Property & Land Tax
In all the discussion of tax dodgers it seems what we really need to do is to make it hard to dodge paying tax. There is nothing illegal about tax dodging it is just immoral, taking things for nothing. It is as simple as that, these individuals and companies want all the benefits that come from government spending but do not want to pay their share of the bill. As a consequence the poorer in society pay a bigger share proportionally than they can afford. £100 is a lot to a person with no money and is a trivial amount to someone with a lot.
So we need a tax, one of many, which is hard to dodge and, preferably, cheap to collect. We use to have one but we need to expand and develop it. That is a tax on land and property. it is relatively cheap to collect and is clearly identifiable. If Amazon has a dirty grat warehouse then we know where it is, they cannot pretend it is in Luxembourg.
It would also be a way to localise taxation and give them a significant revenue that was independent of central government. They could be made responsible for the collection. As there is now a Land Registry it is much easier to identify who owns land. I would argue that any land not registered would be advertised and if not claimed within 6 months would be requisitioned by the local authority and could be used by them.
Essentially it would be a tax on assets which is missing from the current taxation system. It would encourage efficient use of assets and would mean that if planning permission is granted for development on the land the tax would increase. This would encourage companies and people to actually do something with the permission because they would be paying tax. Also if values went down then the tax payable would decrease.
These values would be determined by using Land Registry data, a small percentage of the tax would help fund the Land Registry to improve their services and make access to their database free, It would also be good to have a hotline so that if things happen it could be reported anonymously. Tjis would be analogous to the benefits version.
If this was done for land and property on a quarterly basis there should be gradual revaluation and so no sudden shocks. I think we need to move away from restricting taxation to being based on income and expenditure. This is economically illiterate and reduces the base of taxation. Given that we are overcrowded do we wish to discourage the efficient use of land and property?
care would have to be taken, for example public parks should not be taxed because they are in public use and planning permission should not be given to develop them. Waste land should be taxed and the owners might feel it would be good to have some income from the land. Where there is no identifiable owner the land or property reverts to public ownership. When the taxation is not being paid there should be a process as in with unpaid mortgages, the property or land will be sold, the taxation taken out of the proceeds and the remainder will go to the owners.
So we need a tax, one of many, which is hard to dodge and, preferably, cheap to collect. We use to have one but we need to expand and develop it. That is a tax on land and property. it is relatively cheap to collect and is clearly identifiable. If Amazon has a dirty grat warehouse then we know where it is, they cannot pretend it is in Luxembourg.
It would also be a way to localise taxation and give them a significant revenue that was independent of central government. They could be made responsible for the collection. As there is now a Land Registry it is much easier to identify who owns land. I would argue that any land not registered would be advertised and if not claimed within 6 months would be requisitioned by the local authority and could be used by them.
Essentially it would be a tax on assets which is missing from the current taxation system. It would encourage efficient use of assets and would mean that if planning permission is granted for development on the land the tax would increase. This would encourage companies and people to actually do something with the permission because they would be paying tax. Also if values went down then the tax payable would decrease.
These values would be determined by using Land Registry data, a small percentage of the tax would help fund the Land Registry to improve their services and make access to their database free, It would also be good to have a hotline so that if things happen it could be reported anonymously. Tjis would be analogous to the benefits version.
If this was done for land and property on a quarterly basis there should be gradual revaluation and so no sudden shocks. I think we need to move away from restricting taxation to being based on income and expenditure. This is economically illiterate and reduces the base of taxation. Given that we are overcrowded do we wish to discourage the efficient use of land and property?
care would have to be taken, for example public parks should not be taxed because they are in public use and planning permission should not be given to develop them. Waste land should be taxed and the owners might feel it would be good to have some income from the land. Where there is no identifiable owner the land or property reverts to public ownership. When the taxation is not being paid there should be a process as in with unpaid mortgages, the property or land will be sold, the taxation taken out of the proceeds and the remainder will go to the owners.
Labels: paublic good, Txation
posted by Unknown at
12:21 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home