2 ms·

N.B. Crazy idea follows: I wonder if there would be a away for the government to allow people to purchase land at a reduced cost and tax-free (sales and proper

N.B. Crazy idea follows: I wonder if there would be a away for the government to allow people to purchase land at a reduced cost and tax-free (sales and property taxes) for the sole purpose of planting trees. Land purchased this way would be legally protected against the government's power of eminent domain/expropriation [0]. Sale of the said land would be restricted in the same way. If someone did want to develop the land, they would be allowed to do so only if they paid the difference that would have been accumulated over the years in taxes compounded with interest. The whole thing would sort of be like a U.S. 401k or Canadian RRSP, but for the environment. It would sort of like what this Brazilian politician asked for here except the ownership of the land would be transferred, so it wouldn't be a sort of one-sided, long-term extortion [1]. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eminent_domain https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eminent_domain [1] https://www.npr.org/2015/11/10/455432704/rich-nations-should-pay-to-preserve-amazon-rainforest-brazilian-politician-says https://www.npr.org/2015/11/10/455432704/rich-nations-should...

mattkrause 7y ago
A couple of similar mechanisms already exist. One way to do this is through a conservation easement, which essentially splits off the right to develop some land and sells/donates that right to a land trust or the government. You retain ownership of the land itself, but this restriction becomes part of the title, so it runs with the land and binds you and future owners to its terms. In exchange, the donation is tax deductible (or the sale nets you money) and the easement also reduces your property tax since the land is now worth less (30-60%). There are also less permanent versions where the owner agrees to manage the land in a particular way or according to a designated person’s advice (e.g., a forester). I think these are often for a fixed term (e.g., 10 or 25 years).
avierax 7y ago
What would be the advantage of making the land private compared to planting trees in public land?
- tareqak 7y ago
  It’s so that a future government can’t sell that land to someone else to cut down the trees and develop it. That can still happen with private ownership, which is why I had the idea of giving concessions that would have to be paid back to deter it.

mattkrause 7y ago

A couple of similar mechanisms already exist. One way to do this is through a conservation easement, which essentially splits off the right to develop some land and sells/donates that right to a land trust or the government. You retain ownership of the land itself, but this restriction becomes part of the title, so it runs with the land and binds you and future owners to its terms. In exchange, the donation is tax deductible (or the sale nets you money) and the easement also reduces your property tax since the land is now worth less (30-60%). There are also less permanent versions where the owner agrees to manage the land in a particular way or according to a designated person’s advice (e.g., a forester). I think these are often for a fixed term (e.g., 10 or 25 years).

avierax 7y ago

What would be the advantage of making the land private compared to planting trees in public land?

tareqak 7y ago
It’s so that a future government can’t sell that land to someone else to cut down the trees and develop it. That can still happen with private ownership, which is why I had the idea of giving concessions that would have to be paid back to deter it.