[cma256]

Why are we pretending like LVT doesn't exist already? I pay taxes on my land. Those taxes are calculated based on size and location. The Disney example is particularly egregious. They pay taxes on the land AND the structures they built but the article acts as though they would be disincentivized from building if we _removed_ taxes on the structures? Huh?

[bitshiftfaced]

The idea is not to disincentivize developing on the land. To me, it only really works when you remove the friction/gaming of all the other taxes and put it all into LVT, but that will never happen of course.

[xvedejas]

If your land can be treated as an asset, then we don't really have LVT yet. The goal of LVT is to tax land to the point where it is no longer an appreciating asset (and, not too much that it becomes a liability)