Hacker News Reader

Comment by JumpCrisscross | Hacker News Reader

> What's the difference between the two in reality?

Land value tax incentivises turning a single-family home into a multi-unit building. Property tax explicitly discourages that.

View on HN

Instead, I see LVT incentivizing the production and purchase of mobile homes, RVs, and hotels. You could live tax free if you don't have a permanent abode.

The tax is still paid, just indirectly.

The only way to avoid it is to move to areas where land is valueless.

Why does a tailor on Saville Row in London charge $10k while the tailor in southern Italy charge $1k for a bespoke suit?

Land values and land rents: https://twitter.com/dieworkwear/status/1549648048426344448?s...

If everyone on the block turns their homes into multiplexes or high rises, this would attract businesses/restaurants to cater to the new residents which would ultimately increase the value of the land and the corresponding taxes, so I'm confused how it's different than property taxes in that regard

> this would attract businesses/restaurants to cater to the new residents which would ultimately increase the value of the land and the corresponding taxes

Lot more steps. Developing a property is risky. The double whammy of eating the development cost in addition to increased property tax bill dissuades homeowners from taking the risk. (Yes, theoretically, prices should go down as easily as they go up. In reality, obviously, no, no city does that.)

By the time your land value has increased, you’ve already made money. (Or ridden on your neighbours’ investments.)

Unless every property in the area is owned by the same person each individual owner will want to build a more expensive building because their individual action has minimal effect on land value. Basically if you don’t build big someone else will and you r lvt will go up either way.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com