(Jan.-Feb. 2009 GroundSwell)
COMMENTS TO THE SILVER HAIRED LEGISLATURE FINANCE
COMMITTEE
By Carl Shaw, Mt. Zion, WV
(The following presentation was made by Carl Shaw on Aug. 21, 2008 to the
Finance Committee of the West Virginia Silver Haired Legislature. The
non-partisan and volunteer members to the West Virginia Silver Haired
Legislature House of Delegates and Senate are elected by West Virginia seniors
at county senior centers. Those elected meet several days per year
and enact proposals which are forwarded to the regular legislature for their
consideration.)
Robert Kennedy often used a quote from George
Bernard Shaw. ?Some people see things as they are and ask, ?Why?? I
see things that have never been and ask, ?Why not??
I favor a different approach to land
ownership. It is not a new concept. All wealth is created on land,
using natural resources, by human labor. Were you born with a tag fastened
to your leg saying, ?I created this earth for all to use, but you will have to
buy it from an owner if you wish to use,? Signed,
GOD.
Have you ever wondered, ?Why does land have a
sales price? The air we breathe is free. So is the rain and snow we
enjoy. When was the last time you had to pay for sunshine? Land has
a sale price because left over rent gets capitalized into sale price.
Highly taxed land will not have a sale price. By left over I mean rent
which is not taxed. When land is taxed it is the site rent which gets
collected by the Sheriff. Today here in West Virginia only about 10% of
the rent is taxed. (8% in Calhoun County). One of the lowest land
tax rates in the USA. Land therefore becomes a GREAT Investment. Did
God intend that land and resources become an investment? I?ll give you
$25.00 for every Holy Bible quote you can provide which says the land should be
an investment.
Native Americans knew no such concept
as buying and selling the land. This idea was brought here by the earliest
settlers. Economic conditions in Europe were not good. Land cost
money there. People wanted something better. So they migrated here,
bringing their private land ownership ideas with them.
What would we call a reformer who wants
overnight changes? Revolutionist! Would you prefer reform overnight
or over time? The so-called Two Rate Property Tax is intended as a moral
reform, but over time, not revolutionary. It can be gradually changed over
15 years so that eventually only the land will be taxed, and the improvements
tax free. Several Pennsylvania cities are in the process of eliminating
taxes on buildings. Washington, Allentown, and Harrisburg are gradually
increasing the land tax rate while reducing the improvement rate. 900
cities in Australia and New Zealand do not tax buildings. New Hampshire
made the change in the 1940s and today taxes land at about 40% of the rent,
highest of any state in the USA. In the 1980s New Hampshire had the
nation?s 6th highest state income per capita and 6th in population gain.
And the first 5 states were west of the Mississippi. New Hampshire has no
sales or income tax. These taxes only raise revenue, and do not encourage
production. In fact, in contrast to the land tax they discourage
production. Denmark taxes 50% of the rent and is Europe?s highest per
capita and lowest in unemployment.
This tax change can be revenue neutral, so
the homeowner will not see any increase or decrease in his/her taxes.
Can you see a relationship between economic
development and land taxation? Suppose you owned a land parcel whose rent
was $100.00 per year. The current tax is
$10.00. Suppose your
land is little used. Suppose the government announced that over the next
15 years the land tax was to be increased to $100.00 per year. Would you
leave it idle or little used? Wouldn?t you look around your area, decide
what kinds of businesses were needed, and begin planning how to make better use
of the parcel? Wouldn?t you eventually run ads in the paper looking to
hire help, to construct a building, to develop a business? Wouldn?t this
development reduce local unemployment? A business on that site would help
bring in the full $100.00 annual rent, which you would use to pay the land
tax. If we did not tax improvements, a great incentive would be provided
to develop the parcel. Your own taxes would not be increased. The
business would pay the increased taxes. The city would look better with
new construction. Jobs would be provided. The word Unemployment
would leave our language. West Virginians who had gone elsewhere for work
would return to W.V. Poverty would only exist where some folks did not
want to work.
I mentioned site rent. Rent, the
payment for the use of land, is a social product, created by all of us.
Our economic activities, and the so called infrastructure -- streets, schools,
hospitals, etc. -- contribute to the rent. Where population is sparse,
land values are low. The rent of my Calhoun County land is $30.00 per
acre. Downtown Charleston land rent is $3.00 per square foot. If you
and your friend made something together, who should own it? What if your
friend took the product for himself? We all make the rent of land --
shouldn?t we all share the rent? Should moral standards play a role in
operating society?
In residential neighborhoods today most of the
property tax is based on the improvement. In commercial neighborhoods
where land values are high, building taxes still account for much of the total
tax.
