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

14582Re: [LandCafe] Re: Software companies etc would pay little tax with lvt

Expand Messages
  • Harry Pollard
    Dec 4, 2012

      Land heavy or land light simply confuses.

      In an economic rent collecting society, no-one pays for more, or less than they get.

      If they pay a heavy land-value tax it is because they are getting 
      what they pay for. Similarly, if they are paying very little, it's because they are getting very little. Worrying about producers such as software companies on low rent land not paying enough is a holdover from:

      "Let's not tax you, let's not tax me. Let's tax that chap behind the tree."


      The Alumni Group 
      The Henry George School
      of Los Angeles
      Tujunga   CA   90243
      (818) 352-4141

      On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 8:22 AM, John <burns-john@...> wrote:

      --- In LandCafe@yahoogroups.com, "mattbieker" <agrarian.justice@...> wrote:

      > > Dave Wetzel
      > Roy nailed the first response: why WOULD we want
      > to make sure all productive activity is taxed?
      > If someone is able to add value to the economy
      > while at the same time consuming few resources,
      > we would be wise to avoid disincentivizing that.

      I fully agree. However, the way they think is what should a land-heavy company pay more than land light-light company when say they make the same profits.

      Technology means Amazon can be land-light. Other companies "need" to be land-heavy and are penalized by LVT. OK, a company can built a taller building and sell off land to get the same production effect and lower the LVT bill. But heavy industry cannot work on multiple floors. So does land-heavy industries will have to up their prices. As LVT is across the board all land-heavy companies are in the same boat.

      Currently, many financial organisations make amazing amounts of money, and are land-light, compared to heavy industry land-heavy companies who make a faction of the money the financial company makes. That is the nature of the two industries. Amazons's is no different to this. The land-heavy company still has the land asset with the likes of Amazon do not.

      Also, Amazon has to set up near transport routes, near to conurbations to give easy access, skilled labour, services, etc. They can't set up on the side of hill in Scotland where land is pennies. They have a large warehouse/offices right on junction 13 of the M1 motorway, simply because of the transport access, where the land is not cheap to buy.

      I believe for years on end Amazon never made a profit, showed no signs of making a profit and yet had a high stock price in the Dot-Com boom. They were swilling in cash though. They paid the book suppliers, package suppliers and delivery companies way down the line, cashing the customers money immediately. They never had a cash flow problem.

    • Show all 142 messages in this topic