"John Williamson" wrote in message
...
Doctor Drivel wrote:
John Williamson wrote:
Doctor Drivel wrote:


They are landowners so pay LVT on the value of the land only. No
Income tax or Sales tax, etc. Studies have proven that a
owner/occupier man on £40K per year when changing over to LVT would
be approx £6-7K better off each year. Then land prices will remain
steady and people could afford bigger and better homes at highly
affordable prices.

Given that any government will spend as much as they can get away with
as a proportion of GDP, if a change was made to Land Value Tax as the
only revenue, the total amount raised would be the same as it is now,
or, if they think they can get away with it, greater. Therefore, on
average, we would all be paying at least the same amount of tax as
now.

No. Read above.

Rubbish. Unless you really believe that HMG will accept a reduction in
revenue.

Stop guessing you fool. Studies were taken using the same level of HMG
expenditure as now and the average man was £1000s per year better off. Also
land price would spiral out of control.

HMG revenue would not be allowed to drop, as HMG will do whatever they
need to do to increase it beyond the old level.

HMGs speding on welfare would drop as the economy would rise - as occured
Denmark, etc.

Join the real world. Landlords will either pass on the increase,

LVT CANNOT be passed on. Read my other posts on this. Stop guessing.

or sell the land to a new owner, who will then issue new rental
agreements.

...and use the land to greater productive use. LVT is only tax shift - not a
political movement.

Incidentally, Income tax was only introduced to pay for a war, with the
promise that it would be removed after the war finished,

See my other posts on this.

I note that many years after the wars in question ended, we're still
paying them.

William Pitt, the Tories saw the opportunity to remove taxes from their
lands and load it onto the poor. They call it progressive taxation - it is
not pregressive and does not work.

I honestly can't see our government introducing LVT and then removing a
single tax from the existing framework.

The Tories, the party of privilideg and landowers? No. The LibDems have it
high on their target, but try to get it in, in various watered down ways -
the mansion tax for one. Churchill was a massive fan. The only war he lost
was to the British landlords.

Q: If LVT is so sensible, why don't we have it
already?

A: LVT, first proposed by the American social
economist Henry George in the 19th Century,
received wide popular support. But it was
suppressed from mainstream economics just
because it is fundamentally pro-community
(the whole community) and anti-elitist.
Mainstream economists are the priesthood of
our wealth-elitist political system, which
favours privatisation and leads to the
exhaustion of natural resources. LVT is part of
a more enlightened agenda for a just and
sustainable society.

Q: Could LVT be introduced tomorrow ?

A: Yes. But, once the principle had been
accepted, there would need to be a debate
about the form it should take and as to
transitional provisions to avoid disruption.

Q: Will LVT be yet another tax?

A: Not necessarily. It could replace an
existing tax that is considered harmful to the
economy.

Q: Where else has LVT been
implemented?

A: Denmark, Hong Kong, lots of cities in
the US - especially in Pennsylvania, cities
in Australia, including Sydney. Taiwan
catapulting an island of paddy fields and
ignorance into a world technological power
in a few decades. The Germans used it brilliantly
in Tsingtao in China - unfortunately taken from
Germany after WW1.

Q: How does LVT effect the planning
system?

A: It doesn't. Land can still be
zoned/designated as industrial/residential/
public space/agricultural as normal, and
differential tax rates set accordingly.

Q: How can we persuade the legislators
to act?

A: Popular pressure. The principle of LVT
will be opposed by big landowners and
their hangers-on who will spend millions
campaigning against it. But we live in a
democracy. And LVT benefits the majority,
including builders and house-buyers and
tenants, as well as strengthening the
community as a whole.

WHAT IS LAND VALUE TAX (LVT) ?

LVT is a tax on the site value of land.
The site value is the unimproved value of the land.
It is the part of the total value of the land not
attributable to any buildings on the land or any
work of improvement, so neither the present owner
nor any previous owner can claim to have
contributed to the site value. The site value is
created by nature or by the community, often by
publicly funded infrastructure provision.
However it is imposed, LVT is a way for the
community to receive back the value created by
public expenditure, or for the community to share
the benefit of nature's gift.

HOW DOES LVT WORK?
LVT can take many forms. It can be an annual tax,
or it can take the form of a levy payable on the sale
of the land, the zoning of land for development or
the grant of planning permission.
The tax can be made payable to a local authority, a
parish or city council, or to central government.
The tax can be used to increase the total revenue
available to the local authority or central
government to spend on public services. Or it can
enable other, less efficient, taxes to be reduced.
As a single tax, it would replace all other taxes.
LVT can be 'hypothecated', ie ring-fenced to be
spent in a certain way for the benefit of the
community.

LVT is often imposed in addition to a tax on the
buildings on land: the site value is taxed at a higher
rate than the buildings: this is known as the 'dual
rate tax.'

LVT can be charged at different rates for different
per acre site values, at higher rates for more
valuable land, as in Barbados.
Land is special because:

.. there is only so much of it
unlike manufactured goods, higher
prices don't result in more land being
produced

.. you can't move it around
a tax on land cannot be avoided

.. it's a free gift
people who profit from increased site
values haven't earned one cent of this
profit

.. it's a basic necessity of life
everyone needs somewhere to live

At the moment

· open market housing is unaffordable to the vast majority of
people, especially the young, and those who can afford to buy can
only do so by taking out massive mortgages

· meanwhile speculators and other landowners are making
unearned fortunes. If not taxed, land ownership confers superior
bargaining power and leads to concentration of wealth

Because at the moment there is a fundamental flaw in the
system: the site value of land, which is created not by the
landowner but by nature and the community, belongs to
the lucky landowner. The landowner is getting the value
that ought to belong to the community.

We need to correct the system, not just tweak it.
More regulation and bureaucracy aren't the answer:
they address the symptoms, not the cause of the
problem. They are inefficient and open to abuse.
We need a system that eliminates the basic flaw; a
system that ensures that increased site values created
by nature and the community are enjoyed by the
community.

The benefits of Land Value Tax

LVT corrects a basic flaw in the existing system.
Not surprisingly, there are many benefits:

Economic; it discourages land speculation - the
tax encourages landowners to develop or sell.
It brings more land onto the market for housing
at lower prices.

Social: the site value of land belongs in justice to
the community: LVT ensures that the economic
advantages of land-ownership are fairly shared.

Logistic: easy to assess and collect, can't be
evaded, as the location is know to the inch. It
can't be taken off-shore.