Land Value Taxation Campaign

  • Increase font size
  • Default font size
  • Decrease font size

Land rent for public revenue


The dead loss of VAT

E-mail Print PDF

With the UK soon to be out of the EU, the country now has a golden opportunity to get rid of a regressive and troublesome tax. It would be difficult to conceive of any tax more damaging than VAT, because it applies precisely at the point where supply meets demand. VAT is exactly, precisely, wrong. Whatever is taxed results in less of the thing taxed. Taxes on gambling, tobacco and alcohol lead to a less betting, smoking and drinking; that is their aim and purpose. A tax on the addition of value will lead to the addition of less value. Since labour adds value, a tax on added value is the perfect tool to create unemployment by reducing demand. It is the exact opposite of what Keynesian theory would recommend, which is the artifical stimulation of demand due to a chronic shortage of demand in the economy.


Musings on inflation

E-mail Print PDF

Inflation is back in the news. These thoughts were sent to me by Robin Smith, a long-term supporter, though a critical one.

  • Inflation, through new money, is the best way for politicians to redistribute wealth In reduced purchasing power; it acts as a stealth tax, unjustly taking from the producer who saves and in hands out to the non producer who spend.
  • As the distribution of wealth is already so poor, there are fewer wealthier votes to lose and millions of poorer votes to buy.
  • The poorer recipients of the unjust taxation are a much bigger constituency. So it is perfect political expedience
  • Given the wealth is pre-distributed to the poorer constituents, is there a catch? Yes, of course! The deficit spending always ends up in land values through higher rents.
  • The poorer tenants can now afford to pay more, so the real-estate owner merely raises the rent.
  • In the end, the poorer are actually the losers And the real-estate owners the winners
  • Do the politicians look this far, when they get elected by an overwhelming majority for their unwise policy. Do they care?

Fishing after Brexit

E-mail Print PDF

As the post-Brexit negotiations proceed, or, apparently, fail to proceed, fishing has emerged as a major topic of disagreement. Yet there could be a simple solution. British fishing grounds belong to the British people, not to British fishermen or British owners of fishing boats, or owners of fishing boats registered in British ports. The British people are entitled to the value of their fishing grounds.

In economics, fish in the sea are classified as ‘land’, which provides a clue about how this national natural resource ought to be managed. Ownership of the seabed up to 12 nautical miles already forms part of the Crown Estate, and this might be extended to include all the fishing grounds which belong to the UK. Management could then become the responsibility of the Crown Estates Commissioners, who currently supervise and receive rents from fish farming in coastal waters. One of the benefits would be that the Crown Estate would have an incentive in managing the resource from a long term perspective. Since it would wish to optimise its revenue, it would presumably - or could be charged with, the operation of some scheme of leasing or licensing on the following lines.

  • Fishing grounds would be divided into zones based on criteria such as location to ports, types of fishing habitats and availability of species.
  • Licenses would be valid for a limited period of from one to five years.
  • Licences would be subject to terms and conditions such as sizes and types of boats which can be used, methods of fishing, size of mesh, quantities and sizes of each species which can be caught.
  • Licenses would be sold at open auction, possibly on the internet or, in the case of inshore fishing zones, locally; as an estate management company, the Crown Estate is experienced in this kind of commercial practice.
  • Revenues should be reserved for policing, protection, conservation, fish hatchery and research.
It is important that auctions should be open to all - French, Spanish, Dutch, etc; otherwise local fishermen might collude to hold down the bidding. Nevertheless, auctions would automatically give UK coastal fishermen an advantage; Dieppe fishermen would be unlikely to outbid those from Hastings for bidding for licences to fish off the Sussex coast in small boats, as their access across the stormy waters of the English Channel would be too unreliable for it to be worth their while to put in a high bid, if any at all. If the French played 'dirty' and subidise their fishermen's bids, the British get the money. But the French and Spanish cannot reasonably complain that their fisherman are being locked out when they have the opportunity to bid for licences to fish in British waters.

The arrangements might take a couple of years to bed-in, as the industry would have to adapt. With only short leases, fishermen might prefer to rent their boats and tackle from leasing companies rather than own them outright. One of the great opportunties is that it would enable depleted stocks to be replenished, through the use of hatcheries where spawn can be hatched and protected until the fish and crustacea are large enough to stand a fair change of survival. With ownership of the grounds vested in a body like the Crown Estate, there is an incentive to enhance the stock as this will generate a return as the value of the licences will be higher.

The long term aim should be to protect and enhance what is an important part of the national ‘estate’.


Have your say?

Do you have something to say?
Would you like to contribute to this web site?


We use cookies to improve our website and your experience when using it. Cookies used for the essential operation of the site have already been set. To find out more about the cookies we use and how to delete them, see our Privacy Policy.

I accept cookies from this site

EU Cookie Directive Plugin Information