I enjoy your last point. It's wild to me how many southern states, who famously despise California, are rapidly enacting all the same policies that ruined CA thirty years ago. What a mess. At least CA is starting to learn from those mistakes, although they have a long way to go.
I dunno, man, the problems with California's system are pretty obvious to anyone who pays attention, but it remains extremely popular. The electorate is older and more propertied than the population as a whole, and homeowners by and large LOVE Prop 13. We tried to at least strip it back for commercial / industrial properties, and the Jarvisites managed to beat that effort by saying it'd be bad for small business. (Never mind that there was already a pretty generous small business carve-out, and even if there hadn't been, 90+% of the incremental tax would've been paid by _enormous_ entities like Apple, Chevron, and Disney.)
People can get suckered by this stuff for _decades_.
I think if we re-ran something like Prop 15 now, with perhaps even a slightly larger carve-out, it might well pass.
Side note, we really need to ban "triple net" leases, where the landlord passes on the utilities, insurance, and taxes. It's totally reasonable to pass on utilities and insurance -- the occupant of the building can play a direct role in the cost of those bills. Like on insurance, what type of business you are, and what safety practices you demonstrate, is going to matter. But the tax is what it is. Writing the lease with a lower headline rent, but then passing on the tax to the tenant, is just a way for landlords to suborn the interests of tenants, to get them to act as sock puppets. We don't necessarily need to void existing leases that do that, but we should bar them going forwards.
Thanks for sharing this update about our progress in New Zealand! We think supporting our organization is probably the most cost-effective way to promote LVT worldwide at the moment, as we can meaningfully move the needle on this issue in Wellington for just a few thousand dollars, and the city is right on the edge of backing this policy. Your support would mean more conversations with city council candidates, more time spent promoting this policy in the media and on social media, and more support for pro-LVT candidates who are in close races. All of this could be the difference between Wellington becoming the flagship example of LVT, or it not happening at all.
Good post! I need some of these ideas to strengthen my discussion of LVT. Especially about the agricultural context and how LVT helps to improve the housing supply. The review of initiatives, divided between international and U.S. is helpful.
As a Californian, I always find it grimly funny when I see Republicans in places like Ohio or Texas critique California in one breath, and then in the next, propose adopting the single worst California policy.
I enjoy your last point. It's wild to me how many southern states, who famously despise California, are rapidly enacting all the same policies that ruined CA thirty years ago. What a mess. At least CA is starting to learn from those mistakes, although they have a long way to go.
People fail to understand the root causes, but once they know, they will see
I dunno, man, the problems with California's system are pretty obvious to anyone who pays attention, but it remains extremely popular. The electorate is older and more propertied than the population as a whole, and homeowners by and large LOVE Prop 13. We tried to at least strip it back for commercial / industrial properties, and the Jarvisites managed to beat that effort by saying it'd be bad for small business. (Never mind that there was already a pretty generous small business carve-out, and even if there hadn't been, 90+% of the incremental tax would've been paid by _enormous_ entities like Apple, Chevron, and Disney.)
People can get suckered by this stuff for _decades_.
I think if we re-ran something like Prop 15 now, with perhaps even a slightly larger carve-out, it might well pass.
Side note, we really need to ban "triple net" leases, where the landlord passes on the utilities, insurance, and taxes. It's totally reasonable to pass on utilities and insurance -- the occupant of the building can play a direct role in the cost of those bills. Like on insurance, what type of business you are, and what safety practices you demonstrate, is going to matter. But the tax is what it is. Writing the lease with a lower headline rent, but then passing on the tax to the tenant, is just a way for landlords to suborn the interests of tenants, to get them to act as sock puppets. We don't necessarily need to void existing leases that do that, but we should bar them going forwards.
Thanks for sharing this update about our progress in New Zealand! We think supporting our organization is probably the most cost-effective way to promote LVT worldwide at the moment, as we can meaningfully move the needle on this issue in Wellington for just a few thousand dollars, and the city is right on the edge of backing this policy. Your support would mean more conversations with city council candidates, more time spent promoting this policy in the media and on social media, and more support for pro-LVT candidates who are in close races. All of this could be the difference between Wellington becoming the flagship example of LVT, or it not happening at all.
Get in touch to support our work and make LVT a reality: jesse@common-ground.org.nz
Nice article. Thanks.
Good post! I need some of these ideas to strengthen my discussion of LVT. Especially about the agricultural context and how LVT helps to improve the housing supply. The review of initiatives, divided between international and U.S. is helpful.
As a Californian, I always find it grimly funny when I see Republicans in places like Ohio or Texas critique California in one breath, and then in the next, propose adopting the single worst California policy.
https://www.texastribune.org/2023/05/15/texas-house-property-taxes-appraisal-cap/