doc89 t1_j19ow9b wrote
Reply to comment by flamehead2k1 in 29-Unit, Mixed-Use Project to be Built on Broad Street Diner Site - Rising Real Estate by RoughRhinos
>Larger buildings with more occupants will require more services and should pay tax to help cover that.
Remember that everyone in the building will presumably be paying city wage taxes and sales taxes, it's not like they are free-riding.
On balance most of the residents of market rate new housing are going to be contributing much more to the city budget than they are going to be drawing in expenses. We should encourage buildings like this as much as possible.
>Something like taxing land at X and taxing improvements at .25-.5X would motivate landholders to put that land into productive use but also raise revenue as the city takes on new residents who need services.
Most of the advocates of a land value tax would consider something like this a huge win, myself included.
flamehead2k1 t1_j19r8wz wrote
>Remember that everyone in the building will presumably be paying city wage taxes and sales taxes, it's not like they are free-riding.
That's true but I don't think we should further rely on city wage tax. It has seriously hurt our development and I don't think lower property taxes on high density housing is going to offset that enough.
The 10 year tax abatement is a temporary land value tax because it only includes the improvement portion.
I think between keeping this and encouraging the city to get rid of lots they are holding, we could do a great job infilling the city.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments