document_title: British Empire

question_text: when did the british empire become the british commonwealth

question_tokens: when did the british empire become the british commonwealth

text: British Empire

text: Origins (1497–1583)

text: The foundations of the British Empire were laid when England and Scotland were separate kingdoms. In 1496, King Henry VII of England, following the successes of Spain and Portugal in overseas exploration, commissioned John Cabot to lead a voyage to discover a route to Asia via the North Atlantic.[6] Cabot sailed in 1497, five years after the European discovery of America, but he made landfall on the coast of Newfoundland, and, mistakenly believing (like Christopher Columbus) that he had reached Asia,[21] there was no attempt to found a colony. Cabot led another voyage to the Americas the following year but nothing was ever heard of his ships again.[22]

text: No further attempts to establish English colonies in the Americas were made until well into the reign of Queen Elizabeth I, during the last decades of the 16th century.[23] In the meantime the 1533 Statute in Restraint of Appeals had declared "that this realm of England is an Empire".[24] The subsequent Protestant Reformation turned England and Catholic Spain into implacable enemies.[6] In 1562, the English Crown encouraged the privateers John Hawkins and Francis Drake to engage in slave-raiding attacks against Spanish and Portuguese ships off the coast of West Africa[25] with the aim of breaking into the Atlantic slave trade. This effort was rebuffed and later, as the Anglo-Spanish Wars intensified, Elizabeth I gave her blessing to further privateering raids against Spanish ports in the Americas and shipping that was returning across the Atlantic, laden with treasure from the New World.[26] At the same time, influential writers such as Richard Hakluyt and John Dee (who was the first to use the term "British Empire")[27] were beginning to press for the establishment of England's own empire. By this time, Spain had become the dominant power in the Americas and was exploring the Pacific Ocean, Portugal had established trading posts and forts from the coasts of Africa and Brazil to China, and France had begun to settle the Saint Lawrence River area, later to become New France.[28]

text: Plantations of Ireland

text: Although England trailed behind other European powers in establishing overseas colonies, it had been engaged during the 16th century in the settlement of Ireland with Protestants from England and Scotland, drawing on precedents dating back to the Norman invasion of Ireland in 1169.[29][30] Several people who helped establish the Plantations of Ireland also played a part in the early colonisation of North America, particularly a group known as the West Country men.[31]

text: "First" British Empire (1583–1783)

text: In 1578, Elizabeth I granted a patent to Humphrey Gilbert for discovery and overseas exploration.[32] That year, Gilbert sailed for the Caribbean with the intention of engaging in piracy and establishing a colony in North America, but the expedition was aborted before it had crossed the Atlantic.[33][34] In 1583 he embarked on a second attempt, on this occasion to the island of Newfoundland whose harbour he formally claimed for England, although no settlers were left behind. Gilbert did not survive the return journey to England, and was succeeded by his half-brother, Walter Raleigh, who was granted his own patent by Elizabeth in 1584. Later that year, Raleigh founded the Roanoke Colony on the coast of present-day North Carolina, but lack of supplies caused the colony to fail.[35]

text: In 1603, James VI, King of Scots, ascended (as James I) to the English throne and in 1604 negotiated the Treaty of London, ending hostilities with Spain. Now at peace with its main rival, English attention shifted from preying on other nations' colonial infrastructures to the business of establishing its own overseas colonies.[36] The British Empire began to take shape during the early 17th century, with the English settlement of North America and the smaller islands of the Caribbean, and the establishment of joint-stock companies, most notably the East India Company, to administer colonies and overseas trade. This period, until the loss of the Thirteen Colonies after the American War of Independence towards the end of the 18th century, has subsequently been referred to by some historians as the "First British Empire".[37]

text: Americas, Africa and the slave trade

text: The Caribbean initially provided England's most important and lucrative colonies,[38] but not before several attempts at colonisation failed. An attempt to establish a colony in Guiana in 1604 lasted only two years, and failed in its main objective to find gold deposits.[39] Colonies in St Lucia (1605) and Grenada (1609) also rapidly folded, but settlements were successfully established in St. Kitts (1624), Barbados (1627) and Nevis (1628).[40] The colonies soon adopted the system of sugar plantations successfully used by the Portuguese in Brazil, which depended on slave labour, and—at first—Dutch ships, to sell the slaves and buy the sugar.[41] To ensure that the increasingly healthy profits of this trade remained in English hands, Parliament decreed in 1651 that only English ships would be able to ply their trade in English colonies. This led to hostilities with the United Dutch Provinces—a series of Anglo-Dutch Wars—which would eventually strengthen England's position in the Americas at the expense of the Dutch.[42] In 1655, England annexed the island of Jamaica from the Spanish, and in 1666 succeeded in colonising the Bahamas.[43]

text: England's first permanent settlement in the Americas was founded in 1607 in Jamestown, led by Captain John Smith and managed by the Virginia Company. Bermuda was settled and claimed by England as a result of the 1609 shipwreck of the Virginia Company's flagship, and in 1615 was turned over to the newly formed Somers Isles Company.[44] The Virginia Company's charter was revoked in 1624 and direct control of Virginia was assumed by the crown, thereby founding the Colony of Virginia.[45] The London and Bristol Company was created in 1610 with the aim of creating a permanent settlement on Newfoundland, but was largely unsuccessful.[46] In 1620, Plymouth was founded as a haven for Puritan religious separatists, later known as the Pilgrims.[47] Fleeing from religious persecution would become the motive of many English would-be colonists to risk the arduous trans-Atlantic voyage: Maryland was founded as a haven for Roman Catholics (1634), Rhode Island (1636) as a colony tolerant of all religions and Connecticut (1639) for Congregationalists. The Province of Carolina was founded in 1663. With the surrender of Fort Amsterdam in 1664, England gained control of the Dutch colony of New Netherland, renaming it New York. This was formalised in negotiations following the Second Anglo-Dutch War, in exchange for Suriname.[48] In 1681, the colony of Pennsylvania was founded by William Penn. The American colonies were less financially successful than those of the Caribbean, but had large areas of good agricultural land and attracted far larger numbers of English emigrants who preferred their temperate climates.[49]

text: In 1670, Charles II incorporated by royal charter the Hudson's Bay Company (HBC), granting it a monopoly on the fur trade in the area known as Rupert's Land, which would later form a large proportion of the Dominion of Canada. Forts and trading posts established by the HBC were frequently the subject of attacks by the French, who had established their own fur trading colony in adjacent New France.[50]

text: Two years later, the Royal African Company was inaugurated, receiving from King Charles a monopoly of the trade to supply slaves to the British colonies of the Caribbean.[51] From the outset, slavery was the basis of the British Empire in the West Indies. Until the abolition of its slave trade in 1807, Britain was responsible for the transportation of 3.5 million African slaves to the Americas, a third of all slaves transported across the Atlantic.[52] To facilitate this trade, forts were established on the coast of West Africa, such as James Island, Accra and Bunce Island. In the British Caribbean, the percentage of the population of African descent rose from 25% in 1650 to around 80% in 1780, and in the Thirteen Colonies from 10% to 40% over the same period (the majority in the southern colonies).[53] For the slave traders, the trade was extremely profitable, and became a major economic mainstay for such western British cities as Bristol and Liverpool, which formed the third corner of the triangular trade with Africa and the Americas. For the transported, harsh and unhygienic conditions on the slaving ships and poor diets meant that the average mortality rate during the Middle Passage was one in seven.[54]

text: In 1695, the Parliament of Scotland granted a charter to the Company of Scotland, which established a settlement in 1698 on the Isthmus of Panama. Besieged by neighbouring Spanish colonists of New Granada, and afflicted by malaria, the colony was abandoned two years later. The Darien scheme was a financial disaster for Scotland — a quarter of Scottish capital[55] was lost in the enterprise — and ended Scottish hopes of establishing its own overseas empire. The episode also had major political consequences, persuading the governments of both England and Scotland of the merits of a union of countries, rather than just crowns.[56] This occurred in 1707 with the Treaty of Union, establishing the Kingdom of Great Britain.

text: Rivalry with the Netherlands in Asia

text: At the end of the 16th century, England and the Netherlands began to challenge Portugal's monopoly of trade with Asia, forming private joint-stock companies to finance the voyages—the English, later British, East India Company and the Dutch East India Company, chartered in 1600 and 1602 respectively. The primary aim of these companies was to tap into the lucrative spice trade, an effort focused mainly on two regions; the East Indies archipelago, and an important hub in the trade network, India. There, they competed for trade supremacy with Portugal and with each other.[57] Although England ultimately eclipsed the Netherlands as a colonial power, in the short term the Netherlands' more advanced financial system[58] and the three Anglo-Dutch Wars of the 17th century left it with a stronger position in Asia. Hostilities ceased after the Glorious Revolution of 1688 when the Dutch William of Orange ascended the English throne, bringing peace between the Netherlands and England. A deal between the two nations left the spice trade of the East Indies archipelago to the Netherlands and the textiles industry of India to England, but textiles soon overtook spices in terms of profitability, and by 1720, in terms of sales, the British company had overtaken the Dutch.[58]

text: Global conflicts with France

text: Peace between England and the Netherlands in 1688 meant that the two countries entered the Nine Years' War as allies, but the conflict—waged in Europe and overseas between France, Spain and the Anglo-Dutch alliance—left the English a stronger colonial power than the Dutch, who were forced to devote a larger proportion of their military budget on the costly land war in Europe.[59] The 18th century saw England (after 1707, Britain) rise to be the world's dominant colonial power, and France becoming its main rival on the imperial stage.[60]

text: The death of Charles II of Spain in 1700 and his bequeathal of Spain and its colonial empire to Philippe of Anjou, a grandson of the King of France, raised the prospect of the unification of France, Spain and their respective colonies, an unacceptable state of affairs for England and the other powers of Europe.[61] In 1701, England, Portugal and the Netherlands sided with the Holy Roman Empire against Spain and France in the War of the Spanish Succession, which lasted until 1714.

text: At the concluding Treaty of Utrecht, Philip renounced his and his descendants' right to the French throne and Spain lost its empire in Europe.[61] The British Empire was territorially enlarged: from France, Britain gained Newfoundland and Acadia, and from Spain, Gibraltar and Menorca. Gibraltar became a critical naval base and allowed Britain to control the Atlantic entry and exit point to the Mediterranean. Spain also ceded the rights to the lucrative asiento (permission to sell slaves in Spanish America) to Britain.[62]

text: During the middle decades of the 18th century, there were several outbreaks of military conflict on the Indian subcontinent, the Carnatic Wars, as the English East India Company (often known simply as "the Company") and its French counterpart, the French East India Company (Compagnie française des Indes orientales), struggled alongside local rulers to fill the vacuum that had been left by the decline of the Mughal Empire. The Battle of Plassey in 1757, in which the British, led by Robert Clive, defeated the Nawab of Bengal and his French allies, left the British East India Company in control of Bengal and as the major military and political power in India.[63] France was left control of its enclaves but with military restrictions and an obligation to support British client states, ending French hopes of controlling India.[64] In the following decades the British East India Company gradually increased the size of the territories under its control, either ruling directly or via local rulers under the threat of force from the British Indian Army, the vast majority of which was composed of Indian sepoys.[65]

text: The British and French struggles in India became but one theatre of the global Seven Years' War (1756–1763) involving France, Britain and the other major European powers. The signing of the Treaty of Paris (1763) had important consequences for the future of the British Empire. In North America, France's future as a colonial power effectively ended with the recognition of British claims to Rupert's Land,[50] and the ceding of New France to Britain (leaving a sizeable French-speaking population under British control) and Louisiana to Spain. Spain ceded Florida to Britain. Along with its victory over France in India, the Seven Years' War therefore left Britain as the world's most powerful maritime power.[66]

text: Loss of the Thirteen American Colonies

text: During the 1760s and early 1770s, relations between the Thirteen Colonies and Britain became increasingly strained, primarily because of resentment of the British Parliament's attempts to govern and tax American colonists without their consent.[67] This was summarised at the time by the slogan "No taxation without representation", a perceived violation of the guaranteed Rights of Englishmen. The American Revolution began with rejection of Parliamentary authority and moves towards self-government. In response Britain sent troops to reimpose direct rule, leading to the outbreak of war in 1775. The following year, in 1776, the United States declared independence. The entry of France into the war in 1778 tipped the military balance in the Americans' favour and after a decisive defeat at Yorktown in 1781, Britain began negotiating peace terms. American independence was acknowledged at the Peace of Paris in 1783.[68]

text: The loss of such a large portion of British America, at the time Britain's most populous overseas possession, is seen by some historians as the event defining the transition between the "first" and "second" empires,[69] in which Britain shifted its attention away from the Americas to Asia, the Pacific and later Africa. Adam Smith's Wealth of Nations, published in 1776, had argued that colonies were redundant, and that free trade should replace the old mercantilist policies that had characterised the first period of colonial expansion, dating back to the protectionism of Spain and Portugal.[66][70] The growth of trade between the newly independent United States and Britain after 1783 seemed to confirm Smith's view that political control was not necessary for economic success.[71][72]

text: The war to the south influenced British policy in Canada, where between 40,000 and 100,000[73] defeated Loyalists had migrated from the new United States following independence.[74] The 14,000 Loyalists who went to the Saint John and Saint Croix river valleys, then part of Nova Scotia, felt too far removed from the provincial government in Halifax, so London split off New Brunswick as a separate colony in 1784.[75] The Constitutional Act of 1791 created the provinces of Upper Canada (mainly English-speaking) and Lower Canada (mainly French-speaking) to defuse tensions between the French and British communities, and implemented governmental systems similar to those employed in Britain, with the intention of asserting imperial authority and not allowing the sort of popular control of government that was perceived to have led to the American Revolution.[76]

text: Tensions between Britain and the United States escalated again during the Napoleonic Wars, as Britain tried to cut off American trade with France and boarded American ships to impress men into the Royal Navy. The US declared war, the War of 1812, and invaded Canadian territory. In response Britain invaded the US, but the pre-war boundaries were reaffirmed by the 1814 Treaty of Ghent, ensuring Canada's future would be separate from that of the United States.[77][78]

text: Rise of the "Second" British Empire (1783–1815)

text: Exploration of the Pacific

text: Since 1718, transportation to the American colonies had been a penalty for various offences in Britain, with approximately one thousand convicts transported per year across the Atlantic.[79] Forced to find an alternative location after the loss of the Thirteen Colonies in 1783, the British government turned to the newly discovered lands of Australia.[80] The western coast of Australia had been discovered for Europeans by the Dutch explorer Willem Janszoon in 1606 and was later named New Holland by the Dutch East India Company,[81] but there was no attempt to colonise it. In 1770 James Cook discovered the eastern coast of Australia while on a scientific voyage to the South Pacific Ocean, claimed the continent for Britain, and named it New South Wales.[82] In 1778, Joseph Banks, Cook's botanist on the voyage, presented evidence to the government on the suitability of Botany Bay for the establishment of a penal settlement, and in 1787 the first shipment of convicts set sail, arriving in 1788.[83] Britain continued to transport convicts to New South Wales until 1840.[84] The Australian colonies became profitable exporters of wool and gold,[85] mainly because of gold rushes in the colony of Victoria, making its capital Melbourne for a time the richest city in the world[86] and the second largest city (after London) in the British Empire.[87]

text: During his voyage, Cook also visited New Zealand, first discovered by Dutch explorer Abel Tasman in 1642, and claimed the North and South islands for the British crown in 1769 and 1770 respectively. Initially, interaction between the indigenous Māori population and Europeans was limited to the trading of goods. European settlement increased through the early decades of the 19th century, with numerous trading stations established, especially in the North. In 1839, the New Zealand Company announced plans to buy large tracts of land and establish colonies in New Zealand. On 6 February 1840, Captain William Hobson and around 40 Maori chiefs signed the Treaty of Waitangi.[88] This treaty is considered by many to be New Zealand's founding document,[89] but differing interpretations of the Maori and English versions of the text[90] have meant that it continues to be a source of dispute.[91]

text: War with Napoleonic France

text: Britain was challenged again by France under Napoleon, in a struggle that, unlike previous wars, represented a contest of ideologies between the two nations.[92] It was not only Britain's position on the world stage that was at risk: Napoleon threatened to invade Britain itself, just as his armies had overrun many countries of continental Europe.

text: The Napoleonic Wars were therefore ones in which Britain invested large amounts of capital and resources to win. French ports were blockaded by the Royal Navy, which won a decisive victory over a Franco-Spanish fleet at Trafalgar in 1805. Overseas colonies were attacked and occupied, including those of the Netherlands, which was annexed by Napoleon in 1810. France was finally defeated by a coalition of European armies in 1815.[93] Britain was again the beneficiary of peace treaties: France ceded the Ionian Islands, Malta (which it had occupied in 1797 and 1798 respectively), Mauritius, Saint Lucia, and Tobago; Spain ceded Trinidad; the Netherlands Guyana, and the Cape Colony. Britain returned Guadeloupe, Martinique, French Guiana, and Réunion to France, and Java and Suriname to the Netherlands, while gaining control of Ceylon (1795–1815).[94]

text: Abolition of slavery

text: With the advent of the Industrial Revolution, goods produced by slavery became less important to the British economy.[95] Added to this was the cost of suppressing regular slave rebellions. With support from the British abolitionist movement, Parliament enacted the Slave Trade Act in 1807, which abolished the slave trade in the empire. In 1808, Sierra Leone Colony and Protectorate was designated an official British colony for freed slaves.[96] Parliamentary reform in 1832 saw the influence of the West India Committee decline. The Slavery Abolition Act, passed the following year, abolished slavery in the British Empire on 1 August 1834, finally bringing the Empire into line with the law in the UK (with the exception of St. Helena, Ceylon and the territories administered by the East India Company, though these exclusions were later repealed). Under the Act, slaves were granted full emancipation after a period of four to six years of "apprenticeship".[97] The British government compensated slave-owners.

