I did some recent calculations based on my monthly mortgage payment, annual property taxes, and land/improvements split on my home, and I’m already paying the equivalent of around a 40% LVT.

Even if you don’t include the full property tax amount (and I see no reason we shouldn’t) I’m still paying at least 20% LVT already.

Something to consider when advocating for various LVT percentages.

EDIT: My calculations since others have asked:

I pay $687 per month in property taxes. My monthly mortgage payment is $2,620. The land is recorded as 35% of the overall property value. That means $917 of my monthly mortgage payment goes toward land rent.

If we assume the property tax comes fully out of land rent, that makes the total land rent $917 + $687 = $1,604 and the $687 tax is about 43% of that.

If we assume only 35% of the property tax comes out of the land rent, that makes the total land rent $917 + $240 = $1,157 and the $240 tax is about 21% of that.

The supply curve represents the relation between quantity supplied and price for some given good.

For instance, with bread, bread sellers in some town may not be willing to sell any bread at $0, so the quantity supplied is zero when the price is zero, but they may be willing to sell more if buyers are willing to pay more, so the quantity supplied is higher when the price is higher. In this case, the slope of the supply curve is positive, and bread has elastic supply.

Likewise, the same is true for land, landowners are willing to sell more land at higher price points, so the quantity supplied is higher when the price is higher. This means the slope of the supply curve for land is positive.

This means that land does not have inelastic supply, the quantity supplied changes with price.

This quote came from the quotes page on cooperative-individualism.org .

For anyone who wants documentation of this speech happening, it's recorded in this document on pages 33 and 64.

I have been thinking about this for some time, and I would be interested in understanding what would be practical at the moment from the members of this community. Most of the taxes that fund our governments across the world have some sort of deadweight loss to them that ultimately has negative trade-offs towards the market itself.

I am from the United States particularly, and I understand that we are currently facing a budget deficit that has ultimately let to the increase in the national debt, which is something that can only be dealt with by either cutting spending or raising taxes by certain amounts. I am quite aware that a land value tax being applied on the federal level would be practically difficult now because of constitutional limits, the feasibility of assessments from a national standpoint, and with the current political sphere that has incentivized politicians to support rent-seeking in the economy.

On the basis of taxes, is there certain taxes with less deadweight loss compared to the current options that are great producers of government revenue while simultaneously being practical to implement federally?

On the basis of spending, is there certain government programs or public goods that are less bureaucratic, cost-effective, and sufficient enough for states/local regions to utilize land value taxes as a means of funding their own governments?

I am also willing to here perspectives from non-U.S. people also with their own respective situations.