3 ms·
What you’re describing is far more complex than an LVT. Interstate records of property ownership and interstate reconciliation of “presence?” Do children or fam
by ethanbond 3y ago
What you’re describing is far more complex than an LVT. Interstate records of property ownership and interstate reconciliation of “presence?” Do children or family members using a property for 30 days count?
- hakfoo 3y agoWe already have a fair amount of that infrastructure: * Land ownership is generally public record, or at least orchestrated at local government levels for property tax assessment, school enrollment eligiblity, and other similar local services. * Some states already have concepts of presence-- different tax regimes for part-year residents versus full-year. I'd expect that this would end up being relevant in only a very narrow set of cases. Most cases are slam-dunk clearly "owner occupier" versus "investor-owned", and hopefully they'd put more than a HN post worth of effort trying to define rules that handle the ambiguous cases. I tend to be a bit suspicious of the LVT, because it can create toxic consequences for individual landowners. Sure, if I have an empty lot and a new Job Factory opens next door, a rising LVT creates incentive for me to build. But if I already had a house there, my LVT has tripled and my house is no longer affordable. Locking the LVT to the current owner might prevent that toxicity, but it also encourage all sorts of evasion strategies.
- ethanbond 3y agoPeople have tried this. It’s extremely extremely hard to do in practice even when you’re only trying to measure whether a unit is vacant and don’t need to know where else they’ve been or what else they own.