text: Britain's imperial century (1815–1914)

text: Between 1815 and 1914, a period referred to as Britain's "imperial century" by some historians,[98][99] around 10,000,000 square miles (26,000,000 km2) of territory and roughly 400 million people were added to the British Empire.[100] Victory over Napoleon left Britain without any serious international rival, other than Russia in Central Asia.[101] Unchallenged at sea, Britain adopted the role of global policeman, a state of affairs later known as the Pax Britannica,[9] and a foreign policy of "splendid isolation".[102] Alongside the formal control it exerted over its own colonies, Britain's dominant position in world trade meant that it effectively controlled the economies of many countries, such as China, Argentina and Siam, which has been described by some historians as an "Informal Empire".[103][104]

text: British imperial strength was underpinned by the steamship and the telegraph, new technologies invented in the second half of the 19th century, allowing it to control and defend the empire. By 1902, the British Empire was linked together by a network of telegraph cables, called the All Red Line.[105]

text: East India Company in Asia

text: The East India Company drove the expansion of the British Empire in Asia. The Company's army had first joined forces with the Royal Navy during the Seven Years' War, and the two continued to co-operate in arenas outside India: the eviction of the French from Egypt (1799),[106] the capture of Java from the Netherlands (1811), the acquisition of Penang Island (1786), Singapore (1819) and Malacca (1824), and the defeat of Burma (1826).[101]

text: From its base in India, the Company had also been engaged in an increasingly profitable opium export trade to China since the 1730s. This trade, illegal since it was outlawed by the Qing dynasty in 1729, helped reverse the trade imbalances resulting from the British imports of tea, which saw large outflows of silver from Britain to China.[107] In 1839, the confiscation by the Chinese authorities at Canton of 20,000 chests of opium led Britain to attack China in the First Opium War, and resulted in the seizure by Britain of Hong Kong Island, at that time a minor settlement.[108]

text: During the late 18th and early 19th centuries the British Crown began to assume an increasingly large role in the affairs of the Company. A series of Acts of Parliament were passed, including the Regulating Act of 1773, Pitt's India Act of 1784 and the Charter Act of 1813 which regulated the Company's affairs and established the sovereignty of the Crown over the territories that it had acquired.[109] The Company's eventual end was precipitated by the Indian Rebellion, a conflict that had begun with the mutiny of sepoys, Indian troops under British officers and discipline.[110] The rebellion took six months to suppress, with heavy loss of life on both sides. The following year the British government dissolved the Company and assumed direct control over India through the Government of India Act 1858, establishing the British Raj, where an appointed governor-general administered India and Queen Victoria was crowned the Empress of India.[111] India became the empire's most valuable possession, "the Jewel in the Crown", and was the most important source of Britain's strength.[112]

text: A series of serious crop failures in the late 19th century led to widespread famines on the subcontinent in which it is estimated that over 15 million people died. The East India Company had failed to implement any coordinated policy to deal with the famines during its period of rule. Later, under direct British rule, commissions were set up after each famine to investigate the causes and implement new policies, which took until the early 1900s to have an effect.[113]

text: Rivalry with Russia

text: During the 19th century, Britain and the Russian Empire vied to fill the power vacuums that had been left by the declining Ottoman Empire, Qajar dynasty and Qing Dynasty. This rivalry in Central Asia came to be known as the "Great Game".[114] As far as Britain was concerned, defeats inflicted by Russia on Persia and Turkey demonstrated its imperial ambitions and capabilities and stoked fears in Britain of an overland invasion of India.[115] In 1839, Britain moved to pre-empt this by invading Afghanistan, but the First Anglo-Afghan War was a disaster for Britain.[116]

text: When Russia invaded the Turkish Balkans in 1853, fears of Russian dominance in the Mediterranean and Middle East led Britain and France to invade the Crimean Peninsula to destroy Russian naval capabilities.[116] The ensuing Crimean War (1854–56), which involved new techniques of modern warfare,[117] was the only global war fought between Britain and another imperial power during the Pax Britannica and was a resounding defeat for Russia.[116] The situation remained unresolved in Central Asia for two more decades, with Britain annexing Baluchistan in 1876 and Russia annexing Kirghizia, Kazakhstan, and Turkmenistan. For a while it appeared that another war would be inevitable, but the two countries reached an agreement on their respective spheres of influence in the region in 1878 and on all outstanding matters in 1907 with the signing of the Anglo-Russian Entente.[118] The destruction of the Russian Navy by the Japanese at the Battle of Port Arthur during the Russo-Japanese War of 1904–05 also limited its threat to the British.[119]

text: Cape to Cairo

text: The Dutch East India Company had founded the Cape Colony on the southern tip of Africa in 1652 as a way station for its ships travelling to and from its colonies in the East Indies. Britain formally acquired the colony, and its large Afrikaner (or Boer) population in 1806, having occupied it in 1795 to prevent its falling into French hands during the Flanders Campaign.[120] British immigration began to rise after 1820, and pushed thousands of Boers, resentful of British rule, northwards to found their own—mostly short-lived—independent republics, during the Great Trek of the late 1830s and early 1840s.[121] In the process the Voortrekkers clashed repeatedly with the British, who had their own agenda with regard to colonial expansion in South Africa and to the various native African polities, including those of the Sotho and the Zulu nations. Eventually the Boers established two republics which had a longer lifespan: the South African Republic or Transvaal Republic (1852–77; 1881–1902) and the Orange Free State (1854–1902).[122] In 1902 Britain occupied both republics, concluding a treaty with the two Boer Republics following the Second Boer War (1899–1902).[123]

text: In 1869 the Suez Canal opened under Napoleon III, linking the Mediterranean with the Indian Ocean. Initially the Canal was opposed by the British;[124] but once opened, its strategic value was quickly recognised and became the "jugular vein of the Empire".[125] In 1875, the Conservative government of Benjamin Disraeli bought the indebted Egyptian ruler Isma'il Pasha's 44% shareholding in the Suez Canal for £4 million (equivalent to £350 million in 2016). Although this did not grant outright control of the strategic waterway, it did give Britain leverage. Joint Anglo-French financial control over Egypt ended in outright British occupation in 1882.[126] The French were still majority shareholders and attempted to weaken the British position,[127] but a compromise was reached with the 1888 Convention of Constantinople, which made the Canal officially neutral territory.[128]

text: With competitive French, Belgian and Portuguese activity in the lower Congo River region undermining orderly colonisation of tropical Africa, the Berlin Conference of 1884–85 was held to regulate the competition between the European powers in what was called the "Scramble for Africa" by defining "effective occupation" as the criterion for international recognition of territorial claims.[129] The scramble continued into the 1890s, and caused Britain to reconsider its decision in 1885 to withdraw from Sudan. A joint force of British and Egyptian troops defeated the Mahdist Army in 1896, and rebuffed an attempted French invasion at Fashoda in 1898. Sudan was nominally made an Anglo-Egyptian condominium, but a British colony in reality.[130]

text: British gains in Southern and East Africa prompted Cecil Rhodes, pioneer of British expansion in Southern Africa, to urge a "Cape to Cairo" railway linking the strategically important Suez Canal to the mineral-rich south of the continent.[131] During the 1880s and 1890s, Rhodes, with his privately owned British South Africa Company, occupied and annexed territories subsequently named after him, Rhodesia.[132]

text: Changing status of the white colonies

text: The path to independence for the white colonies of the British Empire began with the 1839 Durham Report, which proposed unification and self-government for Upper and Lower Canada, as a solution to political unrest which had erupted in armed rebellions in 1837.[133] This began with the passing of the Act of Union in 1840, which created the Province of Canada. Responsible government was first granted to Nova Scotia in 1848, and was soon extended to the other British North American colonies. With the passage of the British North America Act, 1867 by the British Parliament, Upper and Lower Canada, New Brunswick and Nova Scotia were formed into the Dominion of Canada, a confederation enjoying full self-government with the exception of international relations.[134] Australia and New Zealand achieved similar levels of self-government after 1900, with the Australian colonies federating in 1901.[135] The term "dominion status" was officially introduced at the Colonial Conference of 1907.[136]

text: The last decades of the 19th century saw concerted political campaigns for Irish home rule. Ireland had been united with Britain into the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland with the Act of Union 1800 after the Irish Rebellion of 1798, and had suffered a severe famine between 1845 and 1852. Home rule was supported by the British Prime minister, William Gladstone, who hoped that Ireland might follow in Canada's footsteps as a Dominion within the empire, but his 1886 Home Rule bill was defeated in Parliament. Although the bill, if passed, would have granted Ireland less autonomy within the UK than the Canadian provinces had within their own federation,[137] many MPs feared that a partially independent Ireland might pose a security threat to Great Britain or mark the beginning of the break-up of the empire.[138] A second Home Rule bill was also defeated for similar reasons.[138] A third bill was passed by Parliament in 1914, but not implemented because of the outbreak of the First World War leading to the 1916 Easter Rising.[139]

text: World wars (1914–1945)

text: By the turn of the 20th century, fears had begun to grow in Britain that it would no longer be able to defend the metropole and the entirety of the empire while at the same time maintaining the policy of "splendid isolation".[140] Germany was rapidly rising as a military and industrial power and was now seen as the most likely opponent in any future war. Recognising that it was overstretched in the Pacific[141] and threatened at home by the Imperial German Navy, Britain formed an alliance with Japan in 1902 and with its old enemies France and Russia in 1904 and 1907, respectively.[142]

text: First World War

text: Britain's fears of war with Germany were realised in 1914 with the outbreak of the First World War. Britain quickly invaded and occupied most of Germany's overseas colonies in Africa. In the Pacific, Australia and New Zealand occupied German New Guinea and Samoa respectively. Plans for a post-war division of the Ottoman Empire, which had joined the war on Germany's side, were secretly drawn up by Britain and France under the 1916 Sykes–Picot Agreement. This agreement was not divulged to the Sharif of Mecca, who the British had been encouraging to launch an Arab revolt against their Ottoman rulers, giving the impression that Britain was supporting the creation of an independent Arab state.[143]

text: The British declaration of war on Germany and its allies also committed the colonies and Dominions, which provided invaluable military, financial and material support. Over 2.5 million men served in the armies of the Dominions, as well as many thousands of volunteers from the Crown colonies.[144] The contributions of Australian and New Zealand troops during the 1915 Gallipoli Campaign against the Ottoman Empire had a great impact on the national consciousness at home, and marked a watershed in the transition of Australia and New Zealand from colonies to nations in their own right. The countries continue to commemorate this occasion on Anzac Day. Canadians viewed the Battle of Vimy Ridge in a similar light.[145] The important contribution of the Dominions to the war effort was recognised in 1917 by the British Prime Minister David Lloyd George when he invited each of the Dominion Prime Ministers to join an Imperial War Cabinet to co-ordinate imperial policy.[146]

text: Under the terms of the concluding Treaty of Versailles signed in 1919, the empire reached its greatest extent with the addition of 1,800,000 square miles (4,700,000 km2) and 13 million new subjects.[147] The colonies of Germany and the Ottoman Empire were distributed to the Allied powers as League of Nations mandates. Britain gained control of Palestine, Transjordan, Iraq, parts of Cameroon and Togoland, and Tanganyika. The Dominions themselves also acquired mandates of their own: the Union of South Africa gained South West Africa (modern-day Namibia), Australia gained New Guinea, and New Zealand Western Samoa. Nauru was made a combined mandate of Britain and the two Pacific Dominions.[148]

text: Inter-war period

text: The changing world order that the war had brought about, in particular the growth of the United States and Japan as naval powers, and the rise of independence movements in India and Ireland, caused a major reassessment of British imperial policy.[149] Forced to choose between alignment with the United States or Japan, Britain opted not to renew its Japanese alliance and instead signed the 1922 Washington Naval Treaty, where Britain accepted naval parity with the United States.[150] This decision was the source of much debate in Britain during the 1930s[151] as militaristic governments took hold in Japan and Germany helped in part by the Great Depression, for it was feared that the empire could not survive a simultaneous attack by both nations.[152] The issue of the empire's security was a serious concern in Britain, as it was vital to the British economy.[153]

text: In 1919, the frustrations caused by delays to Irish home rule led the MPs of Sinn Féin, a pro-independence party that had won a majority of the Irish seats in the 1918 British general election, to establish an independent parliament in Dublin, at which Irish independence was declared. The Irish Republican Army simultaneously began a guerrilla war against the British administration.[154] The Anglo-Irish War ended in 1921 with a stalemate and the signing of the Anglo-Irish Treaty, creating the Irish Free State, a Dominion within the British Empire, with effective internal independence but still constitutionally linked with the British Crown.[155] Northern Ireland, consisting of six of the 32 Irish counties which had been established as a devolved region under the 1920 Government of Ireland Act, immediately exercised its option under the treaty to retain its existing status within the United Kingdom.[156]

text: A similar struggle began in India when the Government of India Act 1919 failed to satisfy demand for independence.[157] Concerns over communist and foreign plots following the Ghadar Conspiracy ensured that war-time strictures were renewed by the Rowlatt Acts. This led to tension,[158] particularly in the Punjab region, where repressive measures culminated in the Amritsar Massacre. In Britain public opinion was divided over the morality of the massacre, between those who saw it as having saved India from anarchy, and those who viewed it with revulsion.[158] The subsequent Non-Co-Operation movement was called off in March 1922 following the Chauri Chaura incident, and discontent continued to simmer for the next 25 years.[159]

text: In 1922, Egypt, which had been declared a British protectorate at the outbreak of the First World War, was granted formal independence, though it continued to be a British client state until 1954. British troops remained stationed in Egypt until the signing of the Anglo-Egyptian Treaty in 1936,[160] under which it was agreed that the troops would withdraw but continue to occupy and defend the Suez Canal zone. In return, Egypt was assisted in joining the League of Nations.[161] Iraq, a British mandate since 1920, also gained membership of the League in its own right after achieving independence from Britain in 1932.[162] In Palestine, Britain was presented with the problem of mediating between the Arabs and increasing numbers of Jews. The 1917 Balfour Declaration, which had been incorporated into the terms of the mandate, stated that a national home for the Jewish people would be established in Palestine, and Jewish immigration allowed up to a limit that would be determined by the mandatory power.[163] This led to increasing conflict with the Arab population, who openly revolted in 1936. As the threat of war with Germany increased during the 1930s, Britain judged the support of Arabs as more important than the establishment of a Jewish homeland, and shifted to a pro-Arab stance, limiting Jewish immigration and in turn triggering a Jewish insurgency.[143]

text: The right of the Dominions to set their own foreign policy, independent of Britain, was recognised at the 1923 Imperial Conference.[164] Britain's request for military assistance from the Dominions at the outbreak of the Chanak Crisis the previous year had been turned down by Canada and South Africa, and Canada had refused to be bound by the 1923 Treaty of Lausanne.[165][166] After pressure from the Irish Free State and South Africa, the 1926 Imperial Conference issued the Balfour Declaration of 1926, declaring the Dominions to be "autonomous Communities within the British Empire, equal in status, in no way subordinate one to another" within a "British Commonwealth of Nations".[167] This declaration was given legal substance under the 1931 Statute of Westminster.[136] The parliaments of Canada, Australia, New Zealand, the Union of South Africa, the Irish Free State and Newfoundland were now independent of British legislative control, they could nullify British laws and Britain could no longer pass laws for them without their consent.[168] Newfoundland reverted to colonial status in 1933, suffering from financial difficulties during the Great Depression.[169] The Irish Free State distanced itself further from the British state with the introduction of a new constitution in 1937, making it a republic in all but name.[170]

text: Second World War

text: Britain's declaration of war against Nazi Germany in September 1939 included the Crown colonies and India but did not automatically commit the Dominions of Australia, Canada, New Zealand, Newfoundland and South Africa. All soon declared war on Germany, but Ireland chose to remain legally neutral throughout the war.[171]

text: After the Fall of France in June 1940, Britain and the empire stood alone against Germany, until the German invasion of Greece on 7 April 1941. British Prime Minister Winston Churchill successfully lobbied President Franklin D. Roosevelt for military aid from the United States, but Roosevelt was not yet ready to ask Congress to commit the country to war.[172] In August 1941, Churchill and Roosevelt met and signed the Atlantic Charter, which included the statement that "the rights of all peoples to choose the form of government under which they live" should be respected. This wording was ambiguous as to whether it referred to European countries invaded by Germany and Italy, or the peoples colonised by European nations, and would later be interpreted differently by the British, Americans, and nationalist movements.[173][174]

text: In December 1941, Japan launched, in quick succession, attacks on British Malaya, the United States naval base at Pearl Harbor, and Hong Kong. Churchill's reaction to the entry of the United States into the war was that Britain was now assured of victory and the future of the empire was safe,[175] but the manner in which British forces were rapidly defeated in the Far East irreversibly harmed Britain's standing and prestige as an imperial power.[176][177] Most damaging of all was the Fall of Singapore, which had previously been hailed as an impregnable fortress and the eastern equivalent of Gibraltar.[178] The realisation that Britain could not defend its entire empire pushed Australia and New Zealand, which now appeared threatened by Japanese forces, into closer ties with the United States. This resulted in the 1951 ANZUS Pact between Australia, New Zealand and the United States of America.[173]

text: Decolonisation and decline (1945–1997)

text: Though Britain and the empire emerged victorious from the Second World War, the effects of the conflict were profound, both at home and abroad. Much of Europe, a continent that had dominated the world for several centuries, was in ruins, and host to the armies of the United States and the Soviet Union, who now held the balance of global power.[179] Britain was left essentially bankrupt, with insolvency only averted in 1946 after the negotiation of a $US 4.33 billion loan from the United States,[180] the last instalment of which was repaid in 2006.[181] At the same time, anti-colonial movements were on the rise in the colonies of European nations. The situation was complicated further by the increasing Cold War rivalry of the United States and the Soviet Union. In principle, both nations were opposed to European colonialism. In practice, however, American anti-communism prevailed over anti-imperialism, and therefore the United States supported the continued existence of the British Empire to keep Communist expansion in check.[182] The "wind of change" ultimately meant that the British Empire's days were numbered, and on the whole, Britain adopted a policy of peaceful disengagement from its colonies once stable, non-Communist governments were available to transfer power to. This was in contrast to other European powers such as France and Portugal,[183] which waged costly and ultimately unsuccessful wars to keep their empires intact. Between 1945 and 1965, the number of people under British rule outside the UK itself fell from 700 million to five million, three million of whom were in Hong Kong.[184]

text: Initial disengagement

text: The pro-decolonisation Labour government, elected at the 1945 general election and led by Clement Attlee, moved quickly to tackle the most pressing issue facing the empire: Indian independence.[185] India's two major political parties—the Indian National Congress (led by Mahatma Gandhi) and the Muslim League (led by Muhammad Ali Jinnah)—had been campaigning for independence for decades, but disagreed as to how it should be implemented. Congress favoured a unified secular Indian state, whereas the League, fearing domination by the Hindu majority, desired a separate Islamic state for Muslim-majority regions. Increasing civil unrest and the mutiny of the Royal Indian Navy during 1946 led Attlee to promise independence no later than June 30, 1948. When the urgency of the situation and risk of civil war became apparent, the newly appointed (and last) Viceroy, Lord Mountbatten, hastily brought forward the date to 15 August 1947.[186] The borders drawn by the British to broadly partition India into Hindu and Muslim areas left tens of millions as minorities in the newly independent states of India and Pakistan.[187] Millions of Muslims subsequently crossed from India to Pakistan and Hindus vice versa, and violence between the two communities cost hundreds of thousands of lives. Burma, which had been administered as part of the British Raj, and Sri Lanka gained their independence the following year in 1948. India, Pakistan and Sri Lanka became members of the Commonwealth, while Burma chose not to join.[188]

text: The British mandate in Palestine, where an Arab majority lived alongside a Jewish minority, presented the British with a similar problem to that of India.[189] The matter was complicated by large numbers of Jewish refugees seeking to be admitted to Palestine following the Holocaust, while Arabs were opposed to the creation of a Jewish state. Frustrated by the intractability of the problem, attacks by Jewish paramilitary organisations and the increasing cost of maintaining its military presence, Britain announced in 1947 that it would withdraw in 1948 and leave the matter to the United Nations to solve.[190] The UN General Assembly subsequently voted for a plan to partition Palestine into a Jewish and an Arab state.

