7 ms·

I'm assuming by that they mean the value of the land. And if it's done similar to an appraisal they see what market price is for a sale (which combines the val

I'm assuming by that they mean the value of the land. And if it's done similar to an appraisal they see what market price is for a sale (which combines the value of the building + land). Then they can estimate how much it would cost to rebuild that building if it were completely destroyed. That's the value of the improvements. The remainder is the amount someone implicitly paid for the land.

dnautics 5y ago
This is not great because suppose it cost relatively little to physically build a house but you sold it for a huge amount because it's in some chic architectural style that hasn't arrived yet in this city. So your house was in a crazy seller market and unexpectedly sold for crazy tons. Now you are being seriously penalized for your boldness.
- rthomas6 5y ago
  No, because the tax is only on the price someone would pay for the lot.
  - dnautics 5y ago
    Restating the definition does not magically conjure a sensible strategy for arriving at that value.
    - rthomas6 5y ago
      So far, our comments have boiled down to "Yes you can assess unimproved value of improved land", and "No, you can't, there is no way to get that number separate from the value of improvements." So I'm going to try to say something different. 1. Here is the article that convinces me it is very possible to assess land separate from improvements. It details several strategies for doing so. Also properties are assessed in these ways already in many places. https://astralcodexten.substack.com/p/does-georgism-work-part-3-can-unimproved https://astralcodexten.substack.com/p/does-georgism-work-par... 2. Accuracy of assessment does not need to be super high for this idea to work. You just need an assessment with the intent of assessing unimproved land. The tax does not need to be literally 100% of unimproved land value, it just has to be a high percentage. Let's say there is a +/- 30% accuracy of unimproved land value assessment. We can have a 70% tax on that assessed value. Some people would in actuality be taxed at 97.5% of land value, and some people at 52.5% of land value. Perhaps the unfairness of this discrepancy is a true downside. However, one could argue the same about property taxes now.
- BoiledCabbage 5y ago
  And what are we talking about 0.0001% of all homes ever built? Even less? Someone can always come up with a contrived example to find a short coming in a rule or law. That doesn't make the law not sound or wise. "Speeding shouldn't be illegal. What if there is a tornado behind you and you need to rush to get away from it, but you go faster than the speed limit to save your life? See, we can't have laws for speeding."

dnautics 5y ago

This is not great because suppose it cost relatively little to physically build a house but you sold it for a huge amount because it's in some chic architectural style that hasn't arrived yet in this city. So your house was in a crazy seller market and unexpectedly sold for crazy tons. Now you are being seriously penalized for your boldness.

rthomas6 5y ago
No, because the tax is only on the price someone would pay for the lot.
- dnautics 5y ago
  Restating the definition does not magically conjure a sensible strategy for arriving at that value.
  - rthomas6 5y ago
    So far, our comments have boiled down to "Yes you can assess unimproved value of improved land", and "No, you can't, there is no way to get that number separate from the value of improvements." So I'm going to try to say something different. 1. Here is the article that convinces me it is very possible to assess land separate from improvements. It details several strategies for doing so. Also properties are assessed in these ways already in many places. https://astralcodexten.substack.com/p/does-georgism-work-part-3-can-unimproved https://astralcodexten.substack.com/p/does-georgism-work-par... 2. Accuracy of assessment does not need to be super high for this idea to work. You just need an assessment with the intent of assessing unimproved land. The tax does not need to be literally 100% of unimproved land value, it just has to be a high percentage. Let's say there is a +/- 30% accuracy of unimproved land value assessment. We can have a 70% tax on that assessed value. Some people would in actuality be taxed at 97.5% of land value, and some people at 52.5% of land value. Perhaps the unfairness of this discrepancy is a true downside. However, one could argue the same about property taxes now.
BoiledCabbage 5y ago
And what are we talking about 0.0001% of all homes ever built? Even less? Someone can always come up with a contrived example to find a short coming in a rule or law. That doesn't make the law not sound or wise. "Speeding shouldn't be illegal. What if there is a tornado behind you and you need to rush to get away from it, but you go faster than the speed limit to save your life? See, we can't have laws for speeding."