It's how China works as far as I know. It's a pretty good system; it makes housing cheap (one of the worst problems in the US) and it's good for farmers because if you go bust, you can return the land to the village who owns it anyway.
What happens after 99 years? Are they expected/obligated to renew for a reasonable fee? What's preventing them from refusing to renew the leases after 99 years, and keeping the property (and whatever improvements on top) for themselves? It might not be an issue for the first or second generation of owners, but you'd expect the uncertainly to hurt the resale value of the property as the 99 years approaches.
you'd be surprised how common this agreement is. A lot of the skyscrapers in manhattan are/were built with this arrangement, where one party owns the land, and leases it to the developer who owns builds and maintains the building. Very interesting issues came up in some condos where the owners decided to spike the ground rent when the term was up. Also, as I understand it, pretty much all of the land in China is managed like this, as well as Singapore.
If you think about it, there isn't much of a difference between a 99 year lease and a 1-3% property tax.
Yes it can hurt resale prospects, the longer into the lease you get. At the same time it can also lower upfront acquisition costs. Something to know when you get into it.
Reminds me of a certain piece of land that Britain has a 99 year lease on. Hard for them to end well without a contractual option to extend under reasonable conditions.