I like many Libertarian Democrats support the idea of using a nationwide LVT or land value tax to replace income and payroll taxes for instance. However here’s where I have problems.

Assuming a national most likely 100% LVT on lot value goes into place and replaces the 16th amendment taxes as well as causing state and local property taxes to be abolished its like many argue its far superior to sales tax, but last time I checked if your taxing businesses for anything (including property) it means the tax is ultimately going to get paid out of the cash register (just like any other tax on business including sales tax) so it kinda makes you wonder why not just do a sales tax with big rebates like the Fair Tax People propose? Especially when many who propose LVT even in a libertarian context tend to believe in a substantial guaranteed income program to go with it meaning that homeowners and farmers can get big discounts on their taxes while renters and Condo dwellers get there’s passed on in lower rent from the landlord.

But on the other hand I really like the way it keeps real estate prices low by discouraging land speculation or simply (stops lots of $$$$ from chasing too little land, supply and demand for you). I guess if it were up to me I would like to see National 100% LVT started with the guaranteed income program, no more 16th amendment, fair market prices on natural resources and public lands use, very light sales tax for the rest of Fed. Govt. and for the states and local govt. who couldn’t do property tax any more I would encourage lotteries, gambling and vice taxes on alcohol and tobacco. Please share your thoughts!!!

So you would favor some groups over others, and punish some people to reward others. I can’t agree with that.

Whoever taxes your land owns your land. Let’s abolish the so-called income tax and NOT replace it with a sales tax OR a land tax. Slash the federal government back to its bare bones, cause it to do nothing more than just ensure our Liberty, and let people keep their hard-earned money and do with it as they see fit.

Nobody has a right to decide how we spend our money or what we do with our land except we ourselves...

Aside from what I mentioned earlier about my own concerns over LVT what I’m wondering Soundchaser is how you propose to FUND the federal govt. after its been reduced to "Constitution Size". I feel kinda dumb for telling you this, but any time you tax a business weather its sales, LVT, corporate income tax, tariff etc... the tax ultimately gets paid out of the cash register meaning the customer ultimately pays for it.

I’m sorry Soundchaser, but I just can’t see a lottery and liquor taxes being enough to fund the military even after we’ve returned to Constitutional govt. Please explain yourself.

No taxation without representation my friend.

Each state has two representatives in the Senate. (Even though the 17th Amendment, which needs to be repealed, gave voters the authority to elect the Senators, and took that privilege away from the States, the Senate’s job is STILL, by definition, to represent the States.) Each geographic population group has a representative in the House. The cost of running the federal government should be disbursed according to representation, equally.

No business has representation in the government (other than by bribery) so no business should be taxed. PEOPLE have representation, and States have representation, so all the cost of keeping the government in place should be borne by them.

If people had to directly and openly pay for the cost of government they’d pay a heck of a lot more attention to that cost, and fire any representatives who spent their money illegally and foolishly. The voters would tend to elect fiscally conservative, intelligent representatives who abide by the constitutional limits on government, and therefore on the cost of government.

Yeah, I know, you can say I’m a dreamer, but that’s how our government is supposed to work, it’s how it started out working, and it’s how it should work today.

I will not support ANY tax that is not based on representation, even if it is called a "Fair Tax" or any other misnomer. Especially not a land tax! He who taxes your land owns your land!

Correct me if I’m wrong....but it sounds like what you’re proposing to fund a dramatically downsized federal government is a simple "head tax" where all American citizens would have to pay the same exact dollar amount in tax as opposed to simply the same % rate in income or sales taxes. Not to get too technical, but please tell me how a proposal like this would be any different than all the other kinds of taxes out there where the govt. is "telling people how to spend their money?"

I can understand arguments against all kinds of property tax including LVT like "why should anyone have to pay tax on something they’ve bought and owned over and over again?" as well as arguments that property tax is modernized serfdom or peonage ’cause you’re basically paying the govt. "rent" to use land that you own and hold title to. Especially with the way LVT as Henry George, Thomas Paine, Adam Smith and Thomas Jefferson proposed it would seriously change the real estate price structure seeing as how no bank would loan anyone the money to buy out the lot value of the real estate when you’ll be expected to pay tax on it year after year. Even if you’re a family buying a house and you can get a substantial tax discount and guaranteed income checks still no bank will loan you the loot for that under these circumstances. Although as far as I can tell it would not affect land titles or property owners rights in any other way.

Not to sound too much like a pitch man for LVT, but as a "Geolibertarian" I like the idea of how it would prevent landlords and slumlords from just laying on their asses and getting rich from the rent of the poor and desperate. In my opinion this is worse than most banking and investing where the investor puts up their own hard earned money at great risk to help finance the economy and in my opinion deserves to reap handsome rewards unless there’s usury going on. On a closing note I learned that LVT was used to finance the US Federal govt. from 1776 until 1792. I have a sneaking suspicion that the only reason it was left out of the final draft of the Constitution is that it would have effectively destroyed the slave economy of wealthy Southern landowners who now suddenly faced with a big tax bill on their land would have little choice, but to sell and or rent out lots and collect most likely a middle class income from their acres of cotton and tobacco as opposed to living like a New World nobility.

