BCs große Lösung: Grundwertsteuer
https://www.commonwealth.ca/bc-lvt
BCs große Lösung: Grundwertsteuer
https://www.commonwealth.ca/bc-lvt
2 Kommentare
> Replace Taxes on Income & Property: an LVT capturing 1.8% of land value could replace all provincial personal income and corporate taxes and all property taxes in B.C.
The corporation that I work for has no property and no office. It’s not unique in this.
Why should such corporations get a free ride?
Similarly, the wealthier you are the less meaningful a 1.8% tax on land value is, even if you own hundreds of millions of dollars in property. This means the _agony_ of paying the tax is unevenly distributed across personal wealth.
> Annual Household Rebates: an LVT capturing 0.7% of land value could provide every B.C. household an annual rebate of $6,500, leaving nearly all households with more income.
They never describe how the rebate is funded. Where’s the money coming from to fund the solution that makes this less of a burden on the middle class?
If I were a billionaire tech bro with a remote only, or even hybrid work corporation this is precisely the tax scheme I would push. Thrust the burden onto the poor and middle class, and off the ultra wealthy and physical asset-light corporations; and offer to reduce the burden with rebates, that likely come at the expense of reducing and privatizing services.
>Land Value Tax (LVT) offers a fair and practical solution. LVT can shift the tax burden away from workers, builders, and businesses, and onto land value created by public investments and infrastructure. This could bring down prices and encourage more housing supply, while transforming the housing market from primarily serving investors to serving families and the broader community.
The land value tax is very efficient and should be used for that reason, but this argument is incorrect. It doesn’t affect the supply of land, which is what makes it so efficient. It doesn’t distort the economy. But for the same reason it’s efficient, it cannot affect the cost of land when you include the tax itself as part of that cost.
The price comes down to exactly offset the increased cost from the higher tax rate. A homebuyer would just be replacing a lower mortgage payment with a higher tax rate. In theory, they should exactly cancel out. So it cannot make housing more affordable, at least not directly.
How it can help is by allowing other taxes that are distortionary to be eliminated. Removing the property tax does increase the housing supply and therefore does make housing more affordable. It causes property values to rise, but not by as much as the cost of paying the property tax.
Or if you use it to remove the income tax, that results in people working more and having more money, which allows them to afford more housing.
>Taxing land lowers its returns as a long-term investment, bringing down prices and shifting profits away from holding land towards putting it to productive use.
I’m not sure what this is supposed to mean. It shifts the profits from land to government revenue. I’m not sure what it means to „put them to productive use“. The money can be used for all kinds of things either way. If we’re talking about replacing another tax with the land value tax, then it actually shifts profits from land to profits from ownership of the improved portion of property, after-tax income, or profits from businesses. I don’t know in what real sense you could call that a shift from a non-productive use to a productive use.
>Alternatively, LVT revenues could be returned back to residents as annual household rebates, leaving nearly all households with more disposable income and giving everyone a direct stake in the province’s economic progress.
This is just wealth redistribution and would have none of the efficiency gains from eliminating other taxes. It wouldn’t result in all households having more disposable income. It’s just wealth redistribution from property owners to non-property owners. Some people would have higher disposable incomes, but homeowners would have lower disposable incomes. Even the land value tax is not perfectly efficient, so the average person would necessarily be worse off.
>A more moderate LVT capturing 0.7% of land value could provide every B.C. household with an annual rebate of $6,500.
>This would more than offset the increased tax cost for nearly every homeowner.
This can’t be true. They’re probably counting the revenue collected from businesses but ignoring the effect that would have on reduced returns to businesses, which are largely owned by those households one way or another.
>It would stimulate the economy by unlocking more unproductive land capital and transforming it into spending power.
Only if property taxes are lowered, which I’m not sure if they understand. The land value tax itself has no direct effect on how land is used.