[jpao79]

In California at least, the property tax bill is already split into two components:

1.) Tax on land value

2.) Tax on improvements (building, landscaping)

so Georgism already exists somewhat.

An land value tax increase would need to be phased over decades to account for the building lifetimes which can span 50 or more years. Developers use multi-decode economic models for their developments based on assumptions including worst case property tax scenarios. But if that can change at moment's notice.

It also would need to account for zoning restrictions. If some parcels get re-developed as ultra high density housing but NIMBY's block similar developments in neighboring parcels, that could lead to lawsuits against the county.

[gowld]

It's not the state's job to protect the landlords' business models.

[njarboe]

My property tax bill in California does have the breakdown of the land value and improvements, but they are just added together and a single rate is applied to the total (~%1.3 in my case). So one could implement Georgism pretty easily, by just taxing the land value, but that is not how it works at the moment.