Debate Magazine

Killer Arguments Against LVT, Not (477)

Posted on the 14 January 2020 by Markwadsworth @Mark_Wadsworth

From City AM:
Transport for London (TfL) is considering funding the £3.1bn Bakerloo line extension with a tax on landowners. The proposed works would extend the line from Elephant and Castle to Lewisham via stations on Old Kent Road and New Cross Gate. 
However, the project has been left unfunded with no indication from central government that it will foot the bill. It was revealed today by New Civil Engineer that TfL is considering taxing landowners along the proposed route to pay for the line as they would likely benefit from increased property values from the extension...
The Centre for London and the Adam Smith Institute think tanks said the landowner levy would make sense. 
Adam Smith institute research associate Charlie Paice said: "Rather than relying upon central government handouts for infrastructure investment this land levy will mean that those paying are the ones who stand to benefit as the value of their properties go up.
"If land owners aren't prepared to pay for a project which will further increase their property values – then why should they expect taxpayers from the rest of the country to stump up their cash?"

Good arguments FOR. Now let's see the KLN:
However, the low-tax lobby group the Taxpayers' Alliance (TPA) took a drastically different view.
Harry Fone, TPA grassroots campaign manager, said: "Imposing levies on homeowners who had no idea of the proposal when they bought would be deeply unfair."

OK, let's rephrase that: "Income tax hikes on people who had no idea that their taxes would be used to subsidise landowners elsewhere in the country when they started their current jobs are perfectly fair and reasonable."

Back to Featured Articles on Logo Paperblog