[OJFord]

> The argument is that good business spots are a limited community resource that it makes sense to tax, like radio spectrum. If you can make good use of the space you're taking up, go ahead, but you should compete fairly with other uses of the space.

If it's really such a prime desirable spot then that would drive up the value of the land to the point that the low value business wouldn't have been able to afford it?

I don't understand saying it's such valuable land and detaching that from what a business was actually able to pay for it.

[ufocia]

Low value is not synonymous with low profit.

Also, the arguments made against car washes are the same as those made against bank branches which also generate relatively little sales tax.

Anyway, if there is a surplus of car washes they will eventually dry up.

[a_gnostic]

Bank branches can be replaced with technology. Maybe the problem of car washes has a similar solution, or maybe it ain't a problem.

[lmm]

> If it's really such a prime desirable spot then that would drive up the value of the land to the point that the low value business wouldn't have been able to afford it?

The land continues to appreciate, so the business can hold it based on its value. Especially if they've locked in a mortgage at a low rate. The car wash "business" can profit through land appreciation, which they don't pay any tax on (another flaw in the regulatory regime), and free-ride while the spot becomes more valuable through the efforts of others.