3 ms·

The tax wouldn't affect all properties equally. It would punish undeveloped / under-developed land much more. Those owners could try to pass it on to the renter

The tax wouldn't affect all properties equally. It would punish undeveloped / under-developed land much more. Those owners could try to pass it on to the renter, if there is one, but the renter can move to better developed land that would be able to provide lower rents. The theory is that this would encourage the owner to develop the land into more units or sell it to someone else who will be under the same pressure.

twblalock 4y ago
The motivation to develop land and rent it out for more money is already firmly established simply by the laws of supply and demand. Anyone who is sitting on a vacant lot in a city knows they could make more money with it if they could build something more desirable on it. They don't do it because we make it really hard to do that. Consider San Francisco, where it takes years just to get permission to build housing: https://www.sfchronicle.com/opinion/openforum/article/sf-housing-development-red-tape-17815725.php https://www.sfchronicle.com/opinion/openforum/article/sf-hou... San Francisco is an extreme example, but many other cities are bad about this too. With a land value tax we are basically telling landowners that they aren't allowed to build and also they will be taxed for not building. Stop hitting yourself! Stop hitting yourself! A land-value tax would be a lot more reasonable if we allowed people to do what the tax incentivizes them to do.
- panick21_ 4y ago
  That might be. But honestly, anything is better then a parking lot. And going from a property tax to a land value tax is much preferable. > With a land value tax we are basically telling landowners that they aren't allowed to build and also they will be taxed for not building. Stop hitting yourself! Stop hitting yourself! Ok, and with the current system you hurt the people who have managed to build things even more. Its not like actually impossible to make something productive with your land. Land value tax, any way you look at it, is fairer and better for society then property tax. But yes, regulation are also a problem. But just because bad regulation exists, shouldn't mean you should not improve the tax system.

twblalock 4y ago

The motivation to develop land and rent it out for more money is already firmly established simply by the laws of supply and demand. Anyone who is sitting on a vacant lot in a city knows they could make more money with it if they could build something more desirable on it. They don't do it because we make it really hard to do that. Consider San Francisco, where it takes years just to get permission to build housing: https://www.sfchronicle.com/opinion/openforum/article/sf-housing-development-red-tape-17815725.php https://www.sfchronicle.com/opinion/openforum/article/sf-hou... San Francisco is an extreme example, but many other cities are bad about this too. With a land value tax we are basically telling landowners that they aren't allowed to build and also they will be taxed for not building. Stop hitting yourself! Stop hitting yourself! A land-value tax would be a lot more reasonable if we allowed people to do what the tax incentivizes them to do.

panick21_ 4y ago
That might be. But honestly, anything is better then a parking lot. And going from a property tax to a land value tax is much preferable. > With a land value tax we are basically telling landowners that they aren't allowed to build and also they will be taxed for not building. Stop hitting yourself! Stop hitting yourself! Ok, and with the current system you hurt the people who have managed to build things even more. Its not like actually impossible to make something productive with your land. Land value tax, any way you look at it, is fairer and better for society then property tax. But yes, regulation are also a problem. But just because bad regulation exists, shouldn't mean you should not improve the tax system.