Where does WV stand in regard to per capital
income? I?ve lived here only 25 years -- you know more than I --
W.V. is near the bottom of lots of criteria, and near the top in some
things nobody wants to be tops in. Population growth is low
with lots of poor housing.
In 1945 Taiwan, a Japanese colony, was about
the 175th country in the world in per capital income. Today
Taiwan is the world?s 30th country in per capital income. Do you think
this change came because of a typhoon? Tidal wave? It came about
because of economic reform instituted by Chiang Kai-Sheik.
Are you aware that our young people move to
other states for jobs? Would you like to see the job situation reversed so
that W.V. young people would be encouraged to come back home, and people
from other states would move here for jobs? .
Are you beginning to see a connection between
land taxation and economic improvement? Check it out. Land
speculators, land hoarders, are the primary group standing between us and
economic prosperity. About 4% of the population owns 95% of the privately
owned land. Does this sound fair? (US Dept. Agriculture Survey ?
1978) (Ownership for this survey means deed in hand.) We can certainly
out-vote 4%.
My farmland is worth $30.00 per acre annual
rent. The tax is $2.00 per acre. I pay the tax out of my ?mad
money.? If the land part of my property tax were to be gradually increased
over 15 years so that in 2023 all the site rent was taxed away for social
benefits (and the improvements were exempt of taxation), don?t you think I would
either, 1) advertise for help in order to construct an appropriate building to
start a business on my property, to bring in enough money to pay this increased
land tax, or 2) walk away from this more highly taxed parcel and allow someone
else to operate it along economic principles?
I pay $160.00 land tax annually, and $200.00
improvement tax. The land tax should be $2,400.00. You can see that
the land tax is so low it is a great investment. Did the Creator make our
earth so that a few people can sell it at a profit to the rest of society?
A lot of famous people have sanctioned the
land tax idea. Let?s start with Henry George, Leo Tolstoy, John Dewey,
Francois Quesnay, Victor Mirabeau (he said the single tax on land is one of the
three greatest investions of all time, the other two being money and the
alphabet), Adam Smith, Thomas Paine, Thomas Jefferson, David Ricardo, Ralph
Waldo Emerson, John Stewart Mill, Abraham Lincoln, Karl Marx, Herbert Spencer,
Mark Twain, Joseph Fels, Sun Yat-Sen, and dozens more, including 7 or 8 recent
Nobel Prize winners in economics. Do you think these people had greediness
in mind when they spoke for the land tax idea? Or did they believe in
Justice.
Don?t you think this land tax idea is at
least as important as is taxing alcohol, or improving the Home Exemption
law?
Can Labor and Capital produce wealth without
land and resources? Consider a system where labor and capital would have
to BUY the land, and would not be taxed when they produced goods and
services.
If we start the two rate tax system and take
it to its ultimate, W.V. whould rise to about the 4th state in the Union in per
capita income, based upon our location and resources.
Mechanically ? how it is
done:
1) Realistically appraise the land and the
improvements (assessors should do this work
daily).
2) Reduce tax rates on improvements by 10%
each year.
3) Increase tax rates on land each year by
enough to bring in the same revenue as prior to the 2-rate
system.
4) Over time reduce the improvement tax to
zero (15 years).
5) Over time increase the tax rate
on land so that all the site rent is being collected (again, 15 years)
Some W.V. land is owned by people who live in other
states. Do you think they do this so they can enjoy the scenery? The
Two Rate tax would end this practice. Taxing all the site rent will ensure
that everyone will get to own as much land as they need and can afford to own
based upon the rent tax.
If you think I am idealist for my economic beliefs
-- and you believe we can operate a fair and prosperous system wherein a few
people own most of the good land sites and resources, it is YOU who are the
idealist.
STIMULUS PACKAGE ? OR BETTER LAND USE?
By Carl Shaw, Mt. Zion, WV
We could have full employment now without the
expenditure of even $1.00 of Federal Government funds. How?
Increase the tax on land rent from the
present 8% to 95%, and watch the owners find ways to put their valuable land to
better use in order to raise enough income to pay the new higher tax.
For example ?
Suppose the potential annual rent is
$1,000.00 on a given valuable land parcel.
Suppose the tax on that parcel is now $100.00
per year. Taxing jurisdictions could increase the tax over time to
$950.00. The owner would need to do something with the site to
raise $850.00 more per year. He could hire workers to saw down trees,
drill for oil and gas, grow food crops, construct houses, commercial or
industrial buildings, graze animals, or any other legal use.
In the meantime phase out taxes on labor and
capital -- incomes, sales, buildings, profits. There must be millions of
sites in this country which could be commercially developed in this manner
to the benefit of our whole economy. And no government funds would be
needed!
The question then would be, where would we
get that many workers? In a generation we would have to explain to our
grand children what the word unemployment meant. <<