Joe, yea, nice to see the CD Howe institute talking about Henry George.
Site value taxation, land value taxation and land value capture are the same thing, just different names for collecting the rental value of land for public purposes. Value Capture is a silo tax for specific infrastructure projects, but it's the same mechanism.Tax Increment Financing is a bad idea, punishing developed areas in favour of redeveloping other areas. It's a subsidy for developers which wouldn't be needed if LVT were in place across a municipality.
Enid Slack gets it half correct and half backwards. Below are her 3 criticisms which are all diametrically wrong, amazingly. How can a smart person be so dumb. She's what George would call a muddlehead. LVT intensifies development everywhere equally, it doesn't bias against downtown!! LVT preserves farmland, nature and open spaces everywhere by reducing sprawl everywhere, not the opposite!!! Assessing land value is not at all difficult!! Good grief. Frank
"On the other hand, a site-value tax greatly increases the difficulty of preserving
open space and farmland on the urban fringe because, other things being equal, it
speeds up development there. To preserve farmland and open space under a regime
of site-value taxes, a municipality must enforce other planning regulations.28
Another issue arises from a move from a property tax system to a site-value
system. The move shifts taxes from properties in suburban areas, where land values
are lower, to properties in the downtown area, where land values are higher. This
shift can discourage investment in downtown cores.
One final problem with site-value taxation has to do with its implementation.
Accurate land valuation challenges assessors because urban real estate sales combine
the value of land and improvements. Separating the two can be difficult. "