NoblePath's recent activity
-
Comment on "twitter.com" is now officially dead in ~tech
-
Comment on Experimental real property tax basis-set rate based on usable area per person in ~finance
NoblePath Link ParentI'm not persuaded that your graphs are relevant to the regime. My "equation" was meant to be schematic, not operative, perhaps I misunderstood your request. But if I take your x-axis on the...I'm not persuaded that your graphs are relevant to the regime. My "equation" was meant to be schematic, not operative, perhaps I misunderstood your request.
But if I take your x-axis on the proposed plot as a soft proxy for density, and assume the best about calculations and data, the graph supports the aims for the proposal, that is, as density increases, taxes approach the lower limit. The curves to the left of the peak are weird, but without knowing what numbers exactly you plugged in, it's hard to comment. How did you plug in population density? I would think you would need at least 18000sqft (approx 1/4 city block) resolution and actual numbers to make any meaningful visualization.
Importantly, your graphs are only showing the landscape as it exists, not as it might be after some period of time with incentives in place.
Also importantly, property value and absolute tax values are not really relevant to determining whether this regime might properly incentivize density increases. A better set of axes in my opinion would density on the independent axis, and rate per person on the dependent. Also informative would be pop density to share of tax burden.
As an aside, if we think property value is somehow important, we can roll that into capital tax levies.
-
Comment on Experimental real property tax basis-set rate based on usable area per person in ~finance
NoblePath Link ParentJust for clarification, I was not using Japan for the sake of values or property ownership, but rather to point out a culture that values density and creates a beautiful and healthy landscape with it.Just for clarification, I was not using Japan for the sake of values or property ownership, but rather to point out a culture that values density and creates a beautiful and healthy landscape with it.
-
Comment on Experimental real property tax basis-set rate based on usable area per person in ~finance
NoblePath Link ParentNot that this has anything to do with the tax proposal, but there are high-density rural developments. Usually these are large tracts of land where the buildings are concentrated in a small...Not that this has anything to do with the tax proposal, but there are high-density rural developments. Usually these are large tracts of land where the buildings are concentrated in a small portion and the rest left undeveloped or dedicated to agricultural uses.
-
Comment on Experimental real property tax basis-set rate based on usable area per person in ~finance
NoblePath (edited )Link ParentWithout more about how you generated your graphs, I can't really comment, nevertheless, my equation was meant to be schematic, not definitive. Nevertheless, this tax is not meant to address equity...Without more about how you generated your graphs, I can't really comment, nevertheless, my equation was meant to be schematic, not definitive. Nevertheless, this tax is not meant to address equity issues, only to promote density. Inequities can (and should) be resolved through other means. If your above graphs indicate that the proposal promotes high-value, high-density, low taxed developments, then it is working as intended.
Every scheme is subject manipulation, corruption, and chaos. This scheme is not meant to address that phenomenon.
Edit: The proposal is meant to be largely value/price agnostic.
-
Comment on Experimental real property tax basis-set rate based on usable area per person in ~finance
NoblePath (edited )Link ParentHmm. That's an interesting proposal. My only thought at this time is that how do we recapture the externalities associated with the land use? Edit. Still thinking about this. I see how it would...Hmm. That's an interesting proposal.
My only thought at this time is that how do we recapture the externalities associated with the land use?
Edit. Still thinking about this. I see how it would remove the penalties for building denser housing on the same land, but I don't see how it would necessarily incentivize them.
-
Comment on Experimental real property tax basis-set rate based on usable area per person in ~finance
-
Comment on Experimental real property tax basis-set rate based on usable area per person in ~finance
NoblePath (edited )Link ParentCorruption, fraud, chaos, are a part of any system. I'm not thinking this regime would do much to move that needle either direction, but it might help with sprawl, which is a growing problem on...Corruption, fraud, chaos, are a part of any system. I'm not thinking this regime would do much to move that needle either direction, but it might help with sprawl, which is a growing problem on many fronts. Things like the Canyonero, heating cooling costs, lack of public transit, walkability, time and access to third places, are all improved in denser developments.
Edit: spelling
-
Comment on Experimental real property tax basis-set rate based on usable area per person in ~finance
NoblePath (edited )Link ParentPart of the dream is to encourage cultural change. In Japan, for example, there are very dense (well planned) cities, and vast unoccupied natural areas, plus some rural areas that perform rural...Part of the dream is to encourage cultural change. In Japan, for example, there are very dense (well planned) cities, and vast unoccupied natural areas, plus some rural areas that perform rural type functions (like agricultural production), plus industrial areas adjacent to the dense cities. This is a cultural choice to mostly avoid sprawl. It's not perfect, and wealthier/high status individuals get exceptions, but it works pretty well.
The U.S. prioritizes mini-manors and home ownership. It's got a fairly robust and entrenched tradition behind it, but there's nothing sacred or natural about it. Which means it can be changed.
Nevertheless, homeownership doesn't have to really change to accommodate density, just shift the image of ideal home as detached single family with shed and picket fence to flat in a building. There's nothing here in this tax regime that inherently converts the single family homeowner into a landlord. They could be just as likely to be converted into a subdeveloper. Instead of subdividing a big plot of land and building a bunch of single family homes on lots, the owner is converting an existing structure into 5 new homes, sold just like any other home.
I have an old house cut up into apartments. I landlord for a little additional income but mostly for the sense of community I'm able to be a part of. I'm an atypical landlord, my rents are below market rate and the units very funky (but sound-I'm not a slumlord). But I could be nearly as happy selling the tenants their units and letting them build a collective.
edit: 'but'
-
Comment on Experimental real property tax basis-set rate based on usable area per person in ~finance
NoblePath Link ParentI think this is what it looks like (area of lot x area of structure)/(number of residents x number of residential units) (1 acre lot x 1000 sqft)/family of four = tax of 250. (10 acre lot x 10,000...I think this is what it looks like
(area of lot x area of structure)/(number of residents x number of residential units)
(1 acre lot x 1000 sqft)/family of four = tax of 250.
(10 acre lot x 10,000 sqft)/family of four = tax of 25,000.
(1 acre lot x 10,000 sqft)/(10 units x 40) = 25
Overlooking the powerless is a political problem, present in every regime. This regime by itself does nothing to promote diversity or affordability, it addresses only density. Perhaps density will lead to easier solutions for other social problems, we can hope, but I don't think it exacerbates them.
The attraction of simplicity in any system is overwhelming from high policy altitude. Unfortunately, human systems are complex and chaotic. A good system balances promulgation of principle, addressing the details, and equitable flexibility. Human systems rely on the humans to provide honesty, fairness, and goodwill, while recognizing humans unreliability and fickle natures.
-
Comment on Experimental real property tax basis-set rate based on usable area per person in ~finance
NoblePath Link ParentI would think total area of structure and total area of lot would be considered. It almost doesn't matter whether we include 'outside' structures, as if they are not part of the interior, they are...I would think total area of structure and total area of lot would be considered. It almost doesn't matter whether we include 'outside' structures, as if they are not part of the interior, they are definitely part of the lot. We would tax differently for each however, because we want the twin incentives of more structures per land area, and more people per structure.
It's not necessary to assume a number of residents. It's probably not that hard, using, say, census data, to determine the actual number of people in a residence. There are also already various exemption and appeal mechanisms in place for property valuation, adding 'actual number' isn't that big a deal.
-
Comment on Experimental real property tax basis-set rate based on usable area per person in ~finance
NoblePath Link ParentAccessibility is a real issue. I don't have a ready answer except to say that it's certainly possible to make dense, vertical spaces accessible, to wit, assisted living centers. Retrofitting old...Accessibility is a real issue. I don't have a ready answer except to say that it's certainly possible to make dense, vertical spaces accessible, to wit, assisted living centers. Retrofitting old spaces is of course a challenge.
That public housing is questionable is a political issue. In any regime, there will be pressure to ignore the powerless. Perhaps in denser areas, the disabled and otherwise disadvantaged might be more visible, and so lead to greater attention to their plight.
-
Comment on Experimental real property tax basis-set rate based on usable area per person in ~finance
NoblePath Link ParentI guess I'm having a hard time understanding what the difference is between a straight land tax and the current tax regime in most of the US? Most jurisdictions I'm aware of tax a percentage of...I guess I'm having a hard time understanding what the difference is between a straight land tax and the current tax regime in most of the US? Most jurisdictions I'm aware of tax a percentage of the value of the land described by the deed. The nature of the structure and attachments to the land change its value.
The best goal as I understand it, though, is to have as many people as reasonable living on the same parcel of earth. Discounting primary residence owners works against that goal.
-
Comment on Experimental real property tax basis-set rate based on usable area per person in ~finance
NoblePath (edited )Link ParentIt might incentivize more kids, I'm assuming other social and economic pressures determine family size. It might incentivize additional families to occupy the same structure, which is a win and...It might incentivize more kids, I'm assuming other social and economic pressures determine family size. It might incentivize additional families to occupy the same structure, which is a win and aligned with the overall policy goal in my opinion.
Divorce sucks on so many fronts; there are already a lot of perverse incentives around it. It's definitely an issue that deserves some meditation.
It takes a lot of time for any incentive to work. Tax incentives provide more government flexibility, because they are easier to develop and implement than zoning laws. Zoning also comes with it's own sets of complications and complexities. Also, why not both?
-
Comment on Experimental real property tax basis-set rate based on usable area per person in ~finance
NoblePath Link ParentYour experience is hardly unique, but the real issue is no ownership but rights. The law, mostly wrongly in my opinion, has been written to provide too few rights to lease interests as opposed to...Your experience is hardly unique, but the real issue is no ownership but rights. The law, mostly wrongly in my opinion, has been written to provide too few rights to lease interests as opposed to title interests. This is changeable, even at the local level. But it's not about finance or taxation, this is an individual rights issue.
