[inter_netuser]

I like Georgist taxes, but it's unclear that tax incidence will fall entirely on the rentier class.

Important land is always unique, and therefore taxation would be have be incredibly dialed-in, no? A busy major international port would need to be taxed very differently than a sparsely attended beach just a mile away. This seems very difficult to get right.

Have there been practical applications that show that's not a concern?

[chii]

> A busy major international port would need to be taxed very differently than a sparsely attended beach just a mile away. This seems very difficult to get right.

you could imagine that the taxation is tied to the value of the land, which can be calculated as the rent income, minus the value of improvements upon the land (such as any buildings, which can be estimated by the cost of construction and maintenance over the useful life time, which is already a figure that is needed for depreciation purposes).

This is the reason why LVT cannot be passed onto the renter, because if you increase the rent, you would pay more taxes as the value of the land must have increased if the renter accepts this higher rent without any changes to the building.

[inter_netuser]

valuations are always subjective. you pretend it's like some sort of precise science, but it is not, never was, and never will be. ffs, the example is a major international port, not a cookie-cutter shoebox-sized condo.

The very first thing that will happen upon implementation of LVT is simple "rebranding" of "renting" into "mortgages".

What tax do you charge then? some LLC "owns" the port. some bank provides it a "mortgage".

What's the tax due on such mortgaged property? Previous rent? What if such rent was never charged and it was mortgaged from day zero? What then? What if there is no comparable entity to compare to? Just some half-ass guess?

What's the LVT tax on the Suez Canal? Panama Canal?

It's FAR from trivial.

[ajb]

The Romans had a solution to this. You self declare a value, the government gets a right to purchase your property at that value, which they exercise if they think you declared too low. Otherwise you are taxed.

Not everyone will likes that idea, but it shows that a non subjective solution exists, it and where there is one, there may be more.

[caf]

Land taxes are certainly in use around the world. My "rates" which fund the local government are based on the "unimproved land value". If you are unhappy with the land value determination (presumably because you feel it is too high) you can object and present evidence - for residential property that isn't too hard because area sales records are available and the replacement cost of the improvements on the land are reasonably easy to estimate and subtract from the sale price. No doubt unique businesses like airports get professional appraisals that painstakingly put an estimate together.

[imtringued]

The biggest problem with an LVT isn't when it's too low. Even a low LVT can prevent empty parking lots and abandoned properties. The problem with LVTs start when the LVT is too high as everyone abandons the land and nobody wants to acquire it. That is a real nightmare because of the extremely high valuations of land fueled by low land value and property taxes.

Transitioning to a steep LVT is difficult because the assumption is that the LVT drops the value of the land if the yearly tax payment is too high. A $1 million dollar plot of land isn't supposed to pay $50k in taxes. The payment you are willing to make is say $10k per year which means the value of the land drops to $200k. Making that jump is extremely difficult. It's only really viable if you started with the LVT from the beginning.

The reason why Germany can transition to an LVT is because the property taxes it charges are laughably low to begin with. Around 200€ to 1000€ per year. There is no plan to increase taxes to lower the value of land and put pressure to solving the housing problem.

[ItsMonkk]

There's several ways to look at figuring out the correct value. You can look at the value of the surrounding land, or you can look at the value of the improvements.

What's nice about looking at the improvements is we should always be able to figure out the cost to build the building initially, we can look at the repair costs.

Say we have a house that was just built. We know for sure that this cost $500k to construct. We have the bills. Make the market price of the lot and house cost $500k and the tax is perfect. Done. If the tax is above the correct value, the auction bid will be under $500k, that's bad! Lower the tax.

Now let's say it's 10 years later. There has been depreciation on the house. It's no longer worth the $500k. If we still tax the building as if its worth $500k, what happens? It turns out we under-tax the 100% LVT. But as we know, under-taxing is okay, not perfect, but okay. It's over-taxing that is harmful!

What happens if someone bids $600k for it? Now we know we are significantly under-taxing the area and have good reason to increase the tax, and send out an appraiser to look at it.

Lastly I just need to point out that in a LVT world, it is kinda going to be like the "Don't fight the Fed" line. If you know that bidding $600k on a $500k house is going to force a tax inspection, you might not be so happy to lose $100k, so you might bid less. You might even bid $500k simply because that's what the home is worth, you might fund the appraisal yourself so that you don't risk your $100k. As the speculation is driven out of the market, the values of homes will be much more steady than they are today, and land appraisal will therefore become much easier and uniform. Even Zillow could do appraisal's with a LVT.