Only taxes on produced factors can distort the incentive to produce. As Land by definition is all that is not produced by human effort, a 100% tax on its renta

Only taxes on produced factors can distort the incentive to produce. As Land by definition is all that is not produced by human effort, a 100% tax on its rental value cannot therefore lower aggregate wealth and welfare. Indeed, by putting owner occupiers on the same economic footing as renters, Land is only ever occupied by the Capitalist able to put it to its highest productive use. So, unlike damaging taxes on income and capital, a LVT actually raises economic output. Fundamentally, this is because shared land rent is the only fair way of paying for the services we share. Not only is taxation of income/capital theft, but so is occupation of valuable Land without compensating those excluded. Also, occupying valuable land is by choice. So, a LVT aligns incentives because it is paid by choice, unlike taxes on income/capital which distort incentives because they are based on coercion. Any changes to the tax system produces one off winners and losers. This is not legitimate argument against change . Else we'd still suffer institutions like slavery. Hope this helps.