text: Following the defeat of Japan in the Second World War, anti-Japanese resistance movements in Malaya turned their attention towards the British, who had moved to quickly retake control of the colony, valuing it as a source of rubber and tin.[191] The fact that the guerrillas were primarily Malayan-Chinese Communists meant that the British attempt to quell the uprising was supported by the Muslim Malay majority, on the understanding that once the insurgency had been quelled, independence would be granted.[191] The Malayan Emergency, as it was called, began in 1948 and lasted until 1960, but by 1957, Britain felt confident enough to grant independence to the Federation of Malaya within the Commonwealth. In 1963, the 11 states of the federation together with Singapore, Sarawak and North Borneo joined to form Malaysia, but in 1965 Chinese-majority Singapore was expelled from the union following tensions between the Malay and Chinese populations.[192] Brunei, which had been a British protectorate since 1888, declined to join the union[193] and maintained its status until independence in 1984.

text: Suez and its aftermath

text: In 1951, the Conservative Party returned to power in Britain, under the leadership of Winston Churchill. Churchill and the Conservatives believed that Britain's position as a world power relied on the continued existence of the empire, with the base at the Suez Canal allowing Britain to maintain its pre-eminent position in the Middle East in spite of the loss of India. However, Churchill could not ignore Gamal Abdul Nasser's new revolutionary government of Egypt that had taken power in 1952, and the following year it was agreed that British troops would withdraw from the Suez Canal zone and that Sudan would be granted self-determination by 1955, with independence to follow.[194] Sudan was granted independence on 1 January 1956.

text: In July 1956, Nasser unilaterally nationalised the Suez Canal. The response of Anthony Eden, who had succeeded Churchill as Prime Minister, was to collude with France to engineer an Israeli attack on Egypt that would give Britain and France an excuse to intervene militarily and retake the canal.[195] Eden infuriated US President Dwight D. Eisenhower, by his lack of consultation, and Eisenhower refused to back the invasion.[196] Another of Eisenhower's concerns was the possibility of a wider war with the Soviet Union after it threatened to intervene on the Egyptian side. Eisenhower applied financial leverage by threatening to sell US reserves of the British pound and thereby precipitate a collapse of the British currency.[197] Though the invasion force was militarily successful in its objectives,[198] UN intervention and US pressure forced Britain into a humiliating withdrawal of its forces, and Eden resigned.[199][200]

text: The Suez Crisis very publicly exposed Britain's limitations to the world and confirmed Britain's decline on the world stage, demonstrating that henceforth it could no longer act without at least the acquiescence, if not the full support, of the United States.[201][202][203] The events at Suez wounded British national pride, leading one MP to describe it as "Britain's Waterloo"[204] and another to suggest that the country had become an "American satellite".[205] Margaret Thatcher later described the mindset she believed had befallen Britain's political leaders as "Suez syndrome" where they “went from believing that Britain could do anything to an almost neurotic belief that Britain could do nothing”,[206] from which Britain did not recover until the successful recapture of the Falkland Islands from Argentina in 1982.[207]

text: While the Suez Crisis caused British power in the Middle East to weaken, it did not collapse.[208] Britain again deployed its armed forces to the region, intervening in Oman (1957), Jordan (1958) and Kuwait (1961), though on these occasions with American approval,[209] as the new Prime Minister Harold Macmillan's foreign policy was to remain firmly aligned with the United States.[204] Britain maintained a military presence in the Middle East for another decade. On 16 January 1968, a few weeks after the devaluation of the pound, Prime Minister Harold Wilson and his Defence Secretary Denis Healey announced that British troops would be withdrawn from major military bases East of Suez, which included the ones in the Middle East, and primarily from Malaysia and Singapore by the end of 1971, instead of 1975 as earlier planned.[210] By that time over 50,000 British military personnel were still stationed in the Far East, including 30,000 in Singapore.[211] The British withdrew from Aden in 1967, Bahrain in 1971, and the Maldives in 1976.[212]

text: Wind of change

text: Macmillan gave a speech in Cape Town, South Africa in February 1960 where he spoke of "the wind of change blowing through this continent".[213] Macmillan wished to avoid the same kind of colonial war that France was fighting in Algeria, and under his premiership decolonisation proceeded rapidly.[214] To the three colonies that had been granted independence in the 1950s—Sudan, the Gold Coast and Malaya—were added nearly ten times that number during the 1960s.[215]

text: Britain's remaining colonies in Africa, except for self-governing Southern Rhodesia, were all granted independence by 1968. British withdrawal from the southern and eastern parts of Africa was not a peaceful process. Kenyan independence was preceded by the eight-year Mau Mau Uprising. In Rhodesia, the 1965 Unilateral Declaration of Independence by the white minority resulted in a civil war that lasted until the Lancaster House Agreement of 1979, which set the terms for recognised independence in 1980, as the new nation of Zimbabwe.[216]

text: In the Mediterranean, a guerrilla war waged by Greek Cypriots ended in 1960 leading to an independent Cyprus, with the UK retaining the military bases of Akrotiri and Dhekelia. The Mediterranean islands of Malta and Gozo were amicably granted independence from the UK in 1964 and became the country of Malta, though the idea had been raised in 1955 of integration with Britain.[217]

text: Most of the UK's Caribbean territories achieved independence after the departure in 1961 and 1962 of Jamaica and Trinidad from the West Indies Federation, established in 1958 in an attempt to unite the British Caribbean colonies under one government, but which collapsed following the loss of its two largest members.[218] Barbados achieved independence in 1966 and the remainder of the eastern Caribbean islands in the 1970s and 1980s,[218] but Anguilla and the Turks and Caicos Islands opted to revert to British rule after they had already started on the path to independence.[219] The British Virgin Islands,[220] Cayman Islands and Montserrat opted to retain ties with Britain,[221] while Guyana achieved independence in 1966. Britain's last colony on the American mainland, British Honduras, became a self-governing colony in 1964 and was renamed Belize in 1973, achieving full independence in 1981. A dispute with Guatemala over claims to Belize was left unresolved.[222]

text: British territories in the Pacific acquired independence in the 1970s beginning with Fiji in 1970 and ending with Vanuatu in 1980. Vanuatu's independence was delayed because of political conflict between English and French-speaking communities, as the islands had been jointly administered as a condominium with France.[223] Fiji, Tuvalu, the Solomon Islands and Papua New Guinea chose to become Commonwealth realms.

text: End of empire

text: In 1980, Southern Rhodesia, Britain's last African colony, became the independent nation of Zimbabwe. The New Hebrides achieved independence (as Vanuatu) in 1980, with Belize following suit in 1981. The passage of the British Nationality Act 1981, which reclassified the remaining Crown colonies as "British Dependent Territories" (renamed British Overseas Territories in 2002)[224] meant that, aside from a scattering of islands and outposts, the process of decolonisation that had begun after the Second World War was largely complete. In 1982, Britain's resolve in defending its remaining overseas territories was tested when Argentina invaded the Falkland Islands, acting on a long-standing claim that dated back to the Spanish Empire.[225] Britain's ultimately successful military response to retake the islands during the ensuing Falklands War was viewed by many to have contributed to reversing the downward trend in Britain's status as a world power.[226] The same year, the Canadian government severed its last legal link with Britain by patriating the Canadian constitution from Britain. The 1982 Canada Act passed by the British parliament ended the need for British involvement in changes to the Canadian constitution.[19] Similarly, the Constitution Act 1986 reformed the constitution of New Zealand to sever its constitutional link with Britain, and the Australia Act 1986 severed the constitutional link between Britain and the Australian states.[227] In 1984, Brunei, Britain's last remaining Asian protectorate, gained its independence.

text: In September 1982 the Prime Minister, Margaret Thatcher, travelled to Beijing to negotiate with the Chinese government, on the future of Britain's last major and most populous overseas territory, Hong Kong.[228] Under the terms of the 1842 Treaty of Nanking, Hong Kong Island itself had been ceded to Britain in perpetuity, but the vast majority of the colony was constituted by the New Territories, which had been acquired under a 99-year lease in 1898, due to expire in 1997.[229][230] Thatcher, seeing parallels with the Falkland Islands, initially wished to hold Hong Kong and proposed British administration with Chinese sovereignty, though this was rejected by China.[231] A deal was reached in 1984—under the terms of the Sino-British Joint Declaration, Hong Kong would become a special administrative region of the People's Republic of China, maintaining its way of life for at least 50 years.[232] The handover ceremony in 1997 marked for many,[17] including Charles, Prince of Wales,[18] who was in attendance, "the end of Empire".[19][20]

text: Legacy

text: Britain retains sovereignty over 14 territories outside the British Isles, which were renamed the British Overseas Territories in 2002.[233] Three are uninhabited except for transient military or scientific personnel;[233] the remaining eleven are self-governing to varying degrees and are reliant on the UK for foreign relations and defence. The British government has stated its willingness to assist any Overseas Territory that wishes to proceed to independence, where that is an option,[234] and three territories have specifically voted to remain under British sovereignty (Bermuda in 1995, Gibraltar in 2002 and the Falkland Islands in 2013).[235]

text: British sovereignty of several of the overseas territories is disputed by their geographical neighbours: Gibraltar is claimed by Spain, the Falkland Islands and South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands are claimed by Argentina, and the British Indian Ocean Territory is claimed by Mauritius and Seychelles.[236] The British Antarctic Territory is subject to overlapping claims by Argentina and Chile, while many countries do not recognise any territorial claims in Antarctica.[237]

