Idaho County free press. [volume] (Grangeville, Idaho Territory) 1886-current, 1891-01-09
SINu.- AAA DEPARTMENT.
TAXING LAND VALUES.

values is that tho land owner would add
| the increased tax on the value of his
! land to the rent that must be paid by
his tenants. II is this notion that in
creased taxation of land values would
fall upon the users, not upon the owners
of the land that more perhaps than any
| thing else prevents men from seeing the
far-reaching and benefcent effects OF
doing away with the taxes that now
fall upon labor or tho products Of labor
and taking for public use those values
which attach to land by reason of the
| growth and progress OF society.
The taxes levied upon land values, or,
10 use the politico-economic term, taxes
levied upon rent, do not fall upon the
user of land, and can not be transferred
by the landlord to the tenant, is con-
coded by all economists of reputation.
However much they may dispute as to
other things, there is no dispute upon
this point. Whatever tlimsy reasons
any of them may have deemed it eX-
pedient to give why the tax on rent
should not be more resorted to, they all
admit that the taxation of rent merely
diminishes the profits OF the land owner,
can not be shifted on the user of land,
can not add to prices, or check produc-
ton. Not to multiply authorities, it
will be sufficient to quote John Stuart
Mill. He says (section 2, chapter 8, book
3, principles OF Political Economy'O:
A tax on rent falls wholly on the land
lord. There arc no means by which he
can shift tho burden upon any one else
1t docs not affect the value or price of
agricultural produce, for this is deter
mined by the cost of production in the
most unfavorable circumstances and in
those circumstances as we have SO often
demonstrated, no rent is paid. A tax
on rent, therefore, has no effect other
than its obvious one. 1t merely takes
so much from the landlord and transfers
it to the State.
The reason of this will be clear to
every one who has grasped the accepted
theory of rent-that theory to which
the name of Ricardo has been given,
and which, as John Stuart Mill says,
has but to DO understood to be proved.
And il will DO clear to every one who
will consider moment, even if he has
never before thought of the cause and
nature of rent. Tho rent of land repre-
sents a return TO ownership over and
above the return which is sufficient to
induce usc-it is premium paid for
permission to use. To take, in
taxation, part or the whole of this
premium, in no way affects the in
centivc to use or the return to use; in no
way, diminishes the amount of land
/ there is to use, or makes it moro diff
cult to obtain it for use. Thus there is
no way in which tax upon rent or land
/ values can be transferred to the user.
Whatever the State may demand of this
premium simply diminishes the not
amount which ownership can get for its
use, or the price which it can demand as
purchase money, which is, of course,
rent, or the expectation of rent capital
| lied.
Here, for instance, is a piece of land
that has a value-let it be where it may.
Its rent, or value, is the highest price
that any one will give for tit is
premium which the man who wants to
use the land must pay to the man who
owns the land for permission to
use it. Now, if tax be levied
on that rent or value, this in no
wise adds to the willingness of any one
to pay moro for the land than
before; nor does it in any way add to the
ability of the owner to demand more.
TO suppose, in fact, that such tax
could be thrown by land owners upon
tenants, is to suppose that the owners of
land do not now get for their land all it
will bring, is to suppose that, simply
whenever they want to, they can put up
prices as they please.
This is, of course, absurd. There
would be no limit whatever to prices,
did tho fixing of them rest entirely with
the seller To the price which will be
given and received for anything two
wants or wills must concur-the want
or will of the buyer, and the want or
will of the seller. The one wants to
give as little as he can, the other to get
rs much as he can. and the point at
which the exchange will take place is
the point whore these two desires come
to balance or effect compromise In
other words, price is determined by the
equation of supply and demand, And.
evidently, taxation can not affect price
unless it affects the relative power of one
or the otherof the elements of this equa-
ton. The mere wish of the seller to got
more the mere desire of the buyer to
pay less, can neither raise nor lower
prices. Nothing will lower prices I'M
less it either increases supply or de-
creases demand. Now the taxation OF
land values, which is simply the taking
by the state of part Of the premium
which the land owner can get for the
permission to use land, neither increases
the demand for land nor decreases the
supply of land, and therefore can not in
crease the price which the land owner
can get from the user. Thus it is i'm
possible for land owners to throw such
taxation on land users by raising rents.
Other things being unaltered, rents
would be no higher than before, while
the selling price of land, which is de-
tormined by net rent, would be much
diminished. Whoever purchased land
outright would have to pay less to the
seller, because he would therefore be
called on to pay more TO the State.
But, while the taxation of land values
can not raise rents it would
especially in country like
this, where there is so much
valuable land unused, tend strongly to
lower them. In all our cities and
through all the country, there is much
land which is not used. or not put to its
best use, because IL is held at high
prices by men who do not want to OF
who can not use it themselves, but who
| are holding IL in px npcta alton of nrOf tin n