> The method presented here relies on assessor data and valuations of land and improvement value.
One analysis I’d like to see is how a pure LVT tax shifts the tax burden toward people with less valuable homes while giving a break to people with nicer homes.
One of the overlooked upsides of taxing land and improvements separately is that it’s more progressive: People with more expensive houses pay more in taxes than their neighbors with less expensive houses.
Shifting to a pure LVT ignores the house because, of course, it’s a land value tax. So if you have the most expensive house in the neighborhood your taxes go down, but if you have the cheapest house on the block your taxes go up (assuming similar lot sizes and such).
One analysis I’d like to see is how a pure LVT tax shifts the tax burden toward people with less valuable homes while giving a break to people with nicer homes.
One of the overlooked upsides of taxing land and improvements separately is that it’s more progressive: People with more expensive houses pay more in taxes than their neighbors with less expensive houses.
Shifting to a pure LVT ignores the house because, of course, it’s a land value tax. So if you have the most expensive house in the neighborhood your taxes go down, but if you have the cheapest house on the block your taxes go up (assuming similar lot sizes and such).