• John Locke Update

    Should the UNC System reduce tuition and fees?

    posted August 3, 2020 by Grey Davis
    While the majority of university faculty believe that online teaching is inferior to in-person instruction and invites academic fraud, UNC students now face a fall semester without the advantages…
  • Press Release

    Growth-related charges based on faulty studies

    posted September 11, 2007
    RALEIGH – N.C. counties ignore the economic benefits of growth when they pursue Adequate Public Facilities Ordinances. That’s a key finding in a new John Locke Foundation Spotlight report.
  • Research Report

    APFOs Research Fatally Flawed: One-sided analysis is used to determine “voluntary mitigation” fees

    posted September 11, 2007 by Dr. Michael Sanera
    Counties across the state are adopting Adequate Public Facilities Ordinances (APFOs) that require homebuilders to pay fees of up to $14,953 for each new home built.1 County commissioners favoring these ordinances argue that they allow public services to keep pace with population growth. Opponents believe that APFOs actually place an unfair burden on homebuilders and homebuyers because APFOs can significantly increase home prices.
  • Press Release

    Global warming alarmists push hidden taxes

    posted June 5, 2007
    RALEIGH – North Carolinians could face hundreds of millions of dollars in new taxes and an assault on their safety and standard of living, in a misguided effort to fight…
  • Press Release

    Proposed tax hurts consumers, helps environmental groups

    posted November 29, 2006
    RALEIGH – North Carolina electricity customers could pay an extra $181 million a year, thanks to the efforts of a consumer advocate that’s supposed to represent customers’ interests. That’s according…
  • Research Report

    Smokes, Booze … and Electricity? A new sin tax on electricity could be on its way

    posted November 29, 2006 by Daren Bakst
    The North Carolina Public Utilities Commission is considering charging an extra fee, separate from existing rates, to electric utility customers. This extra charge will help support what is called a “public benefits fund.” The fund would support programs that have nothing to do with the supply of electricity. Consumers would be required to pay the “fee” if they want to receive electricity, and the more electricity they use, the higher their fee will become. To environmental extremists and other proponents of this extra fee, the use of electricity, which allows us to warm our homes and function in modern society, is a “sin” and needs to be reduced.

fees by Author