[cucumber3732842]

>Land value taxes don't discourage desirable behavior

Are you serious? LVTs expressly incentivizes landlords to kick out "grandfathered in" developments and uses in favor of redevelopment and sale for that purpose.

But those grandfathered in developments and uses are exactly what made the place valuable in the first place and you need some amount of them to remain.

[zozbot234]

Redevelopment often mitigates housing scarcity in general, including for existing residents. They may have to move to a slightly smaller apartment within a generally much improved area, which usually leaves them better off. This is especially true for LVT, which amounts to a decrease in property tax for the improvements to land.

[senordevnyc]

They may have to move to a slightly smaller apartment within a generally much improved area, which usually leaves them better off.

Good luck selling this to voters.

[pydry]

I mean, I guess if you're a NIMBY who wants to inhibit the construction of more affordable housing that's a bad thing.

[cucumber3732842]

Nothing inhibits construction like creating a system where all the existing land owners stand to get taxed more if they allow development.

[pydry]

And the land value tax does the exact opposite of that.

If you sit on an underdeveloped plot of land in a high value location your tax bill will exceed your rental income.

The land is worthless to you. So you'll sell up to somebody who will make something of it.