LinkExchange Member
| Some owners made improvements to heritage commercial buildings in King Street, Perth, Western Australia, and the tenants protested because the increased property tax was passed on to them. Property tax ought to be on the land value component, not on the buildings or other improvements. |
Obviously, it is NOT fair to put a heavier tax on a person who spends money turning a run-down building into an attractive premises. Neither is it fair to allow a person who invests some money on improving the premises to TAKE extra rent, or get a greater Capital Gain, if that person is a Landlord, BUT to allow the landlord and the Local and State Governments all to take money off that person if that person who paid for the renovations is a Tenant!!
How, then, to avoid these problems? Well, progressive councillors and politicians years ago knew that the way to do so was to charge rates and taxes on Unimproved Capital Value of each block of land. Valuers work out what the land would be worth if there was no building or improvements on it, but all the parks, gardens, river, other buildings, the trainlines, bus routes, electricity, etc. were all in place. The result, wherever this operates, is that people who DO SOMETHING TO IMPROVE THE AREA don’t have to pay a huge increase. They and their neighbours will probably get a small increase in rates.
There is a school of thought that, if this principle was applied 100%, and only what is called the economic
rent of land was collected by Councils and Governments, all taxes could be taken OFF THE BACKS of
WORK and BUSINESS or PROFESSIONAL ACTIVITY. Those who would make the biggest contribution to
the PUBLIC PURSE would be those who charge too much rent, AND people who buy or inherit land and
whether they do anything with it, will get super profits when the price goes up (and use clever accountants
and lawyers to avoid capital gains tax).
Many progressive statesmen and women supported this concept, which is opposed tooth and nail by many
Think Tanks, and others whose income depends on donations and grants from the Vested Interests!
And all the empty shops? Well, the income tax laws, and until recent years the lack of Capital Gains Tax,
meant that investors could build and build and build, making huge capital gains. For example, the Galleria
at Morley was sold recently, two years after construction, and the AIM of the investors was to get 50% profit,
though they didn't get that much. The Office block mania of the 1980s has been followed by the Shopping
Centre mania of the 1990s.
With taxes falling heaviest on those who do something, and the super-profits going to those who get the
best locations to put their money in to, or who just SIT ON LAND WAITING FOR THE PRICE TO RISE, it is
no wonder we have empty shops, idle hands (the unemployed), and bankruptcies. __ THE END __
| At the turn of the 20th century, the "Single Tax" movement was one of the most vital and influential forces of the progressive era. Single tax Mayors and Legislators were elected in a number of states, most notably Mayor Tom L. Johnson of Cleveland. A statue of Johnson in Cleveland today shows him holding the book that inspired his political career: Progress and Poverty. The Single Tax poster at right was used as an advertisement for The Public, a Chicago Georgist newspaper published by Louis F. Post, the eminent author and advocate who served as Assistant Secretary of Labor in the Wilson Administration. |
| WE ARE MEMBERS OF THE FOLLOWING BANNER EXCHANGES (all FREE) | |
|---|---|
| LinkExchange at The Georgist Remedy | CyberLink at Georgist Economic Philosophy |
| Bannerad at Closest Geoist Encounter ... | Net-On (some Multilingual) at Visitors' & La Georgista ..., Esperanto |
| and THESE ADVERTISING BANNER DISPLAY SYSTEMS (also FREE) | |
| Galaxy of Entrepreneurs & all our banners at Banners | Commonwealth at Esperanto Ne Malaperis ... |
![[ Homepage, Georgist Remedy ]](home002.gif){kind=small}
12
