estate Tax Rate on Market Value^1	Real Estate Tax on Home with $400,000 Market Value	Resident EIT/NPT on Earned Income of $125,000	Total RE/EIT/NPT Tax Burden
Upper Darby	0.00	0.5611	$ 2,245	$ -	$ 2,245
Cheltenham	0.50	0.3654	1,462	625	2,087
Plymouth	1.00	0.1495	598	1,250	1,848
Upper Dublin	0.50	0.2160	864	625	1,489
Haverford	0.00	0.3254	1,302	-	1,302
Abington	0.00	0.2773	1,109	-	1,109
Lower Merion	0.00	0.2358	943	-	943
Radnor	0.00	0.2039	816	-	816
Whitemarsh	0.00	0.1836	734	-	734
Tredyffrin	0.00	0.1678	671	-	671
Upper Merion	0.00	0.1332	533	-	533
Note 1: Expressed as % per $ of 2001 market value. Tax burden calculations and comparisons do not take the impact of Federal Income Tax deductibility into account. Sources: EIT/NPT and real estate tax rate information, DCED, July 31, 2002; market values and assessed values from Pennsylvania State Tax Equalization Board, July 31, 2002.

Were the Township to adopt one of the three revenue options discussed above (again using Taxpayer B, an example of a property with a market value of $400,000 and earned income of $125,000), the Township would still be a relatively low tax jurisdiction (which is particularly noteworthy in light of the large concentration of non-residential property and large non-local employment in several of the other jurisdictions, and also noting that possible tax increases during the 2003-2005 period in those jurisdictions have not been taken into account), as shown in Table 6.2, which also does not take any Lower Merion Township tax reductions beyond the initial $3 million discussed above.

Table 6.2 – Comparison of Taxpayer Tax/Fee Burden – With Lower Merion Revenue Options (Selected Municipalities)
Township	Total RE/EIT/NPT ($)
Upper Darby	2,245
Cheltenham	2,087
Plymouth	1,848
Upper Dublin	1,489
Haverford	1,302
Lower Merion - Option 3 – Lower Merion Taxpayers NOT now Paying EIT/NPT with $3 million Township Tax Reduction	1,288
Lower Merion - Option 1 – Lower Merion Taxpayers NOT now Paying EIT/NPT	1,164
Abington	1,109
Lower Merion - Option 2 – Lower Merion Taxpayers NOT now Paying EIT/NPT	1,109
Lower Merion - Option 1 – Lower Merion Current EIT/NPT Taxpayers	1,092
Lower Merion - Option 2 – Lower Merion Current EIT/NPT Taxpayers	1,054
Lower Merion - CURRENT	943
Lower Merion - Option 3 – Lower Merion Current EIT/NPT Taxpayers – with $3 million Township Tax Reduction	828
Radnor	816
Whitemarsh	734
Tredyffrin	671
Upper Merion	533

Return to the Table of Contents

---

[i] An effort also was made to determine the impact of solid waste fees. Each local government takes a different approach to solid waste management, whether in terms of fees and charges or the degree to which the municipality’s general fund absorbs a portion of labor, transportation and disposal costs, thereby making a direct comparison difficult and susceptible to misinterpretation For example, residential refuse disposal costs in Delaware County are paid at the county level, not by municipalities as is the case with respect to many municipalities in Montgomery County. The data and comparisons were omitted for that reason.