Land Value Tax

A land value tax targets the land only, not the structures on top of it, so nobody is penalized for improving their property. It also means that within an expensive metro vacant lots are taxed at the same rate as dense residential buildings, making land speculation unprofitable. Rather, landowners are incentivized to either put their land to productive use or sell to somebody else who can.

Land value taxes have existed and do exist around the world (along with variations on the theme, such as leasehold land that is leased from the government for a long time). They don't result in the behaviour you describe. Most land value tax proposals are also revenue neutral (e.g. lower income tax in exchange for higher land value tax), so the balance sheet should end up looking the same for companies and individuals, but with higher land holding costs and lower land purchasing costs.

Land value tax solves this (as they say).

Why is a land value tax much better than a wealth tax?

I'll be the LVT guy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Land_value_tax

Sounds like a case for swapping to land value tax if I've ever seen one. Can't hide land.

A land value tax seeks to only tax the value of the land itself, not the improvements. Of course that's not always easy to assess, but neither are property values for normal property taxes.Even setting that aside, if the land value taxes on the land that someone owns dramatically increase then that means the value of their property has dramatically increased, and they can sell the land for a dramatic profit. Certainly it sucks that someone might have to sell; however, don't think th

why is a land value tax good? just curious

land value tax would solve this…

Link for the lazy:https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Land_value_tax