A BETTER WAY: TAX LAND, NOT BUILDINGS
by Joshua Vincent
Exec. Director, Center for
the Study of Economics
Philadelphia, PA
Des Moines Register, Dec. 21, 2004
As the director of a foundation that has been
helping cities with property-tax issues since 1926, I
applaud officials seeing a problem in the Rube Goldberg
affair that is the Iowa property tax ("Cities, Counties
Detail Property-Tax Ideas," Dec. 8)
One aspect of the plan should be supported and
expanded, the others appear to be more springs, coils and
ladders of an unwieldy contraption.
Taxing land as oposed to buildings should be the
goal for all Iowa urban areas. Taxing land means those
that don't build -- or refuse to sell to someone who will -
- pay their fair share for hogging city services.
Untaxing buildings provides a real, permanent
abatement for what Iowa's towns and cities need: tax-free
economic development.
Instead of just for non-profits, this program
should be made available for all property owners in towns
and cities.
As practiced in cities such as Allentown and
Harrisburg in Pennsylvania, land taxation has meant lower
taxes for homeowners and productive businesses, and an
increased tax base. Revenue-neutrality is maintained.
Land with infrastructure must be used at its
highest and best use. If it isn't we get sprawl and more
expensive farmland.
One attraction of land taxation is its simplicity;
unlike the cities' and counties' plan, all properties are
assessed at the same percentage. Period. No more
gymnastic formulas to sort out winners, losers and also-
rans.