In practical terms I think if LVT were enacted much like how banks often have to deal with usury laws limiting interest rates I could imagine a situation where residential landlords aside from having to submit their books to the IRS to show they’re passing on the savings of an individual’s property tax write off in the form of reduced rent might have to deal with a new law or regulation to where instead of landlords being allowed to charge whatever profit the market allows now might be restricted to only charging a simple commission rate per tenant in addition to the share of fixed costs the tenant owes.

You’ve made some very convincing arguments against a federal property tax. I agree with them. Thanks! :-)

As to your question about the difference between taxation based on representation and taxation based on income/spending ability, I think the difference is clear. When people have to pay for government directly, they are more likely to be willing to pay for only what is necessary. When they are forced to pay for government based on income and spending habits, without representation, they really have no direct say in how the money is spent. The people who are paying very little, or as it has become these days RECEIVING the tax money are very unlikely to work toward putting an end to unnecessary hand-out programs. And they are the majority. The people paying the bulk of the tax, being the minority, have very little to say about how it is spent, and therefore cannot do much about it.

Taxation without representation is wrong in and of itself, and the effects it has on an economy and a government are visible in our nation today.

I think a Land Value Tax would be one of the fairest means of taxation. It is not perfect, as pointed out earlier, but it would be a lot fairer than the fair tax that many conservatives propose.
Returning government to it’s constitutional limitations sounds good. It is an important libertarian and conservative theme.
But things have changed in the last 200 years and some of those things could not possibly have been foretold by our founding fathers. Some of those changes have merit and an argument could be made for the constitutionality.
1) FCC: Some libertarians argue for the abolishment of the FCC, but a lifelong
friend who works in radio points to the chaos that would exist without it. A
Constitutional argument could be made that protects people and businesses
from pirates walking all over them on the airwaves.
2) FTC: Some libertarians and conservatives argue for abolishing the FTC. Our
forefathers had no way of knowing the progress that would be made in
transportation and communication that have made the world much smaller.
3) Social Security: this is something that sets libertarian Democrats apart from
some Libertarians and libertarian Republicans. Yes, it is a mandated
retirement plan. But without it, my mother and many other seniors would
have to return to the role of beggars and rely on family and friends to live.
Some social conservatives might say "good, " but most families aren’t as
close as they were 50 years ago or even 20 years ago. Witness the fewer
family reunions, visits to cemetaries to honor veterans and loved ones, etc.
4) Unemployment: this is a mandated "payroll benefit" or "payroll tax." Some
businesspeople no doubt would like to not pay this. But as someone who
had a good job, never called in sick once, never stole and put forth an honest
day’s work for an honest wage...twice I’ve been suddenly layed off with no
warning. Don’t I deserve some kind of protection?
5) Criminal Justice System: even arch-conservatives agree that government
has the obligations to protect it’s people. Take a peak at what is spent just
on police, courts and prisons and you will see that exise and sin taxes just
won’t cut it.

Our government has taken on some legitimate functions within the last 200 years that have to be funded somehow. Most of us agree an income tax is not good. Many of us agree that a national sales tax would not be good. A land value tax makes more sense than other ideas that are out there.

Great Post Todd. Although a 100% LVT or near 100% LVT could never replace all the taxes in our country like Henry George seemed to think it could, one thing I do know is that LVT along with market based pricing on natural resource sales from public land like logging, fishing, mining and even grazing could easilly replace all federal taxes presently being used. Then imagine how much more you could make the $$$$ stretch if you merged social security and all the other non-medical federal aid programs including Food Stamps, HUD and college aid living allowances saving a lot on overhead and essentially creating a guaranteed income program except probably for individuals earning at least $$$75, 000/year which I think is starting pay for Doctors and Lawyers in most places.

And it gets even better. Now imagine that for transportation and recreation (state and local) you use only user fees instead of gas taxes among others. Like for instance other than toll boothes you just pay an increased license plate sticker fee on your car based on the vehicle’s weight which btw is great incentive for consumers to buy fuel efficient vehicles.

As far as the idea of alcohol and tobacco taxes being insufficient to pay for the courts and prisons here’s my take on that. Aside from legalizing weed lets say if you were to change the laws so that all non-violent property crimes and remaining non-violent drug crimes merely had probation and restitution I think hitting them in the pocket book would do a lot better job of discouraging them to re-offend than sending them to prison where they only come out worse. Even for prison itself which is hardly cheap and there would be a lot fewer in there with a proposal like this you could easilly set it up so private companies could contract out labor with each Con earning a minimum wage used to pay for room & board and I think with that sin taxes and fines/tickets could easilly pay for criminal justice and still have lots of $$$$ left over.

Finally for public school funding as I mentioned before lotteries and gambling would be a good revenue source for state and local govt. if natl. LVT comes along. Supposing you had the guaranteed income as part of the LVT (which most LVT advocates suggest) I can tell you that if some piss poor single parent with kids was only getting a $3, 000/year supplement per child (standard TANF payment) and now they had to pay it all in tuition for a year of public school/child I can also tell you that if they went to work part time at minimum wage they could easilly make up the difference and then some.