That’s an interesting idea… increase the tax on the value of the land itself and decrease the tax on assets ON the land.
Theory being people don’t want to put a multi-story building on their land because now they have to pay property taxes on a (potentially) multi-million dollar structure.
Similarly people don’t want to improve their property because of potential tax implications.
It SEEMS like a good idea, but I think the problem with it is tax burden is likely not the only reason for a lack of development.
So if they reduce the taxes and development STILL doesn’t come?
They’re not reducing taxes, they’re adjusting how much of the tax is applied to a given property. So if 97% gets a tax reduction, the other 3% are making up the difference, resulting in the same net tax receipts.
So if development still doesn’t come, nothing changes. At least that’s my read of the situation.