The arguments we have to answer
That’s my home. Get your dirty tax hands off it
Homeowners instinctively hate a mansion tax. They feel their hard-earned bricks and mortar should be beyond the State. So wrote Matthew Parris in today’s Times. The article is worth reading and so are the dozens of comments that follow,
mostly in opposition to the mansion tax proposal. Although LVT is precisely not a tax on bricks and mortar, many of the arguments will be raised against land value taxation as well. Most of the answers can be found on this web site or by clicking on the “Links” button on the top bar of our pages. We need to be familiar with all the objections and well prepared to argue the case against all comers. Some of the objections are valid. Others are soundly argued on false assumptions. Others again are valid if LVT is badly implemented. The biggest mistakes would be to base the tax on selling prices, to introduce the tax at too high a rate too quickly and without reducing other taxes, and to start off with so many exceptions, exemptions and concessions that the tax was full of loopholes even as it was launched. It is also being argued that there is an army of poor old pensioners out there somewhere, living in enormously valuable properties, which had been modestly priced when they moved in, perhaps 30 years ago. But what is the real extent of this potential problem? The problem of the poor widows was used to oppose the abolition of slavery. The idea of old ladies, presumably with no children to help them out, being turfed out of their homes, is meant to tug at the heart strings. Some way must be found to de-fuse the argument. It may be that it is only necessary to adjust the Council Tax rebate system or put up the state retirement pension