4 ms·

Well this is definitely a take I don't read often on HN. The notion of having to pay "rent" on property you "own" is just weird, and it's not helped by the fact

Well this is definitely a take I don't read often on HN. The notion of having to pay "rent" on property you "own" is just weird, and it's not helped by the fact that very notion property of ownership is eroding across the nation. What's your logic behind property taxes being inherently better than income taxes?

HDThoreaun 3y ago
The land should belong to society at large not any individual. Land is not created so it doesn’t make sense to allocate its rents to an individual. The rents should be split by everyone through land value tax.
digdugdirk 3y ago
There's the obvious aspect of you having to pay for the associated infrastructure that makes it possible for you to live in the property you own. Streets, fire department, police, electrical grid, water/sewer. Those costs aren't related to the purchase price of the house/property you own.
- dataflow 3y ago
  That wasn't my question. I wasn't asking "why are property taxes necessary". I was asking: how is that inherently better than taxing income? As to to the question you answered, I could understand land value taxes, or some other forms of taxes that are actually based on the infrastructure cost for supporting your home. (And you could add exemptions/tiers for people who can't afford it, that's beside my point.) But property taxes seem nonsensical for exactly the reason you mention: that they depend on the value of the home (at whatever point) rather than on the cost of the infrastructure itself. Whether my home sells for $1 or $1M, my pipes and wires are going to act the same. And neither of those tells you anything about my means for payment - I could easily lose more money on a more expensive home.
  - ip26 3y ago
    Your zip code is better correlated to the public spending you benefit from than your salary.
    - dataflow 3y ago
      Then tax based on ZIP codes instead of property sale value? But again: why not just try to do something that's more computed from the public expenditures for that location rather than based on the location itself?
      - ip26 3y ago
        You’re basically arguing for land value tax. I don’t spend much time worrying about LVT because it isn’t widely used in the USA. StrongTowns likes to talk about it: https://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2019/3/8/if-the-land-tax-is-such-a-good-idea-why-isnt-it-being-implemented https://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2019/3/8/if-the-land-tax...
      - mcny 3y ago
        I think we are saying the same thing. I am not calling for California to end its state income tax either. I am suggesting that prop 13 was a disaster. Hot take: One possible compromise is limit prop 13 to a single property maybe two bed two baths for the owner and each adult state resident also gets this "credit"? I mean what the owner and every adult living in the household can help keep the property tax low but only for their own primary residence. but beyond that raise the property tax every year based on property value.
        VincentEvans 3y ago
        Not californian, but my interest was piqued by this “idea”. So what you are saying is - if my property values double - so do my taxes? Is the goal here to force me out of my home?
        dataflow 3y ago
        > Not californian, but my interest was piqued by this “idea”. So what you are saying is - if my property values double - so do my taxes? Is the goal here to force me out of my home? In the comment you just replied to, weren't they specifically saying this wouldn't apply to your primary residence?
dns_snek 3y ago
Isn't that avoidable by making exceptions for primary residences? That would disincentivize ownership of multiple properties and associated rent seeking, but it wouldn't price out residents who actually live there.
- dataflow 3y ago
  Sure, there are lots of policies that could help with that problem. I'm just confused what logic leads to the conclusion that income taxes are inherently worse than property taxes.
hindsightbias 3y ago
You must have missed all the libertarians for Georgism threads https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgism

HDThoreaun 3y ago

The land should belong to society at large not any individual. Land is not created so it doesn’t make sense to allocate its rents to an individual. The rents should be split by everyone through land value tax.

digdugdirk 3y ago

There's the obvious aspect of you having to pay for the associated infrastructure that makes it possible for you to live in the property you own. Streets, fire department, police, electrical grid, water/sewer. Those costs aren't related to the purchase price of the house/property you own.

dataflow 3y ago
That wasn't my question. I wasn't asking "why are property taxes necessary". I was asking: how is that inherently better than taxing income? As to to the question you answered, I could understand land value taxes, or some other forms of taxes that are actually based on the infrastructure cost for supporting your home. (And you could add exemptions/tiers for people who can't afford it, that's beside my point.) But property taxes seem nonsensical for exactly the reason you mention: that they depend on the value of the home (at whatever point) rather than on the cost of the infrastructure itself. Whether my home sells for $1 or $1M, my pipes and wires are going to act the same. And neither of those tells you anything about my means for payment - I could easily lose more money on a more expensive home.
- ip26 3y ago
  Your zip code is better correlated to the public spending you benefit from than your salary.
  - dataflow 3y ago
    Then tax based on ZIP codes instead of property sale value? But again: why not just try to do something that's more computed from the public expenditures for that location rather than based on the location itself?
    - ip26 3y ago
      You’re basically arguing for land value tax. I don’t spend much time worrying about LVT because it isn’t widely used in the USA. StrongTowns likes to talk about it: https://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2019/3/8/if-the-land-tax-is-such-a-good-idea-why-isnt-it-being-implemented https://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2019/3/8/if-the-land-tax...
    - mcny 3y ago
      I think we are saying the same thing. I am not calling for California to end its state income tax either. I am suggesting that prop 13 was a disaster. Hot take: One possible compromise is limit prop 13 to a single property maybe two bed two baths for the owner and each adult state resident also gets this "credit"? I mean what the owner and every adult living in the household can help keep the property tax low but only for their own primary residence. but beyond that raise the property tax every year based on property value.
      - VincentEvans 3y ago
        Not californian, but my interest was piqued by this “idea”. So what you are saying is - if my property values double - so do my taxes? Is the goal here to force me out of my home?
        dataflow 3y ago
        > Not californian, but my interest was piqued by this “idea”. So what you are saying is - if my property values double - so do my taxes? Is the goal here to force me out of my home? In the comment you just replied to, weren't they specifically saying this wouldn't apply to your primary residence?

dns_snek 3y ago

Isn't that avoidable by making exceptions for primary residences? That would disincentivize ownership of multiple properties and associated rent seeking, but it wouldn't price out residents who actually live there.

dataflow 3y ago
Sure, there are lots of policies that could help with that problem. I'm just confused what logic leads to the conclusion that income taxes are inherently worse than property taxes.

hindsightbias 3y ago

You must have missed all the libertarians for Georgism threads https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgism