Land Value Taxation Campaign

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

Land rent for public revenue

LVT in the wider context

E-mail Print PDF

It is nearly two months since anything new has been added to the Campaign website. There has been little in the news that it would have been appropriate to respond to. Bigger events have moved onto centre stage, including the takeover of large areas of Iraq by Islamists, the associated massacres that have accompanied that, the war in Gaza and unfolding events in Ukraine. Our supporters will have divergent views on  these conflicts, but all of them are, amongst other things, battles for control of land and natural resources. The Iraq conflict is in and around the area of the oil fields, whilst Ukraine is a source of valuable coal which is exported to, amongst other places, the UK.

Gaza and Palestine generally are another matter. Proposals have been put forward from time to time for solutions which would involve rent-sharing, for example by Fred Foldvary. Land ownership in Israel/Palestine is a complex topic in itself. At the end of the Ottoman period, the major landowners were the Greek Orthodox Church and absentees, letting to rack-rented tenants. The GOC has retained its land holdings and even the Israeli parliament building is on leased land. The absentees sold to the Jewish National Fund which then leased it to Jewish settlers, though until the Nazis came to power in the 1930s their numbers were small, the influx was a trickle and it seemed unlikely that there would ever be enough Jews to make it possible to establish a Jewish state. Most of the absentee landlowners lost their property in the 1948 war.

It is interesting to speculate what might happen if the Israelis were suddenly to depart, leaving the country vacant but in good order. The grandchildren of the pre-1948 owners might emerge; on what basis could they make their claims? Documents would have to be produced, not only relating to land titles but also to inheritance. Courts would have to be set up to deal with it all. What assumptions would or could they make regarding the inheritance over two generations of property which had been thought lost for all time?



The living wage

E-mail Print PDF

The issue of the “living wage” inevitably crops up from time to time and has done so again recently. The notion can be traced back to at least St Thomas Aquinas and has long featured in Catholic moral teaching. The Anglican Archbishop of York recently called for a ‘living wage’ to be paid to all government workers. In a recent newspaper article, he said, “what workers really need is pay, not platitudes”.

We have always asserted that workers should receive the full fruits of their labour, and in most normal circumstances that should be more than enough to support a labourer and his family. The difficulty is that wages cannot be set directly by legislation or decree, because they are governed by economic laws. These need to be understood if the problem is to be remedied.

The law of wages can be formally stated as follows: where land is free, and everyone who so wishes may procure a portion to himself, wages are determined by what a man can produce at the margin without the payment of economic rent. In this situation, there is always the choice between working for an employer and working on one’s own account on a plot of marginal land, free of any requirement to pay rent. In practice, this might mean the opportunity to provide for oneself on some kind of smallholding. Of course not everyone would wish to or be able to, but the fact that the opportunity existed would mean that no-one would be forced to work for penurious wages as they would always have the option to be self-sufficient.

In practice, all land is normally enclosed. Everyone who is not a landowner is like someone who joins a game of Monopoly after all the squares (apart from the twelve that are not for sale) are owned by one or more of the original players. The newcomers are obliged to pay rent almost wherever they land. The board game is in this respect a true model of the real world. Where all land is enclosed, those with no access to land must either pay rent or work for wages on the best terms they can obtain, in other words, the least anyone will accept. Since they cannot work for each other on their own account, they will be competing for apparently scarce jobs. This will drive down wages to a subsistence level. Where some kind of benefit payment system is in operation, take-home pay will equate to the level of benefits. In effect, the benefit sets a “floor” to wages. The overall result is that economic activity is throttled.

A further effect of an increase in wages is to drive up residential rents and property prices. Thus, the minimum wage legislation eventually leads to no overall improvement. The effect was described in a speech given by Winston Churchill in the House of Commons in 1909, when he was campaigning for land value taxation:

“Some years ago in London there was a toll-bar on a bridge across the Thames, and all the working people who lived on the south side of the river had to pay a daily toll of one penny for going and returning from their work. The spectacle of these poor people thus mulcted of so large a proportion of their earnings appealed to the public conscience: an agitation was set on foot, municipal authorities were roused, and at the cost of the ratepayers the bridge was freed and the toll removed. All those people who used the bridge were saved 6d. a week. Within a very short period from that time the rents on the south side of the river were found to have advanced by about 6d. a week, or the amount of the toll which had been remitted.”

For practical reasons, in our present system of economic organisation, all land is, probably of necessity, enclosed. For historical reasons, this enclosed land is owned and controlled by a small proportion of the population. In these circumstances, the best and quickest way to increase the general level of real wages is to abolish taxes on wages and production and use the annual rental value of land as the principal source of public revenue. It would probably also be necessary to introduce some kind of unconditional “citizens’ income”, paid for out of the land value tax, as a safety net for those who were genuinely unable to provide for themselves.


Mansion tax resurfacing

E-mail Print PDF

We note that discussion of the wretched mansion tax is re-surfacing, having been adopted as a policy by the Labour Party. When a tax is based on some round-number threshold, it must be concluded that it is based on no sound principle. It will also lead to endless disputes from property owners who find themselves caught through being just above that threshold. At a time when property prices are volatile, this is a recipe for an administrative shambles as all the appeals have to be dealt with. One might have thought that the valuation problems were so obvious as to rule out the whole suggestion, but it has been sloshing around now for several years ever since Vincent Cable came up with the idea. There are of course two sorts of "mansion" - ordinary houses in the London area, where the land value forms a high proportion of the total property value, and actual mansions, country houses standing on land of little value. Their owners might decide to convert their West Wings into stables and invest in some horses so as to get the value below the threshold. There is an article about this aspect of the tax in the FT today.


Quote from a so-called expert

E-mail Print PDF

In a response to comments from the EU about UK property taxation, Johnny Morris, head of research at Hamptons International, said there was also a potential downside for non-homeowners if reforms were not carried out carefully. "Generally tenants are much more sensitive to council tax levels than buyers," he said. "If new tax bands were adopted nationally, rebalancing so more expensive properties incurred higher charges, those renting in London could end up paying higher council tax, on top of their already higher rent, versus a household on a similar income in another part of the country."

He of all people should know that the incidence of Council Tax is on the landlord. If he does not understand that, he deserves the sack.


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