Land & Finite Resources Tax

Unlike the value that people create themselves through labor and investment, land and other natural resources (e.g., minerals, old growth forests, airspace, water, fossil fuels) are in some sense owned by all current and future residents of a community. Some argue that these finite natural resources should be taxed, while leaving the capital improvements (buildings, wells) untaxed. This practice would not penalize land owners who improve the property or keep structures in good repair. This practice would tend to penalize land owners who let structures fall into disrepair or make inefficient use of the property (e.g. slumlords and parking lot owners).

Opponents of a Land Value Tax argue that it would tend to encourage gentrification of urban areas and the building of energy inefficient overshadowing skyscrapers. Others also caution that a Land Value Tax must be structured in such a way as to protect historic sites, farmland, and public parks.

Those who advocate Land Tax, or a Single Tax to replace all other taxes, tend to follow the philosophy of  Henry George. See for a land tax on New York City plan.

in Australia


One Comment Add yours

  1. VN Alexander says:

    See “YOUR TURN: Infrastructure, tax caps, and impact fees” : “The economy in upstate New York has been suffering and there have been many public risk/private gain schemes such as “Start-up New York” to try to jump start job growth by taking money from all taxpayers and giving it to a few select businesses. This hasn’t gone well, and the tide seems to be turning with the public growing tired of these failing ventures. ”


Public Comments?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.