It’s good they’re trying to match market value. They come up with that assessment by assessing the land value, and the structure value, and adding them together

It’s good they’re trying to match market value. They come up with that assessment by assessing the land value, and the structure value, and adding them together. But they are still taxing improvements at the same rate as the land. Sure, land value can rise and become a greater portion of the total market value. But this is still conventional property taxation. In a pure LVT system the structure should play no part. The landowner should be free to build whatever they want on their land without such building causing a change to their taxes. A partial step towards LVT would be a “split rate” system, where the value of the land is taxed at a higher rate, say 5%, than the value of the structures, which could be 0.5%. Pennsylvania is the example case here in the US: https://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2019/3/6/non-glamorous-gains-the-pennsylvania-land-tax-experiment https://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2019/3/6/non-glamorous-g...