Land Value Tax (LVT) is a levy on the unimproved value of land, it disregards the value of building, personal property and other improvements to real estate. LVT has been referred to as "the perfect tax" and the economic efficiency of a Land Value Tax has been known since the eighteenth century. LVT is a progressive tax in that the tax burden falls on titleholders in proportion to the value of locations, the ownership of which is highly correlated with overall wealth and income.
Land Value Tax would be payable each year depending on the location and size of a plot. We advocate that it should replace some existing taxes. It should not add to the overall tax burden, its purpose is to shift tax away from income taxes . Land means the site alone. A vacant plot in a row of houses would be taxed the same as a similar built-on plot. It taxes the size and location of he plot. It does not tax buildings or other works.
There are three strong arguments for the tax. It is socially just. It is the best way of financing infrastructure. And it is economically efficient.
First social justice. Property taxes are fairer than income taxes. In the UK the wealthiest 1% own almost 25% of all property. Today we base the tax system almost entirely on income rather than assets. This means the very rich avoid paying their fair share of taxes. This entrenches inequality.
Second, infrastructure. The benefits of infrastructure are uneven. A fast rail line from London to Birmingham will provide a windfall for property owners in those locations. It won't benefit other locations nearly as much. At present every taxpayer, everywhere, pays. Land value tax corrects this. It recoups costs from those who benefit the most.
Third, economic efficiency. Land value tax is payable whether or not the owner actually uses the plot productively. It penalizes owners of empty houses; owners of run-down sites. Unlike now, they would be taxed at the same rate as a site in productive use. This would promote inner city regeneration. There is a myth that Land Value Tax would destroy green spaces. In fact, the City of New York made a profit when it created Central Park. It greened over existing built-up areas. The increased property tax from surrounding neighbourhoods paid for this.
In summary, Land Value Tax is pro-enterprise and green. Its introduction would allow other taxes to be reduced; especially those on income and profits. Enterprise would be better rewarded. Building on a property doesn't change its location value. The location value of land comes from geography -a beautiful view; or from investment elsewhere - for example a high speed railway. Location value is maintained by society. It just and efficient to tax it.
Freeman's Wood is a plot of land on the edge of Lancaster. The land has been used by local people for decades, and they have regarded it as common land, but fencing was installed around it in 2012, resulting in public unrest and reports in the local press.
Answers to questions from ALTER from leadership contenders Tim Farron and Norman Lamb have been published on Libdem Voice.
ALTER is actively advocating Land Value Taxation in Scotland, and has provided a detailed submission to Scottish Local Tax Commission. It is authored by ALTER member John Howell and can be found here.
A good article by Edward Lucas on the Economist blog, outlining the economic advantages but the considerable politicial difficulties of introducing Land Value Tax. One of the comments to the article makes the interesting point that China has substantial land taxes which no doubt increases the ability of the Chinese state to invest in infrastructure. Where better infrastructure leads to higher tax receipts, public investment flows. While western nations stagnate due to rent seeking behavior by land owners, the emerging economies in the East forge ahead.
George Osborne wants to introduce Mugabe-style property grabs into the UK. His latest wheeze is to force the sale of private property owned by housing associations to their tenants at a huge discount. The associations will be 'compensated' for this confiscation by the taxpayer. By offering this electoral bribe, he hopes to win votes in marginal constituencies.
Is support for Land Value Tax becoming the "new normal"? In yesterday's Financial Times leader ( "UK's weak productivity invites a bolder response") the paper comments:-
