Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Detroit wants to be the first big American city to tax land value

economist.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

751–760 of 910 posts

Re: Detroit wants to be the first big American city to tax land value

#751

Post by ndsipa_pomu »

giantg2 wrote: post #739
simonh wrote: post #658

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We already tax revenue and/or profits in various ways anyway. If land is in a city, that gives it a high value and revenue earning potential due to no work or expenditure from the land owner, but ongoing costs to the taxpayer to provide the infrastructure and services that give it this value and potential. Roads, schools, hospitals, etc. these are very costly to the public but increase the value of nearby land. The l…

"but ongoing costs to the taxpayer to provide the infrastructure and services that give it this value and potential" Empty land isn't using any of those things. Any future improvement would use those things and be taxed accordingly. If you're concerned about infrastructure costs, the. You want to use a per capita tax or the current property tax that taxes the improvements (where people work or live) since they are us…

> Empty land isn't using any of those things

It doesn't have to use them to benefit from their proximity. Land in the middle of a barren desert is usually worth far less than a similar piece of land near a populous city.

Re: Detroit wants to be the first big American city to tax land value

#752

Post by giantg2 »

AlchemistCamp wrote: post #703
sidewndr46 wrote: post #671

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem with that is that would displace virtually everyone from many cities in the US. There are plenty of cities with single family housing near the metro area. It was built before the city expanded. Nowadays the city engulfs it. Obviously the best use for most of that is medium density housing or some commercial use. The idea of taxing a house with a backyard like it's a $3 million quad-plex of town homes isn'…

That claim isn’t true. The book goes into details like this and taxes would go down for ~97% of parcels. It would go up a lot for parking lots in city centers and certain segments of commercial real estate.

Taxes never really go down. That's always the ploy - say the tax is a limited time, or only a specific low rate, then extend it. In this case, the people in power can play with the tax rates, but even more so in the zoning. An added avenue of getting screwed is not very appealing when taxes are already high. Let's not forget rhat if the goal is to utilize more space, that means more infrastructure and services costs. If we actually make a big impact on the space front, those infrastructure costs will go up and require substantially more revenue. I'm skeptical of the claim that most taxes will go down.

Re: Detroit wants to be the first big American city to tax land value

#753

Post by chongli »

orwell_bruh wrote: post #684
chongli wrote: post #584

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can’t make everyone happy all the time. I’m a lot more okay with a situation in which a person is compelled to sell their very valuable property because they can’t afford the taxes than I am with people being unable to afford housing. If LVT helps to loosen up some undeveloped/underdeveloped land and get it into the hands of a willing developer then that is a big win for the fight against the housing crisis.

That's the kind of fine print that would kill any popular support for LVT. It's also a false dichotomy. We don't need LVT to solve housing. We don't even know if LVT would solve housing. On the other hand, we know exactly how to solve housing. People just don't want to.

We don't even know if LVT would solve housing.

We'll just have to wait and see then. Detroit is going to try it out and we'll see how it works for them.

we know exactly how to solve housing. People just don't want to.

It's a collective action problem. One of the ways we usually solve those is through government action. LVT is a candidate for exactly that!

Re: Detroit wants to be the first big American city to tax land value

#754

Post by MichaelZuo »

nukeman wrote: post #297
simonsarris wrote: post #280

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Bridges are even more financially burdensome. Recently, we replaced a culvert that was so small I could easily jump over it, and yet it set us back $700,000. Why? Why didn't you all agree to go down to Home Depot and load up on one big short metal pipe and some cement if that's the case? How was 700K spent?

Likely due to: - Environmental regulations requiring NEPA analysis or categorical exclusion - State laws on who can perform road construction - Construction codes for roadways and bridges - Miscellaneous overhead for other areas (e.g., Human Resources, accounting, etc)

Then it seems to be more of a problem with excessive regulation then suburbs themselves.

As a thought experiment, even the wealthiest city in the world couldn't afford a single bridge if regulations required bridges to be made out of stainless steel.

