Land value tax

[ttwtt78640]

If we are going to have taxation we should be targeting the behavior we want to discourage in society. Why would it make sense to instead target the behavior we do want? We work hard, we get taxed. We produce something that benefits society, we get taxed. We provide employment, we get taxed. Tax the things we want less of before taxing the things we want more of. Land hoarding/speculation is a great detriment to society. It drives up prices and forces sprawl. I can think of no other thing that is more worthy of taxation.

I agree with that (bolded above) but that would seem to require an exemption for (up to one acre of?) land used for a personal residence and some (similar) allowance for commercial establishments (places of business). Otherwise it would discourage normal residential and commercial land use - not only land hoarding/speculation.

 

[Glitch]

If we are going to have taxation we should be targeting the behavior we want to discourage in society. Why would it make sense to instead target the behavior we do want? We work hard, we get taxed. We produce something that benefits society, we get taxed. We provide employment, we get taxed. Tax the things we want less of before taxing the things we want more of. Land hoarding/speculation is a great detriment to society. It drives up prices and forces sprawl. I can think of no other thing that is more worthy of taxation.

We should definitely not be taxing behavior. The reason we tax those who work hard, produce, and the employed is because we cannot tax those who do not work, or produce, or are unemployed. Unless you figured out a way to take money from those who have none.

What you call "land hoarding/speculation" a developer calls a subdivision. Particularly in undeveloped areas, it is very common for a developer to buy several parcels of land for the purpose of developing and selling when completed. In my particular case, I was the third buyer in a subdivision of twelve properties owned entirely by one developer. The developer has since sold eleven of those properties. One they still own because it is designated as a "park."

 

[Fishking]

In the 19th century, there was an economic philosophy known as Georgism (or Geoism). To sum it up, they believe in socialism for land and capitalism for everything else. The logic is that while people can produce many stuff with their labor, they did not produce the land. Thus by paying a land value tax, they would be paying rent to mother nature. Georgists use this to argue that there should be a tax on land and that it should be the only tax. The movement died out after the early 20th century and very few jurisdictions ended up embracing this kind of tax.

This is the worst kind of tax out of all the taxes that exist. The reasons are as follows:

1. Why should you continue to pay taxes on something you own?
2. This would utterly crush people's ability to retire. One of the main things that helps people retire is owning their own home and needing only a small income to fill the tank and buy some food.
3. You get taxed the same no matter what your income is or even if you have income, making it a very regressive tax. A lot of people use a large % of their budget to pay for their property.

 

[austrianecon]

Any significant reductions in federal government outlays would require massive reductions in defense spending, Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid. Which of these are you wanting to cut significantly?

So are your admitting that FICA taxes are bs then? Since those are suppose to fund SS, Medicare and Medicaid (along with Sin tax for SCHIP). Defense spending is out of control.

 

[ALiberalModerate]

So are your admitting that FICA taxes are bs then? Since those are suppose to fund SS, Medicare and Medicaid (along with Sin tax for SCHIP). Defense spending is out of control.

No, we need Social Security and particularly Medicare. What I am saying is that cutting spending would require cuts to those programs.

 

[Geoist]

This is the worst kind of tax out of all the taxes that exist.

JFC, hyperbole must be contagious with the Trumpists.

 

[Geoist]

I agree with that (bolded above) but that would seem to require an exemption for (up to one acre of?) land used for a personal residence and some (similar) allowance for commercial establishments (places of business). Otherwise it would discourage normal residential and commercial land use - not only land hoarding/speculation.

I think an exception or very low tax of under a certain market value is fair. It's insane the market values of some residences in Manhattan that are well under an acre.

 

[Geoist]

We should definitely not be taxing behavior.

But we already do...

The reason we tax those who work hard, produce, and the employed is because we cannot tax those who do not work, or produce, or are unemployed.

Working. Producing. Employing. That is all behavior.

What you call "land hoarding/speculation" a developer calls a subdivision. Particularly in undeveloped areas, it is very common for a developer to buy several parcels of land for the purpose of developing and selling when completed. In my particular case, I was the third buyer in a subdivision of twelve properties owned entirely by one developer. The developer has since sold eleven of those properties. One they still own because it is designated as a "park."

People would still be able to buy up parcels of undeveloped land. Hell, if they want to hold it undeveloped indefinitely they could still do so. They would just have to pay the tax.

 

[Fishking]

JFC, hyperbole must be contagious with the Trumpists.

WTF do you me by "hyperbole"? How is that hyperbole? I even wrote why it is so bad. Your response was nothing but worthless trash to be dismissed.

 

[austrianecon]

No, we need Social Security and particularly Medicare. What I am saying is that cutting spending would require cuts to those programs.

Those programs are getting cut period for people under 40. That's reality. But they aren't needed long term if a politician got up and had the balls to be truthful. I am 38. I don't expect to see more then $.60 on the current $1 when I retire. Nor do my friends. It's why were are heavily 401k and Roth IRA generation.

 

[Geoist]

WTF do you me by "hyperbole"? How is that hyperbole? I even wrote why it is so bad. Your response was nothing but worthless trash to be dismissed.

Oh, that's right, your side actually advocates poll taxes.

LVT is one of the most endorsed taxes in history.

Land Value Tax: Saving Communities

savingcommunities.org

Even the anti-tax economist Milton Friedman said it is the 'least bad' tax.

1. Why should you continue to pay taxes on something you own?

This doesn't explain why LVT is 'bad.' And the vast majority of private property is not occupied or is occupied by someone who does not technically own the land.

2. This would utterly crush people's ability to retire. One of the main things that helps people retire is owning their own home and needing only a small income to fill the tank and buy some food.

The tax can be phased in to reduce the negative impact on those depending on their property for retirement. The issue can also be resolved with a roll-up/defer option.

As for younger people, there are other ways to invest towards retirement. 401Ks, Roth IRAs, dividend investing, bonds later on...

3. You get taxed the same no matter what your income is or even if you have income, making it a very regressive tax. A lot of people use a large % of their budget to pay for their property.

If the burden is too great the property, or part of the property, can always be sold. Both of my grandfathers and my wife's grandfather have already done this before under the current system. It really isn't as catastrophic of a move as you're trying to make it out to be.