text: Most former British colonies and protectorates are among the 52 member states of the Commonwealth of Nations, a non-political, voluntary association of equal members, comprising a population of around 2.2 billion people.[238] Sixteen Commonwealth realms voluntarily continue to share the British monarch, Queen Elizabeth II, as their head of state. These sixteen nations are distinct and equal legal entities – the United Kingdom, Australia, Canada, New Zealand, Antigua and Barbuda, The Bahamas, Barbados, Belize, Grenada, Jamaica, Papua New Guinea, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Solomon Islands and Tuvalu.[239]

text: Decades, and in some cases centuries, of British rule and emigration have left their mark on the independent nations that arose from the British Empire. The empire established the use of English in regions around the world. Today it is the primary language of up to 460 million people and is spoken by about one and a half billion as a first, second or foreign language.[240]

text: The spread of English from the latter half of the 20th century has been helped in part by the cultural and economic influence of the United States, itself originally formed from British colonies. Except in Africa where nearly all the former colonies have adopted the presidential system, the English parliamentary system has served as the template for the governments for many former colonies, and English common law for legal systems.[241]

text: The British Judicial Committee of the Privy Council still serves as the highest court of appeal for several former colonies in the Caribbean and Pacific. British Protestant missionaries who travelled around the globe often in advance of soldiers and civil servants spread the Anglican Communion to all continents. British colonial architecture, such as in churches, railway stations and government buildings, can be seen in many cities that were once part of the British Empire.[242]

text: Individual and team sports developed in Britain — particularly golf, football, cricket, rugby, netball, lawn bowls, hockey and lawn tennis — were also exported.[243] The British choice of system of measurement, the imperial system, continues to be used in some countries in various ways. The convention of driving on the left hand side of the road has been retained in much of the former empire.[244]

text: Political boundaries drawn by the British did not always reflect homogeneous ethnicities or religions, contributing to conflicts in formerly colonised areas. The British Empire was also responsible for large migrations of peoples. Millions left the British Isles, with the founding settler populations of the United States, Canada, Australia and New Zealand coming mainly from Britain and Ireland. Tensions remain between the white settler populations of these countries and their indigenous minorities, and between white settler minorities and indigenous majorities in South Africa and Zimbabwe. Settlers in Ireland from Great Britain have left their mark in the form of divided nationalist and unionist communities in Northern Ireland. Millions of people moved to and from British colonies, with large numbers of Indians emigrating to other parts of the empire, such as Malaysia and Fiji, and Chinese people to Malaysia, Singapore and the Caribbean.[245] The demographics of Britain itself was changed after the Second World War owing to immigration to Britain from its former colonies.[246]


document_title: Margo McCaffery

question_text: who said pain is what the patient says it is

root

text: Margo McCaffery

text:
The topic of this article may not meet Wikipedia's notability guideline for biographies. Please help to establish notability by citing reliable secondary sources that are independent of the topic and provide significant coverage of it beyond its mere trivial mention. If notability cannot be established, the article is likely to be merged, redirected, or deleted.
Find sources: "Margo McCaffery" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR (October 2009) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)

tag: table

text: Margo McCaffery is an American registered nurse and pioneer of the field of pain management nursing. McCaffery's oft-quoted definition of pain as "whatever the experiencing person says it is, existing whenever and wherever the person say it does" has become the prevailing conceptualisation of pain for clinicians over the past few decades.[1]

tag: p


document_title: Property tax in the United States

question_text: when did property tax start in the us

question_tokens: when did property tax start in the us

text: Property tax in the United States

text: Basics[edit]

text:
Average Effective Property Tax of the 50 States (2007)

  Income
Percentile
       Effective Property Tax (%)

Top 1%

0.70

95-99

2.10

80-95

2.70

60-80

2.80

40-60

2.70

20-40

2.70

0-20

3.60

The average effective property tax of the 50 states on a household (2007). The effective tax shown is calculated using a microsimulation model based on the 1990 Public Use Microdata Sample of census records and statistical data from the Internal Revenue Service for undisclosed years.[2]

text: Most jurisdictions below the state level in the United States impose a tax on interests in real property (land, buildings, and permanent improvements) that are considered under state law to be ownership interests.[3] Rules vary widely by jurisdiction.[4] However, certain features are nearly universal. Some jurisdictions also tax some types of business personal property, particularly inventory and equipment.[5] States generally do not impose property taxes.[6]

text: Many overlapping jurisdictions may have authority to tax the same property.[7] These include counties or parishes, cities and/or towns, school districts, utility districts, and special taxing authorities which vary by state. Few states impose a tax on the value of property. The tax is based on fair market value of the subject property, and generally attaches to the property on a specific date. The owner of the property on that date is liable for the tax.[8]

text: The amount of tax is determined annually based on market value of each property on a particular date,[9] and most jurisdictions require redeterminations of value periodically. The tax is computed as the determined market value times an assessment ratio times the tax rate.[10] Assessment ratios and tax rates vary among jurisdictions, and may vary by type of property within a jurisdiction.[11] Most jurisdictions' legislative bodies determine their assessment ratios and tax rates, though some states impose constraints on such determinations.

text: Tax assessors for taxing jurisdictions determine property values in a variety of ways, but are generally required to base such determinations on fair market value.[12] Fair market value is that price for a willing and informed seller would sell the property to a willing and informed buyer, neither being under any compulsion to act. Where a property has recently been sold between unrelated sellers, such sale establishes fair market value. In other (i.e., most) cases, the value must be estimated. Common estimation techniques include the comparable sales method, the depreciated cost method, and an income method approach. Property owners may also declare a value, which is subject to change by the tax assessor.

text: Once value is determined, the assessor typically notifies the last known property owner of the value determination. Such notices may include the calculated amount of tax. The property owner may then contest the value.[13] Property values are generally subject to review by a board of review or similar body, before which a property owner may contest determinations.[14]

text: After values are settled, property tax bills or notices are sent to property owners.[15] Payment times and terms vary widely. If a property owner fails to pay the tax, the taxing jurisdiction has various remedies for collection, in many cases including seizure and sale of the property. Property taxes constitute a lien on the property to which transferees are also subject.

text: Property subject to tax[edit]

text: Nearly all property tax imposing jurisdictions tax real property.[16] This includes land, buildings, and all improvements (often called fixtures) that cannot be removed without damage to the property.[17] Taxed property includes homes, farms, business premises, and most other real property. Many jurisdictions also tax certain types of other property used in a business. Property existing and located in the jurisdiction on a particular date is subject to this tax. This date is often January 1 of each year, but varies among jurisdictions. Property owned by educational, charitable, and religious organizations is usually exempt.[18]

text: Tax rates[edit]

text: Tax rates vary widely among jurisdictions.[19] They are generally set by the taxing jurisdiction's governing body.[20] The method of determining the rate varies widely, but may be constrained under laws of particular states. In some jurisdictions, property is taxed based on its classification. Classification is the grouping of properties based on similar use. Examples of classification are residential, commercial, industrial, vacant, and blighted real property. Property classification are used to tax properties at different rates and for different public policy purposes. In Washington D.C. for instance property occupancy is incentivized by taxing residential property at 0.85 percent of assessed value but vacant residential property at 5 percent of assessed value.[21]

text: Rate or millage[edit]

text: The rate of tax is a percentage of the assessed value of the property subject to tax. This in some cases is expressed as a “millage” or dollars of tax per thousand dollars of assessed value.[22]

text: Assessment ratio[edit]

text: Most jurisdictions impose the tax on some stated portion of fair market value, referred to as an assessment ratio.[23] This ratio may vary depending on the type or use of the property. The assessment ratio can, in many jurisdictions, be changed from year to year by the taxing jurisdiction's governing body. Changes in tax rate or assessment ratio may have the same practical effect of changing net tax due on a particular property.

text: Valuation[edit]

text: Determining the value of property is a critical aspect of property taxation, as such value determines the amount of tax due. Various techniques may be used to determine value. Except in the case of property recently sold, valuation has some inherently subjective aspects. Values may change over time, and many states require taxing jurisdictions to redetermine values every three or four years. The value of property is often determined based on current use of the property, rather than potential uses.[24] Property values are determined at a particular valuation date for each jurisdiction, which varies widely.

text: Who determines value[edit]

text: Property owners may make a declaration of the value of property they own to a taxing authority. This is often referred to as rendition.[25] The taxing authority may accept this value or make its own determination of value. The value determinations are generally made by a tax assessor for the taxing authority. Some states require uniform values to be determined for each particular property.

text: Market value[edit]

text: Property values are generally based on fair market value of the property on the valuation date. Fair market value has been defined as that price a willing and informed purchaser would pay to an unrelated willing and informed seller where neither party is under compulsion to act. Sale of the particular property between unrelated persons generally conclusively establishes fair market value on the date of sale. Thus, a recent sale of the same property provides good evidence of market value. Where there has been no recent sale, other techniques must be used to determine market value.

text: Assessed value[edit]

text: Many jurisdictions impose tax on a value that is only a portion of market value. This assessed value is the market value times an assessment ratio.[26] Assessment ratios are often set by local taxing jurisdictions. However, some states impose constraints on the assessment ratios used by taxing jurisdictions within the state.[26] Some such restrictions vary by type or use of property, and may vary by jurisdiction within the state. Some states impose restrictions on the rate at which assessed value may increase.[27]

text: Equalization among jurisdictions[edit]

text: Many states require that multiple jurisdictions taxing the same property must use the same market value.[28] Generally, such state provides a board of equalization or similar body to determine values in cases of disputes between jurisdictions.[29]

text: Valuation techniques[edit]

text: Tax assessors may use a variety of techniques for determining the value of property that was not recently sold.[24] Determining which technique to use and how to apply it inherently involves judgment.

