This study examined different funding methods for financing public education in order to solve the problems associated with large numbers of school districts and great disparities in property wealth without abandonment of property tax as the major revenue source. Using enrollment and State Property Tax Board data for the 1,061 school districts in Texas in 1986-87, four alternative funding plans were studied to compare the equity and fiscal impact of each on public school finance in Texas. The state and local shares of the total cost of education were computed using a combination of three per-pupil expenditure levels and four funding formulas. The per-pupil expenditure levels used were $3,850, $4,200, and $4,580. The formulas used were representative of a full state funding plan, a percentage equalization plan, a power equalization plan, and a foundation school program plan. Since each of the four plans used significantly higher per-pupil expenditure values, all required a greater monetary investment on the part of the state. However, all plans were found to be equalizing in nature if set per-pupil expenditure values were maintained and no local enrichment was permitted. In addition, each of the four plans, as studied, met the fiscal neutrality standard of the 1987 Edqewood v. Kirbv case. The percentage and power equalization plans required less monetary investment on the part of the state than either full state funding or the foundation school program. As a result of the study, it is recommended that the state consider a combination of plans. For example, the state could employ a full state funding model up to the $3,850 per-pupil expenditure level with added permissible local millage being limited and power equalized. In addition, while each of the plans studied reduces inequity, the increased cost of an adequate public school education suggests that the state consider other sources of revenue to fund public education. These could include personal or corporate income taxes.

Finanskrisen 2007-2008 blev startskottet för nya bankregleringar och åtstramningar.Regelverket Basel III introducerades med syfte att hantera risker bättre genom att införahårdare kapital- och likviditetskrav som i sin tur skulle motverka eventuella nya systematiskarisker. Syftet med denna uppsats är att undersöka Basel III:s påverkan på diversifieringen avfastighetsfinansiering på den svenska marknaden och utreda de drivkrafter och effekter avdessa förändringar. Studien ämnar att ge ett brett perspektiv genom att undersöka påverkan påett flertal sektorer i den empiriska undersökningen. Efter genomförandet av studien så kan det konstateras att bankerna har fått ökade kostnadersom sedermera har förskjutits till kunderna. Vidare har belåningsgraderna i fastighetssektornminskat till följd av implementeringen Basel III. Det nya regulatoriska landskapet har banat väg för diversifiering. Dock, så kan de primäradrivkrafterna tillskrivas makro-sentiment, jakt på avkastning, market timing och aktörer somhar vuxit ifrån sitt beroende av bankkapital. / The financial crisis of 2007-2008 was the start of new banking regulations and austeritymeasures. Basel III was introduced with the intent of managing risks better by introducingstricter capital and liquidity requirements. The new requirements would in return counteractany new systematic risks. The purpose of this study is to investigate Basel III’s impact oncredit diversification on the Swedish market and navigate what the driving forces are and theeffects of regulatory change. The aim is to provide a broad perspective by presenting valuableinformation relevant to the subject and examining the impact of these changes on differentsectors. The results of the study shows that new regulations have entailed a major regulatory changewith subsequent implications on the market. Findings also show that banks have experiencedan increase of costs which have since been shifted to customers. Furthermore, loan-to-valueratios within the real estate sector have decreased as a result of the implementation of BaselIII. The new regulatory framework has paved the way for diversification. However, thedevelopment has been propelled by macro sentiment, reaching for yield-behavior, markettiming and firms outgrowing their dependency on bank capital.