Re: Detroit wants to be the first big American city to tax land value

#755

Post by cultureswitch »

sidewndr46 wrote: post #671
bombcar wrote: post #620

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The idea is that you tax the land only as if it was being used for best use - so that every property is encouraged to develop to maximum density. I suspect that in actual use it would end up having a small to no effect.

The problem with that is that would displace virtually everyone from many cities in the US. There are plenty of cities with single family housing near the metro area. It was built before the city expanded. Nowadays the city engulfs it. Obviously the best use for most of that is medium density housing or some commercial use. The idea of taxing a house with a backyard like it's a $3 million quad-plex of town homes isn'…

On the contrary, that's exactly what most cities need in order for property prices to drop from insane to less insane.

LVT would exclusively take from people and corporations who own land. This in turn will allow more people to own their home.

Re: Detroit wants to be the first big American city to tax land value

#756

Post by Tiktaalik »

gred wrote: post #129

I hope they do try it. If they do, one of two thing will happen. Either it will fail dramatically, in which case the LVT muppets can finally shut up about it... or it will succeed, all of our cities will migrate to this new utopian taxation scheme, and the LVT muppets can finally shut up about it.

Folks already ventured the idea in Henry George’s own time and after then.

For some weird reason (laziness?) no one is going back to see why in these cases the idea was repealed.

Re: Detroit wants to be the first big American city to tax land value

#757

Post by civilitty »

asdff wrote: post #413
sethherr wrote: post #303

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not having the bridge blow over or vibrate apart.

Yet there are wooden trestle bridges that have seen traffic for 100 years

That’s probably what inspired those building codes…

Re: Detroit wants to be the first big American city to tax land value

#758

Post by invalidOrTaken »

ajsnigrutin wrote: post #607
Double_a_92 wrote: post #601

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand how that needs a special tax though. Wouldn't the more obvious choice be to just tax all wealth/assets? E.g. where I live it's just assumed that all your assets produce a yield of 4% yearly, and that is taxed as regular income. Makes the tax declaration also a lot easier, since people don't have to list all exact dividends and profits they might have gotten from investments.

The problem is, what if it doesn't produce that much? What if it doesn't produce anything? Imagine someone buying a house somewhere cheap. Then some gentrification, a new microsoft campus built nearby, etc., and the price of the house jumps 10x+. You're on a fixed income, and your taxes are now higher then you can afford. If you have multiple houses, sure, tax the second, third, etc. one (evn though the taxes are the…

While moving is certainly not costless, keep in mind that this grandma moving and selling has just had a huge windfall.

Re: Detroit wants to be the first big American city to tax land value

#759

Post by cultureswitch »

bluGill wrote: post #610
malta_kano wrote: post #595

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is that the problem though? Empty land held by speculators?

Not just empty land. The 'little old Lady' who lived happily in her small house for decades, while everything else developed bigger. At one time her house fit in, but now the rest of the block is bigger buildings worth a lot more. You decide if the above is good or bad.

Does little old lady own her house? If yes, what's the problem with taxing the increase in value of her property caused by the environment becoming more desirable? All in all she's neither losing nor gaining anything.

Re: Detroit wants to be the first big American city to tax land value

#760

Post by cultureswitch »

ajsnigrutin wrote: post #607
Double_a_92 wrote: post #601

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand how that needs a special tax though. Wouldn't the more obvious choice be to just tax all wealth/assets? E.g. where I live it's just assumed that all your assets produce a yield of 4% yearly, and that is taxed as regular income. Makes the tax declaration also a lot easier, since people don't have to list all exact dividends and profits they might have gotten from investments.

The problem is, what if it doesn't produce that much? What if it doesn't produce anything? Imagine someone buying a house somewhere cheap. Then some gentrification, a new microsoft campus built nearby, etc., and the price of the house jumps 10x+. You're on a fixed income, and your taxes are now higher then you can afford. If you have multiple houses, sure, tax the second, third, etc. one (evn though the taxes are the…

Why is it evil? She's richer than she used to be, through no fault of her own. Just a little less richer because of the tax.
Post reply on HN