3 ms·
San Francisco is an interesting case cause they used to have a land tax and economists argued that's what cause San Fran to be quickly rebuilt after it was burn
by MrPowers 5y ago
San Francisco is an interesting case cause they used to have a land tax and economists argued that's what cause San Fran to be quickly rebuilt after it was burned to the ground in 1906. Land owners were still taxed the same, even though their building was gone. They'd have to either sell or rebuild.
Contrast that with New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina. Property owners had their buildings destroyed, so taxes went to zero (taxes based on the property value, not the land value). This incentivized property owners to wait and see if their neighbors would rebuild rather than take immediate action.
- oblio 5y agoThat's works only if you're an investor. You're going to rebuild your home immediately, finance optimizations be damned.
- PragmaticPulp 5y ago> San Francisco is an interesting case cause they used to have a land tax Property taxes on land aren't unique to San Francisco. It's basically standard practice in most cities to have one tax for property and one tax for improvements. > Contrast that with New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina. Property owners had their buildings destroyed, so taxes went to zero (taxes based on the property value, not the land value) New Orleans has separate property taxes on land and structures, so property taxes did not go to $0 after Katrina. Overall property tax rates went up because income from taxes on structures went down, but unimproved lots still get a tax bill.
- gnopgnip 5y agoAre there any places outside of PA that do this in modern times?