text: Comparable sales[edit]

text: Values may be determined based on recent sales of comparable property.[30] The value of most homes is usually determined based on sales of comparable homes in the immediate area. Valuation adjustments may be necessary to achieve comparability. Among the factors considered in determining if a property is comparable are:

text:
Nature of the property (house, office building, bare land, etc.)
Location
Size
Use of the property (residential, commercial, farm, etc.)
Nature of improvements

Types and uses of buildings
Features of the buildings (number of bedrooms, level of amenities, etc.)
Age of improvements

Desirability of the property (view, proximity to schools, type of access, nearby detracting features, etc.)
Restrictions on the property (easements, building code restrictions, physical restrictions, etc.)
Utility of the property (fertility of land, drainage or lack thereof, environmental issues, etc.)
General economic conditions

tag: ul

text: Cost[edit]

text: Where recent comparable property sales are not available, a cost based approach may be used. In this approach, the original or replacement cost of a property is reduced by an allowance for decline in value (depreciation) of improvements.[26] In some jurisdictions, the amount of depreciation may be limited by statute. Where original cost is used, it may be adjusted for inflation or increases or decreases in cost of constructing improvements. Replacement cost may be determined by estimates of construction costs.

text: Income[edit]

text: An alternative valuation may be used for income producing property based on economic concepts. Using the income approach, value is determined based on present values expected income streams from the property.[26] Selection of an appropriate discount rate in determining present values is a key judgmental factor influencing valuation under this approach.

text: Special use values[edit]

text: Most taxing jurisdictions provide that property used in any of several manners is subject to special valuation procedures.[31] This is commonly applied to property used for farming, forestry, or other uses common in the jurisdiction. Some jurisdictions value property at its "highest and best use", with some of these providing exceptions for homes or agricultural land.[32] Special valuation issues vary widely among jurisdictions.

text: Revaluation[edit]

text: All taxing jurisdictions recognize that values of property may change over time. Thus, values must be redetermined periodically. Many states and localities require that the value of property be redetermined at three or four year intervals.[33] Such revaluation may follow valuation principles above, or may use mass valuation techniques.

text: Limits on increases[edit]

text: Some jurisdictions have set limits on how much property values may be increased from year to year for property tax purposes.[34] These limits may be applied yearly or cumulatively, depending on the jurisdiction's rules.

text: Assessment process[edit]

text: The assessment process varies widely by jurisdiction as to procedure and timing. In many states, the process of assessment and collection may be viewed as a two-year process, where values are determined in the first year and tax assessed and paid in the second.[35] Most jurisdictions encourage property owners to declare the value of their property at the start of the assessment process. Property owners in all jurisdictions are given rights to appeal taxing authority determinations, but such rights vary widely.

text: Valuation by assessor[edit]

text: Jurisdictions imposing property tax uniformly charge some official with determining value of property subject to tax by the jurisdiction.[36] This official may be an employee or contractor to the taxing government, and is generally referred to as the tax assessor in most jurisdictions. Some taxing jurisdictions may share a common tax assessor for some or all property within the jurisdictions, especially when the jurisdictions overlap.

text: Tax assessors must first determine what property is subject to tax, compiling lists or rolls of such property. In many jurisdictions, the tax assessor notifies the last known owner of each property that the property is subject to tax. The tax assessor must determine the value of each property subject to tax. Often, the value used is the value from the previous assessment, possibly increased or decreased by a factor determined by the tax assessor.

text: Notification to owner[edit]

text: Following determination of value, tax assessors are generally required to notify the property owner(s) of the value so determined.[37] Procedures vary by jurisdiction. In Louisiana, no formal notice is required; instead, the assessor “opens” the books to allow property owners to view the valuations.[38] Texas and some other jurisdictions also require that the notice include very specific items, and such notice may cover multiple taxing jurisdictions. Some jurisdictions provide that notification is made by publishing a list of properties and values in a local newspaper.[39]

text: In some jurisdictions, such notification is required only if the value increases by more than a certain percentage. In some jurisdictions, the notification of value may also constitute a tax bill or assessment. Generally, notification of the owner starts the limited period during which the owner may contest the value.

text: Review[edit]

text: Owners of property are nearly always entitled to discuss valuations with the tax assessor, and such discussions may result in changes in the assessor's valuation.[40] Many jurisdictions provide for a review of value determinations. Such review is often done by a board of review, often composed of residents of the jurisdiction who are not otherwise associated with the jurisdiction's government.[41] In addition, some jurisdictions and some states provide for additional review bodies.[42]

text: Protest[edit]

text: Nearly all jurisdiction provide for a mechanism for contesting the assessor's determination of value. Such mechanisms vary widely.[43]

text: Judicial appeal[edit]

text: All jurisdictions levying property tax must allow property owners to go to court to contest valuation and taxes.[44] Procedures for such judicial appeal vary widely. Some jurisdictions prohibit judicial appeal until administrative appeals are exhausted. Some permit binding arbitration.[45]

text: Levy of tax[edit]

text: Tax is levied at the tax rate and assessment ratio applicable for the year.[46] Taxing jurisdictions levy tax on property following a preliminary or final determination of value. Property taxes in the United States generally are due only if the taxing jurisdiction has levied or billed the tax. The form of levy or billing varies, but is often accomplished by mailing a tax bill to the property owner or mortgage company.[47]

text: Exemptions and incentives[edit]

text: Taxing jurisdictions provide a wide variety of methods a property owner may use to reduce tax. Nearly all jurisdictions provide a homestead exemption reducing the taxable value, and thus tax, of an individual's home.[48] Many provide additional exemptions for veterans.[49] Taxing jurisdictions may also offer temporary or permanent full or partial exemptions from property taxes, often as an incentive for a particular business to locate its premises within the jurisdiction.[50] Some jurisdictions provide broad exemptions from property taxes for businesses located within certain areas, such as enterprise zones.[51]

text: The largest property tax exemption is the exemption for registered non-profit organizations; all 50 states fully exempt these organizations from state and local property taxes with a 2009 study estimating the exemption's forgone tax revenues range from $17-$32 billion per year.[52]

text: Exemptions can be quite substantial. In New York City alone, an Independent Budget Office study found that religious institutions would have been taxed $627M yearly without such exemptions; all exempt groups avoided paying a combined $13 billion in the fiscal year of 2012 (1 July 2011 to 30 June 2012).[53]

text: Payment[edit]

text: Time and manner of payment of property taxes varies widely.[54] Property taxes in many jurisdictions are due in a single payment by January 1. Many jurisdictions provide for payment in multiple installments.[55] In some jurisdictions, the first installment payment is based on prior year tax. Payment is generally required by cash or check delivered or mailed to the taxing jurisdiction.

text: Liens and seizures[edit]

text: Property taxes generally attach to the property; that is, they become an encumbrance on the property which the current and future owners must satisfy.[56] This attachment, or lien, generally happens automatically without further action of the taxing authority.[56] The lien generally is removed automatically upon payment of the tax.

text: If the tax is not paid within a specified period of time (including additional interest, penalties, and costs), a tax sale is held, which may result in either 1) the actual sale of a property, or 2) a lien sold to a third party, who (after another specified period of time) may take action to claim the property, or force a later sale to redeem the lien.

text: Attachment date[edit]

text: The tax lien attaches to the property[57] at a specific date, generally the date the tax liability becomes enforceable.[58] This date varies by state, and in some states by local jurisdiction.

text: Delinquency[edit]

text: Where the property owner does not pay tax by the due date, the taxing authority may assess penalties and interest.[59] The amount, timing, and procedures vary widely. Generally, the penalty and interest are enforceable in the same manner as the tax, and attach to the property.

text: Seizure and sale[edit]

text: Where the property owner fails to pay tax, the taxing authority may act to enforce its lien. Enforcement procedures vary by state. In some states, the lien may be sold by the taxing authority to a third party, who can then attempt collection.[60] In most states, the taxing authority can seize the property and offer it for sale, generally at a public auction.[57] In some states, rights acquired in such sale may be limited.

text: Tax administrations[edit]

text: Property taxes are generally administered separately by each jurisdiction imposing property tax,[12] though some jurisdictions may share a common property tax administration. Often the administration of the taxes is conducted from the taxing jurisdiction's administrative offices (e.g., town hall). The form and organization varies widely.

text: Assessors[edit]

text: Most taxing jurisdictions refer to the official charged with determining property values, assessing, and collecting property taxes as assessors. Assessors may be elected, appointed, hired, or contracted, depending on rules within the jurisdiction, which may vary within a state. Assessors may or not be involved in collection of tax.[61] The tax assessors in some states are required to pass certain certification examinations and/or have a certain minimum level of property valuation experience.[12] Larger jurisdictions employ full-time personnel in the tax assessors office, while small jurisdictions may engage only one part-time person for the entire tax assessor function.

text: Constitutional limitations[edit]

text: Property taxes, like all taxes in the United States, are subject to constraints under the United States and applicable state constitutions. The United States Constitution contains three relevant provisions: limits on federal direct taxation, an equal protection rule, and the privileges and immunities provisions.[62] Nearly all state constitutions impose uniformity and equality rules. Most state constitutions also impose other restrictions, which vary widely.

text: The federal government is generally prohibited from imposing direct taxes unless such taxes are then given to the states in proportion to population. Thus, ad valorem property taxes have not been imposed at the federal level.

text: The states must grant residents of other states equal protections as taxpayers.

