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

The 'Georgists' Are Out and they want to tax your land

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 164 posts

Re: The 'Georgists' Are Out and they want to tax your land

#91

Post by dublinben »

unshavedyak wrote: post #54
303uru wrote: post #10

I'm a huge proponent of land tax. Here's why I think it's worth considering: 1. Economic Efficiency: Unlike income or consumption taxes, an LVT is non-distortionary. It doesn't discourage productive activities like work, saving, or investment. Land is a fixed resource; its supply doesn't change with price or tax fluctuations. Therefore, an LVT wouldn't distort market incentives, unlike other taxes. By shifting the ta…

As an aside, i'd be curious how this strategy would work for long term farming. Ie 40+ year tree farms, where they own thousands (millions?) of acres which sit for 40 years, harvest, and then go back to being idle. You could say that they can set the land to being a special tax code for tree farming or w/e. Which is something that already exists. I've been looking for a 10 acre plot (being picky on location, shape, e…

The value of farm land versus land in the city is several orders of magnitude different.

An average value for farmland might be something like $5000 / acre.

The average value for land in even a low cost of living city can be $2.5m / acre.

Re: The 'Georgists' Are Out and they want to tax your land

#92

Post by nwah1 »

PopAlongKid wrote: post #83
nwah1 wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The mortgage interest tax deduction is one of the least popular policies among economists because it fails in its objectives. It made homes less affordable and raises prices, and enriches banks, without helping new homeowners. The concept of imputed income also helps homeowners. If you own a house that you rent out to people, the money you get is counted as income. If you are an owner-occupier and paid off your mortg…

>The concept of imputed income also helps homeowners. If you own a house that you rent out to people, the money you get is counted as income. If you are an owner-occupier and paid off your mortgage, then you effectively pay rent to yourself... money that you otherwise would've needed to pay to others, but don't need to pay tax on it. Imputed income is everywhere, are you suggesting it should all be taxed? When you pr…

Imputed income is one of many issues that proves income taxation is unfair... unlike taxing the unimproved value of land by value.

Re: The 'Georgists' Are Out and they want to tax your land

#93

Post by strangesmells06 »

spaceman_2020 wrote: post #45
strangesmells06 wrote: post #22

I personally think people's first property should be tax-free. their actual home. people own more than that The property should be taxed also corporation-owned properties should be taxed edit: i mean annual property taxes

Capitalist societies across the world are in complete demographic collapse because young people can’t afford homes to raise families, and yet progressive land taxation remains an unpopular idea. Absurd.

I find it absurd that the government can come take the house of a 70-year-old whose retired and cant keep up with the property tax skyrocketing around them.

I find it absurd that rich people can move to an area they like and displace all the families that have been there generations by virtue of property tax increases effectively conquering the land.

I find it absurd that the government can take your home AT ALL after you have spent your whole life paying for it.

Re: The 'Georgists' Are Out and they want to tax your land

#94

Post by voisin »

303uru wrote: post #10

I'm a huge proponent of land tax. Here's why I think it's worth considering: 1. Economic Efficiency: Unlike income or consumption taxes, an LVT is non-distortionary. It doesn't discourage productive activities like work, saving, or investment. Land is a fixed resource; its supply doesn't change with price or tax fluctuations. Therefore, an LVT wouldn't distort market incentives, unlike other taxes. By shifting the ta…

Questions: 1) How does Land Tax differ from Property Tax?

2) How do you account for the difference in land value (seaside versus downtown versus suburban, views versus no views, etc)?

Re: The 'Georgists' Are Out and they want to tax your land

#95

Post by strangesmells06 »

dukeyukey wrote: post #31
strangesmells06 wrote: post #22

I personally think people's first property should be tax-free. their actual home. people own more than that The property should be taxed also corporation-owned properties should be taxed edit: i mean annual property taxes

The indirect effect of that is subsidising (richer) homeowners at the expense of (poorer) renters. I really don't think that's a good thing.

I dont follow.

Taxes would still happen on renter investment property.

Just not someones personal home.

So no subsiding at all.

Re: The 'Georgists' Are Out and they want to tax your land

#96

Post by bryanlarsen »

throw0101a wrote: post #67
strangesmells06 wrote: post #22

I personally think people's first property should be tax-free. their actual home. people own more than that The property should be taxed also corporation-owned properties should be taxed edit: i mean annual property taxes

> I personally think people's first property should be tax-free. their actual home. This is how it works in Canada: principle residence has no capital gains on sale. If you move to a new place, and don't sell the old one, then you have to change its status and the clock starts ticking on any price appreciation after the status change. Further if you rent out part of the structure (e.g., basement), then you have to pr…

It's capital gains tax free, but it's far from tax-free. Myself, I pay about $7000 a year in property taxes on mine.

Eliminating those and increasing corporate/second property taxes instead would be insane. That means that renters would be responsible for most of the taxes required to maintain the streets in front of my house.

Re: The 'Georgists' Are Out and they want to tax your land

#97

Post by xboxnolifes »

voisin wrote: post #94
303uru wrote: post #10

I'm a huge proponent of land tax. Here's why I think it's worth considering: 1. Economic Efficiency: Unlike income or consumption taxes, an LVT is non-distortionary. It doesn't discourage productive activities like work, saving, or investment. Land is a fixed resource; its supply doesn't change with price or tax fluctuations. Therefore, an LVT wouldn't distort market incentives, unlike other taxes. By shifting the ta…

Questions: 1) How does Land Tax differ from Property Tax? 2) How do you account for the difference in land value (seaside versus downtown versus suburban, views versus no views, etc)?

1) property taxes increase when you make property improvements.

Re: The 'Georgists' Are Out and they want to tax your land

#98

Post by voisin »

robertlagrant wrote: post #41
sokoloff wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The strongest incentive to develop land exists for land which has a high value owing to its location. Land out in the countryside would not be hugely taxed under this system.

But it'd still be taxed.

Is there somewhere where land isn’t taxed? I am in Canada and all privately held land is taxed.

Re: The 'Georgists' Are Out and they want to tax your land

#100

Post by tzs »

303uru wrote: post #46
AnimalMuppet wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Re non-distorionary: It distorts along a completely new axis - whether or not economic activity uses land. It's unclear (at least to me) why Google, say, whose business activity is very non-land-intensive, should be in a favorable tax position compared to, say, farming. You say "because the farmers use more land!" And it's true; they do. But if you don't already believe that land should be the determinant of tax, tha…

Sure, the LVT is not designed to be a wealth tax, but rather a tax on the unimproved value of land. Its primary purpose is to encourage efficient use of land and discourage speculative land holding, which can lead to artificial scarcity and inflated property prices. If the wealthy do decide to hold their wealth in other forms, this could potentially free up land for more productive uses or for those who might not hav…

> Its primary purpose is to encourage efficient use of land

"Efficient" by one specific measure--how much money you can make from the land. But who says that's the best measure to guide land use?

Post reply on HN