Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

12141Re: Why don't companies promote LVT

Expand Messages
  • walto
    Nov 2, 2011
      --- In LandCafe@yahoogroups.com, "John" <burns-john@...> wrote:
      >
      > --- In LandCafe@yahoogroups.com, "roy_langston1" <roy_langston1@> wrote:
      > >
      > > --- In LandCafe@yahoogroups.com, "John"
      > > <burns-john@> wrote:
      >
      > > A rent seeking operation doesn't have to worry about
      > > competition.
      >
      > Two office blocks next to each other. One is brand new the other 70 years old and tatty. Which gets the higher rents? To bet higher rents the landowner of the tatty block may have to demolish or renovate - which costs. Even if the owner of the bricks is not the landowner, the landowner will get less rent if the block onto of the land takes in less, than a state-of-the-art block.
      >
      > > > Less or zero Corporation tax would have companies
      > > > crying out for LVT for sure.
      > >
      > > I explained why it wouldn't. Companies are mostly
      > > run by privileged landowners who know very well
      > > that LVT would stop their gravy train.
      >
      > Roy, most companies are not owned by privileged landowners. Many companies may own land, and this is a part of the assets, but their main income is not land.
      >
      > For sure, MacDonalds assets are primarily land based and they are now primarily a land company. There is a family owned Yorkshire brewery Called Samuel Smiths. They date from the 1760s. They own their own a national pub chain of about 200 pubs - the buildings and land under, apart from two which they rent the land (both in London). They brew "all" their own beers and have a stake in the spirits, wine and soft drinks companies that supply, and even own their own central kitchens - vertically integrated. They keep beer prices "very low" to other pubs - like 1/3 less. So business in some pubs is brisk.
      >
      > The brewery only employs about 50 people. The business is not worth that much at all as many pubs are poorly run with one of the Smith family members, who runs the pubs, not the brewing, not having much of clue or how to treat staff. The prime asset value is in the land and buildings of the pubs and brewery the chain owns. About 35 are in London with about 15 right in the centre where land prices are off the scale. That is why breweries in the UK are very wealthy. They tend to own the land they have the pubs on and the pubs are in prime locations. San Smiths are riding the CC well. They never borrowed and have few outgoings (no landlords to demand high rents) all they do is keep their head above water until it passes. To them, owning land has kept the company going for around 250 years.
      >
      > Of course, the likes of MacDonalds and San Smiths are probably exceptional. They need retail outlets which need to be in the centre of districts where land values are high. The nature of their business dictates so. Once the companies are so big they buy premises and the land under, rather than rent.
      >
      > Not all companies have their assets tied up in high value land.
      >
      > > > They are not crying out. Many large companies do
      > > > have people who understand matter including LVT.
      > >
      > > Most of those who understand the current injustice
      > > want to go on taking advantage of it.
      >
      > I think they just don't know. As the girl friend said, "if they could get taxes down by shifting taxes, they would". She worked at high management levels in banks and some companies.
      >


      Again, John. In the U.S., corporations don't need LVT to pay low corporate taxes. They already have quite low effective rates. They're not stupid.

      W
    • Show all 28 messages in this topic