Quote:
Originally Posted by GGG
...In the same way by not maximizing land use the golf course never has to pay more taxes.
|
Why should they? The land value is always a residual function of a Council-approved land-use (not potential land-use). It cannot be done any other way, because a different land-use is not assured or certain; it is an opposite of being certain by being expressly prohibited in the By-Law. Using crude analogies: we shouldn't charge every man with rape just because they have a penis and might rape someone with it. We shouldn't tax every family doctor based on how much income they CAN be making if they were a neurosurgeon.
As I said earlier, these threads are always developing in the same predictable direction: how can governments grab more money from businesses and the salaried middle class (note - not the rich; the rich just laugh at all this noise in their Barbudian and Antiguan tax-free mansions). Progressive federal and provincial taxation systems are flawed to the core and need to be replaced with flat tax + net worth tax + consumption tax. Similarly, municipal taxation system based on FMV is flawed to the core and should be replaced by a flat tax + user-fee based system. But that is a very different discussion.