text: Uniformity and equality[edit]

text: State constitutions constrain taxing authorities within the state, including local governments. Typically, these constitutions require that property taxes be uniformly or equally assessed. While many states allow differing rates of taxation among tax jurisdictions, most prohibit the same jurisdiction from applying different rates to different taxpayers. These provisions have generally been interpreted to mean the method of valuation and assessment must be consistent from one local government to another. Some state courts have held that this uniformity and equality requirement does not prevent granting individualized tax credits (such as exemptions and incentives). Some states permit different classes of property (as opposed to different classes of taxpayer) to be valued using different assessment ratios. In many states the uniformity and equality provisions apply only to property taxes, leading to significant classification problems.[62]

text: History[edit]

text: Property taxes in the United States originated during colonial times.[63] By 1796, state and local governments in fourteen of the fifteen states taxed land, but only four taxed inventory (stock in trade). Delaware did not tax property, but rather the income from it. In some states, "all property, with a few exceptions, was taxed; in others, specific objects were named. Land was taxed in one state according to quantity, in another according to quality, and in a third not at all. Responsibility for the assessment and collection of taxes in some cases attached to the state itself; in others, to the counties or townships." Vermont and North Carolina taxed land based on quantity, while New York and Rhode Island taxed land based on value. Connecticut taxed land based on type of use. Procedures varied widely.[64]

text: During the period from 1796 until the Civil War, a unifying principle developed: "the taxation of all property, movable and immovable, visible and invisible, or real and personal, as we say in America, at one uniform rate."[65] During this period, property taxes came to be assessed based on value. This was introduced as a requirement in many state constitutions.

text: After the Civil War, intangible property, including corporate stock, took on far greater importance. Taxing jurisdictions found it difficult to find and tax this sort of property. This trend led to the introduction of alternatives to the property tax (such as income and sales taxes) at the state level.[16] Property taxes remained a major source of government revenue below the state level. Connecticut taxed land based on type of use. Procedures varied widely.[64]

text: Hard times during the Great Depression led to high delinquency rates and reduced property tax revenues.[66] Also during the 1900s, many jurisdictions began exempting certain property from taxes. Many jurisdictions exempted homes of war veterans. After World War II, some states replaced exemptions with "circuit breaker" provisions limiting increases in value for residences.

text: Various economic factors have led to taxpayer initiatives in various states to limit property tax. California Proposition 13 (1978) amended the California Constitution to limit aggregate property taxes to 1% of the "full cash value of such property." It also limited the increase in assessed value of real property to an inflation factor that was limited to 2% per year.

text: Policy issues[edit]

text: There are numerous policy issues regarding property tax, including:[citation needed]

text:
Fairness, or lack thereof
Progressivity, or lack thereof
Administrability/socialist redistribution of taxpayer funds
Allodial title vs. true ownership of property

text: In spite of these issues, many aspects of the property tax, and the reliance of local governments on it as a principal source of revenue, have remained much the same since colonial times.

text: Serfdom

text: Opinions on property tax[edit]

text: Sprawl[edit]

text: In the absence of urban planning policies, property tax on real estate changes the incentives for developing land, which in turn affects land use patterns. One of the main concerns is whether or not it encourages urban sprawl.

text: The market value of undeveloped real estate reflects a property's current use as well as its development potential. As a city expands, relatively cheap and undeveloped lands (such as farms, ranches, private conservation parks, etc.) increase in value as neighboring areas are developed into retail, industrial, or residential units. This raises the land value, which increases the property tax that must be paid on agricultural land, but does not increase the amount of revenue per land area available to the owner. This, along with a higher sale price, increases the incentive to rent or sell agricultural land to developers. On the other hand, a property owner who develops a parcel must thereafter pay a higher tax, based on the value of the improvements. This makes the development less attractive than it would otherwise be. Overall, these effects result in lower density development, which tends to increase sprawl.

text: Attempts to reduce the impact of property taxes on sprawl include:

text:
Land value taxation - This method separates the value of a given property into its actual components — land value and improvement value. A gradually lower and lower tax is levied on the improvement value and a higher tax is levied on the land value to insure revenue-neutrality. A similar method is known as split-rate taxation.
Current-use valuation - This method assesses the value of a given property based only upon its current use. Much like land value taxation, this reduces the effect of city encroachment.
Conservation easements - The property owner adds a restriction to the property prohibiting future development. This effectively removes the development potential as a factor in the property taxes.
Exemptions - Exempting favored classes of real estate (such as farms, ranches, cemeteries or private conservation parks) from the property tax altogether or assessing their value at a minimal amount (for example, $1 per acre).
Forcing higher density housing - In the Portland, Oregon area, for example, local municipalities are often forced to accept higher density housing with small lot sizes. This is governed by a multi-county development control board, in Portland's case Metro.
Urban growth boundary or Green belt - Government declares some land undevelopable until a date in the future. This forces regional development back into the urban core, increasing density but also land and housing prices. It may also cause development to skip over the restricted-use zone, to occur in more distant areas, or to move to other cities.

text: Distributional[edit]

text: Property tax has been shown to be regressive [2] (that is, to fall disproportionately on those of lower income) when not correctly implemented because of its impact on particular low-income/high-asset groups such as pensioners and farmers. Because these persons have high-assets accumulated over time, they have a high property tax liability, although their realized income is low. Therefore, a larger proportion of their income goes to paying the tax. In areas with speculative land appreciation (such as California in the 1970s and 2000s), there may be little or no relationship between property taxes and a homeowner's ability to pay them short of selling the property.[67]

text: This issue was a common argument used by supporters of such measures as California Proposition 13 or Oregon Ballot Measure 5; some economists have even called for the abolition of property taxes altogether, to be replaced by income taxes, consumption taxes such as Europe's VAT, or a combination of both. Others, however, have argued that property taxes are broadly progressive, since people of higher incomes are disproportionately likely to own more valuable property. In addition, while nearly all households have some income, nearly a third of households own no real estate. Moreover, the most valuable properties are owned by corporations not individuals. Hence, property is more unevenly distributed than income.

text: It has been suggested that these two beliefs are not incompatible — it is possible for a tax to be progressive in general but to be regressive in relation to minority groups. However, although not direct, and not likely one-to-one, property renters can be subject to property taxes as well. If the tax reduces the supply of housing units, then it will increase the rental price. In this way, the owner's cost of taxation is passed on to the renter (occupant).

text: Progressive policies[edit]

text: As property increases in value the possibility exists that new buyers might pay taxes on outdated values thus placing an unfair burden on the rest of the property owners. To correct this imbalance municipalities periodically revalue property. Revaluation produces an up-to-date value to be used in determination of the tax rate necessary to produce the required tax levy.

text: A consequence of this is that existing owners are reassessed as well as new owners and thus are required to pay taxes on property the value of which is determined by market forces, such as gentrification in low income areas of a city. In an effort to relieve the frequently large tax burdens on existing owners, particularly those with fixed incomes such as the elderly and those who have lost their jobs, communities have introduced exemptions.

text: In some states, laws provide for exemptions (typically called homestead exemptions) and/or limits on the percentage increase in tax, which limit the yearly increase in property tax so that owner-occupants are not "taxed out of their homes". Generally, these exemptions and ceilings are available only to property owners who use their property as their principal residence. Homestead exemptions generally cannot be claimed on investment properties and second homes. When a homesteaded property changes ownership, the property tax often rises sharply and the property's sale price may become the basis for new exemptions and limits available to the new owner-occupant.

text: Homestead exemptions increase the complexity of property tax collection and sometimes provide an easy opportunity for people who own several properties to benefit from tax credits to which they are not entitled. Since there is no national database that links home ownership with Social Security numbers, landlords sometimes gain homestead tax credits by claiming multiple properties in different states, and even their own state, as their "principal residence", while only one property is truly their residence.[68] In 2005, several US Senators and Congressmen were found to have erroneously claimed "second homes" in the greater Washington, D.C. area as their "principal residences", giving them property tax credits to which they were not entitled.[69]

text: Undeserved homestead exemption credits became so ubiquitous in the state of Maryland that a law was passed in the 2007 legislative session to require validation of principal residence status through the use of a social security number matching system.[70] The bill passed unanimously in the Maryland House of Delegates and Senate and was signed into law by the Governor.[71] The fairness of property tax collection and distribution is a hotly debated topic. Some people feel school systems would be more uniform if the taxes were collected and distributed at a state level, thereby equalizing the funding of school districts. Others are reluctant to have a higher level of government determine the rates and allocations, preferring to leave the decisions to government levels closer to the people.

text: In Rhode Island efforts are being made to modify revaluation practices to preserve the major benefit of property taxation, the reliability of tax revenue, while providing for what some view as a correction of the unfair distribution of tax burdens on existing owners of property.[72]

text: The Supreme Court has held[citation needed] that Congress can directly tax land ownership so long as the tax is apportioned among the states based upon representation/population. In an apportioned land tax, each state would have its own rate of taxation sufficient to raise its pro-rata share of the total revenue to be financed by a land tax. So, for example, if State A has 5% of the population, the State A would collect and remit to the federal government such tax revenue that equals 5% of the revenue sought. Such an apportioned tax on land had been used on many occasions up through the Civil War.

text: Indirect taxes on the transfer of land are permitted without apportionment: in the past, this has taken the form of requiring revenue stamps to be affixed to deeds and mortgages, but these are no longer required by federal law. Under the Internal Revenue Code, the government realizes a substantial amount of revenue from income taxes on capital gains from the sale of land and in estate taxes from the passage of property (including land) upon the death of its owner.

text: Milton Friedman noted that "[T]he property tax is one of the least bad taxes, because it’s levied on something that cannot be produced — that part that is levied on the land".[73] A 2008 analysis from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development was consistent with Friedman's opinion; examining the effect of various types of taxes on economic growth, it found that property taxes "seem[ed] to be the most growth-friendly, followed by consumption taxes and then by personal income taxes."[74][75] Allodial title Land patent.