3 ms·
You can get identical effects as Singapore’s state owned land without actually making it state owned/managed/priced by simply instituting a very high Land Value
by ethanbond 6y ago
You can get identical effects as Singapore’s state owned land without actually making it state owned/managed/priced by simply instituting a very high Land Value Tax.
Rent collected for buildings/management/amenities goes to landlord, rent collected for the physical land upon which the building exists (which is valuable not because of the landlord) is recouped by the community as tax.
- thehappypm 6y agoHigher taxes also directly cause higher rents passed on to renters.
- taktoa 6y agoThat is uniquely not the case for LVT, because the supply of land is fixed, whereas the demand for housing is variable. EDIT: to be clear, I meant the "passing on to renters" part, not the "property may become more expensive" part.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- ethanbond 6y agoReiterating the other comment: this is not true of LVT. LVT cannot be passed on to renters. Essentially every other tax can be and is passed to consumers. No economist disputes LVT’s inability to be passed on.
- seanmcdirmid 6y agoLower taxes means more money people can devote to housing, which in turn can also bid up prices. This is why the USA provides for a foreign housing deduction, or Americans could never practically live in Singapore without running into double taxation.