-
Comment on Experimental real property tax basis-set rate based on usable area per person in ~finance
NoblePath Link ParentSo, under this regime both the starter home and the manor would be assumed to have the same residency. As such, the manor would be taxed much more the starter home. The inequity could be reduce by...So, under this regime both the starter home and the manor would be assumed to have the same residency. As such, the manor would be taxed much more the starter home. The inequity could be reduce by using a progressive tax rate, the way income tax (is supposed to) works. So, we pick some numbers, say 1000 sq ft on .1 acre is a 4% rate, up to 2000 sq ft on .2 acre is 4.5%, and so on. There's probably a programmatic way to do this that doesn't require brackets (but does require math).
an inexact proxy variable for lot square footage, finished square footage, and house finish.
Not finish, but it might be more equitable to throw that in there. I'll push back on the "inexact" part but yes, it's a way to tax more for bigger houses and bigger lots for the same number of people.
Corruption and chaos are separate problems. There are so many loopholes, expemptions, appeals, valuations exercises in the current system already. So long as we replace some of what's existing, I wouldn't think it was adding any additional 'attack surface' for exploitation. Worth thinking hard about, though, when implementing an experiments.
-
Comment on Experimental real property tax basis-set rate based on usable area per person in ~finance
NoblePath Link ParentThat's a fair point. But it is also kinda the point. Converting oversized single family structures into multifamily is an easy and direct way to raise density. I'm not certain homeownership is a...That's a fair point. But it is also kinda the point. Converting oversized single family structures into multifamily is an easy and direct way to raise density. I'm not certain homeownership is a desirable goal, in any event, especially if it requires sprawl to accomplish. The same would probably happen on undeveloped lots, they would be developed into apartment buildings instead of single family home subdevelopments.
Even if we are persuaded that homeownership is what's needed, there's no reason a reconfigured house (or developed lot, for that matter) couldn't be converted to owned condominiums instead of just apartments, and there's plenty of ways to incentivize that behavior.
Also, 'ownership' is also really just a question of degree. It's easier for a landlord to displace you from a leased real property interest than it is for a bank a government to the same from a piece of real property titled in your name. But there's no reason it has to be, it's simply what we (or, depending on your degree of cynicism, they) decided the law should be.
-
Comment on Experimental real property tax basis-set rate based on usable area per person in ~finance
NoblePath Link ParentI was unaware of the concept, but my proposal is more about how best to allocate real property taxes, not about whether we should tax real property, or whether we should tax other property or...Georgism
I was unaware of the concept, but my proposal is more about how best to allocate real property taxes, not about whether we should tax real property, or whether we should tax other property or activity.
-
Comment on Experimental real property tax basis-set rate based on usable area per person in ~finance
NoblePath Link ParentYes that's the point, to incentivize dense residential development (required for things like walkability and good public transport). Green buffers are important, we could surely make exemptions...Would taxing based on sqft/person not end up disproportionately favor people in denser urban areas with better economies compared to people in rural and more economically poor settings?
Yes that's the point, to incentivize dense residential development (required for things like walkability and good public transport). Green buffers are important, we could surely make exemptions for conservation corridors.
Rural buffers, like you describe in 3, are tricky. While they're good for some things, they're pretty awful for others. That's another discussion, and if we were to determine collectively to support them, they would be due some kind of exemption.
-
Experimental real property tax basis-set rate based on usable area per person
Random thought. What if we taxed property based on the area per person of the property, as opposed to sale value? Edit and quick intro to those who mostly rent: most real property in the US,...
Random thought. What if we taxed property based on the area per person of the property, as opposed to sale value?
Edit and quick intro to those who mostly rent: most real property in the US, especially residential property, is taxed yearly based on some variation of something called "fair market value," usually assessed by a local tax assessor's office
I'm proposing that a property would be taxed for every square meter of space per person in the designated property unit. It can't be totally simplified, but should be fairly straightforward. There could also be progressive brackets. It might not make make sense to apply it strictly per person, but rather for a typical use. That is, we would assume "single family residential" properties to house 3.4 (totally made up number) people per house and property.
The goal of this is to find a fair, market-driven incentive to build density into urban cores.
A similar approach could be applied to commercial space (but probably not industrial).
It could be coupled with a sales tax (currently missing in most real property tax regimes, at least in the US) to capture runaway property valuations in certain jurisdictions.
Alternatively, we could drop the property value based tax rate (but not eliminate it), and then add a per person-area surcharge.
It's not meant to increase revenue, although it could certainly be used that way. It could also be use to decrease revenue, and maybe that would be a good way to sell it. But at the end of the day, developers and residents would both have an incentive to pursue as dense development as possible, even if there is not a density driving pressure of desirablity, which only exists in a few really cool urban cores.
8 votes
Trademark is not there to protect words. We can and should argue about how useful or just or current property laws are. The law however protects a private enterprise from competitors trying to use the same mark, any mark is fair game for registration.