 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
||||||
 |
|
||||||
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
Working GroupsFred Foldvary & Neil GilchristI infer from what Fred says that he believes LVT revenue should go first to replacing taxes and so long as there are taxes there should be no CD. Taxes on production and exchange are clearly harmful and lack the moral basis of LVT. However, the CD also facilitates the reduction of other taxes by enabling citizens to purchase services that are otherwise provided by government using tax revenue.Neil Gilchrist: I get frustrated when the revenue potential of LVT is calculated as 6% of current land values. As you say removing other taxes will greatly increase land values. The revenue potential of LVT far exceeds the potential of all other taxes because it promotes wealth creation and economic efficiency while other taxes do the opposite. The LVT rate can be increased to 100% of LV before total revenue will stop increasing. At that point annual LVT will equal LV. Perhaps drawing more from Fred's comment than is there, is the issue of how locally CD should be distributed. I would hope that we all agree that it should be global. However, distribution of CD at a national or regional level of part or all of LVT raised at a national or regional level is inevitablygoing to come first, if it ever comes.
|
http://www.earthrights.net/wg/ff-ng.html