 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
||||||
 |
|
||||||
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
Working GroupsNic TidemanLand value comes from nature, infrastructure, and surrounding private activity. The part of land value that comes from nature should be used for a global CD, unless citizens in a particular jurisdiction express a clear preference for having part of their CD put to a social use. The part that comes from infrastructure should be used to finance infrastructure. The part that comes from surrounding private activity has no morally obligatory use, but is most efficiently used to repay the people who undertake the private activities that create land value. If it is used that way it will probably generate more additional land value than it costs. (It will produce an upward re-valuation of the parts of land value generated by nature and by infrastructure.)You can tax either land values or land rents. Neil says, “The LVT rate can be increased to 100% of LV before total revenue will stop increasing. At that point annual LVT will equal LV.” It’s a bit more complicated. If you have a tax of 100% of land value per year, collected annually, and the land value equals the tax payment just before the tax is paid, then the land value is 200% of the tax just after the tax has been paid. If the value of the land is 100% of the tax just after the tax has been paid, then the value of the land is 0 just before the tax has been paid, and the tax rate, expressed as a percentage of the value just before the tax has been paid is infinity. Because of these ambiguities, I think it is a good idea to view full LVT as collecting 100% of the rent of land, by a monthly fee.
|
http://www.earthrights.net/wg/nt.html