Imagine a new streetcar or subway line were built and extra
money started magically appearing in cash registers of businesses along it; along
the route, especially at stops, landlords suddenly got a cash bonus with their
monthly rent cheques. Meanwhile, businesses along this line saw costs drop
because they needed to provide less parking for employees and customers even as
employee retention and sales traffic went up, further boosting bottom lines.
If all this were clearly marked as coming from the transit
service, which the government paid to install and run, would it be fair for businesses
or landlords to pocket that cash? Would it make more sense for that free extra
money to be collected by the government that created it? Of course it would,
and doing so would let transit pay for itself without expensive taxpayer
subsidies.
This approach is called Land Value Capture (LVC), and is how
Ontario should finance improvements in transit. The beauty of LVC is that it
doesn’t increase anyone’s real tax burden at all, it just reclaims some of the
extra revenue public infrastructure creates from the landowners who didn’t do
anything to earn it.
How would it work? The existing market value property
assessment system could track how much prices of land near new transit rose
beyond normal property value rise. That extra increase would clearly be the
result of the improved transit, and be recaptured through a surtax on the extra
land value.
Landowners along that route would already be charging higher
rents to businesses or residents reflecting improved access to these sites, normal
practise in a market economy like ours. But instead of pocketing extra unearned
rent, landowners would remit most of it as an LVC surtax. There would be no extra
tax burden on the businesses or families renting those properties, and
landowners would still keep the basic rent they were already charging before
the increase.
People living in their own house or condo would have the
option of deferring all of their LVC until they eventually sold the property;
accumulated LVC would add up to less than the rise in their land value since
the transit was improved. Thus they would still keep all the value they had
invested in their property, and even pocket the general increase not due to
transit. If, for some reason, their property’s market value stayed flat or went
down, there would be no LVC assessed, as there would be no extra value to
capture.
Sadly, the province is leaning towards a gas tax of 10 cents
per liter. While I believe energy prices are too low, any increase should be
used to reduce job-killing taxes like HST or payroll taxes, not to increase
overall spending and taxation.
Transit should be financed by those who benefit financially
from it, the landowners along or near the transit route, not by taxing everyone
near and far. The purpose of transit is to move people along it, but if we go
the gas tax route (or increase HST, another proposal) we’ll be moving money
from the general taxpayers into the pockets of privileged landowners!
Land value capture was mentioned in Ann Golden’s Transit Panel report and I know Ontario’s Transport Minister, Glen Murray, is familiar with
it from when he proposed land value taxes as Mayor of Winnipeg. I can’t imagine
why he isn’t championing it now, so transit can pay for itself instead of putting
the burden on all regardless of benefit. There is still time before the
province finalizes plans in the spring; I hope they seriously reconsider using
LVC to finance transit from unearned income instead of the tax dollars of
hard-working Ontarians.
Publised as my Root Issues column in the Barrie Examiner as "Transit costs need review / Ontario's transit plan needs tweaking" or "Not all taxpayers should pay for transit costs"
Re-posted by request at Loonie Politics
Re-posted by request at Loonie Politics
Erich Jacoby-Hawkins is a director of
Living Green and the Robert Schalkenbach Foundation.
blog at the progress report and get thousands more readers
ReplyDelete