Living rooms have shrunk?

[hard-work]

He currently pays council tax for the rest of his life. Swings and roundabouts in this scenario.

Some people are asset rich, cash poor when old. So someone can be in £1.5m house and be on welfare (many around me are like this - literally). His Council Tax is paid, etc. Then he dies and the £1.5m is left to his kids who did sweet nothing to create that wealth (unearned income). LVT may defer his LVT payments on sale of house or death. The state should not be in the business of ensuring unearned income to anyone. The state should ensure people take the paths of enterprise and production, not seek out "economic rent" and unearned income.

We could defer Council Tax right now, until sale of house (the land) or death. Some may sell the land, but not the house, to worm their way around it.

 

[hard-work]

Milton Friedman (Nobel Prize winning economist) a monetarist who inspired Margaret Thatchers free market reforms and who Thatcher herself praised and endorsed LVT.

Lady Thatcher "Milton Friedman revived the economics of liberty when it had been all but forgotten. He was an intellectual freedom fighter. Never was there a less dismal practitioner of a dismal science. "I shall greatly miss my old friend's lucid wisdom and mordant humour."

Milton Friedman lauding LVT:

"Unimproved value of land", is land which is virgin and not touched by man. Unimproved land is land beneath the soil layer, provided by nature. Soil can be worked by man and buildings built by man.

So back to LVT. As a transfer from the rich to the poor - is that an argument against it? Maybe if you read the DM.

LVT does not transfer wealth from the rich and give it to the poor. It ensures productive wealth goes to those who create it when it is created.

• Privately created wealth stays in private pockets.
• Socially created wealth (like land values) stay in public coffers, to pay for our services.

 

[noseall]

Where is your contribution to this thread?

Look at your hands shaking.

 

[JohnD]

silly notch is flinging around the daily wail's nonsense!

Somebody works hard all his life, paying his taxes. He upgrades his house until his forever house is a nice size in a large garden.

As we all know, the imaginary person pays council tax on his expensive house and garden. This applies regardless of how hard he worked, or didn't, and it applies even if he has been a tax-dodger or a career criminal. There is no moral virtue corresponding to the size of your house.

Notch thinks that in some way, paying Council Tax is "better" than paying a Land Value Tax.

Has notch been able to explain why he holds this strange belief?

No.

 

[Notch7]

Look at your hands shaking.

Thank you for your insightful post.

Great contribution

 

[JohnD]

Great contribution

If only the same could be said for you.

 

[Notch7]

Notch thinks that in some way, paying Council Tax is "better" than paying a Land Value Tax

So would a land value tax be similar in cost to council tax?

JohnD clearly thinking that a new tax should be broughtin, but nobody is allowed to subject the idea to any scrutiny?

Does he have something to hide?

 

[JohnD]

Total absence of scrutiny.

But a silly smear.

And some complete nonsense.

Somebody works hard all his life, paying his taxes. He upgrades his house until his forever house is a nice size in a large garden.

He has paid off his mortgage.

LVT is introduced. Suddenly he know longer 'owns' his own house, he has to pay rent (you can call it Land Value Tax). He has to pay it every year until he dies.

So LVT effectively means state ownership of every piece of land in the country. You can never be free of paying tax no matter how long you live.

 

[Notch7]

Why don't you read up about double marginalisation problem Notch7.

Its a nice day I'm off out. This has been fun but our resident Marxist Comrade Notch7 needs a pint. I'll buy you one Notch7. We may not agree but you on the whole have been a fun debater.

Thanks, I'm quite partial to a London Pride

A bit of gardening going on at this end....

 

[Notch7]

Total absence of scrutiny.

But a silly smear.

And some complete nonsense.

Yes, your de facto response is cries of: 'its a smear'

So how much would LVT be? Similar to council tax?

 

[hard-work]

Assessments have revealed that if LVT is at a levy to eliminate income tax, the average household would be £4,000 per ann. better off.

 

[hard-work]

Excellent document:

"The current taxation system has characteristics that, in some circumstances, encourage inefficient land use, deter development and make land banking more likely. Land Value Tax might overcome these drawbacks and deliver higher levels of development to fund London’s growth. There are sites in London that are more appropriate for meeting our housing need that would be encouraged to come forward more quickly if they were taxed appropriately. If implemented in London, LVT would reduce the city’s reliance on Whitehall funding and give much greater flexibility in promoting and encouraging development as well as ensuring the community benefits when land values increase as a result of public investment."

"In 2011, the Mirrlees Review noted the ‘perverse’ incentives provided by the current system that can encourage demolition of buildings or continuing vacancy when reduced or zero business rates are applied to empty or derelict land. “If property is subject to tax and land is not, then, if the property is not being used, a tax incentive for demolition is created. If empty or unused property is taxed at a lower rate than property being used, then a tax disincentive to use it is created. An LVT avoids these problems.”"​

Tax trial
A Land Value Tax for London? by GLA
https://www.london.gov.uk/sites/default/files/final-draft-lvt-report_2.pdf

 

[hard-work]

"Landlords grow rich in their sleep without working, risking or economizing. The increase in the value of land, arising as it does from the efforts of an entire community, should belong to the community and not to the individual who might hold title."​

- Political Economy (1848), Book V, Chap. 2, Sec. 5 by John Stuart Mill

Failed attempts at ‘land tax’:

• Town & Country Planning Act 1947 – Nationalised development rights
• Land Commission Act 1967 – Betterment Levy (40%)
• Community Land Act 1975
• Development Land Tax Act 1976
• ‘planning gain’ (DoE Circular 1983)
• Panning & Compensation Act 1991 – ‘Section 106’ planning obligations
• Stamp Duty Land Tax (2003)

 

[JohnD]

Notch thinks that in some way, paying Council Tax is "better" than paying a Land Value Tax.

Has notch been able to explain why he holds this strange belief?

No.

please try.

 

[Notch7]

"Landlords grow rich in their sleep without working, risking or economizing. The increase in the value of land, arising as it does from the efforts of an entire community, should belong to the community and not to the individual who might hold title."

Im not convinced a quote by somebody from 1848 is terribly helpful.