Published in the Cape Town newspaper
The Cape Argus on 4 August 2000 was the below quoted article written by
Godfrey R. A. Dunkley, the Immediate Past President of 'The International Union
for Land Value Taxation and Free Trade':
"Land value only fair rating
base"
An overview of the principles of municipal
rating would be appropriate at present in view of the misconceptions and
resultant emotions being stirred up by rapidly circulating miss-information
both in the press and on Email.
The annual rating of all property
within the municipal area provides the main source of revenue for the good
governance or management of civic affairs for the benefit of all who live or
work within that local authority area.
Miss-management of civic affairs or
insufficient revenue to allow management to provide for and maintain necessary
services, free movement of people and traffic, sanitary and healthy living and
working conditions has a negative impact on all the citizens.
Even people fortunate enough to live
in affluent and clean suburbs are not immune to conditions that breed in poor
and deprived areas. It is in everyone's interest that the municipality be
empowered with sufficient revenue to provide a healthy environment for the
development of body, mind and spirit and the restoration of the dignity of all
citizens.
To the above end it is necessary
that a healthy municipal budget be provided for. A major part of municipal
expenditure and income relates to the provision and payment for services. The
supply of electricity and water should be self-supporting; paying running costs
and repayment of capital costs, leaving a small excess to go into general
funds.
The major part of general funds
should, however, come from all businesses and individuals enjoying the
advantages arising from all the various factors provided by the totality of
that community. Payment should be in direct proportion to the benefits enjoyed
There is an accurate
"barometer" that continuously values the benefits of each individual
site or location on an equitable and unbiased basis. It takes into account the
proximity or distance from employment and schools, including their perceived
quality, from shopping centres, libraries, sports facilities, to name but a
few, and the type, ease and cost of transport. This barometer values the
services and infrastructure provided by municipal expenditure in the past and
present, together with a speculative estimate of future advantages to be
provided by the presence of the community as a whole, both positive and
negative.
This barometer of benefits enjoyed
by residents or business is the free market value of the land or site of every
property, excluding improvements thereon. This is naturally based on the market
price assuming willing buyer and willing seller. This takes into account the difference
in value between identical houses in say Clifton and Mitchell's Plain, or on a
larger site in Constantia. When the value of the improvements is taken away
from the total market value, the remaining site value is a fair measure of the
advantages to be enjoyed by occupation of that site.
Since the market has already taken
into account all known factors it is no longer necessary for municipalities to
differentiate between different suburbs, townships or business and industrial
areas. A constant rate in the rand should be applied across the board, with few
exceptions.
A legitimate exception would be to
rate private owner / occupier dwellings at say 35% less than industry and
business as the latter are able to offset their rates against company taxes.
A further point for consideration is
to assist the poorer people by giving a base-line rebate of a fixed amount to
everyone irrespective of size and value of property. The rateable value would
be the valuation roll value (or market value of land only) reduced by say
R7500.00 irrespective of size and value. However any excess should not be
refundable.
There is an important point to
consider when deciding on an equal percentage rating on all domestic sites or
business sites. There seems to be a misconception that high value suburbs
should be treated more favourably than others as their land is so expensive.
The fact that buyers are prepared to pay high prices for a property and then
pay the building societies approximately 15% to 20% per annum on the value of
the land or site for the next twenty years, indicates that the market values
the benefits provided by the community. Why then, should they not pay to the
municipality, representing the community, that which rightfully belongs to the
community?
The community has no legitimate
claim on any improvements on any site be it residential or business. It is in
the interest of the community that every property owner should be encouraged to
improve or rebuild on the site, thereby injecting capital into the community
and creating new employment. It has often been shown that rates based on land
values only, exclusive of the value of improvements thereon, is indeed both
good and fair. Site Value Rating, (SVR) has been proven to be the most just
system and the one that gives greatest incentive towards economical
development, employment and social stability.
Far from being pioneers into
uncharted territory, these municipalities are in fact following the lead of
most of South Africa. The former Cape Town, prior to being divided up, and Port
Elizabeth were the only two major cities in South Africa still being
handicapped by total value rating, commonly known as Flat Rating.
Studies have shown that Cape Town
and Port Elizabeth were growing at only half the rate of the average growth of
those towns on SVR. Seventy percent of all property rates collected by local
government in South Africa came from those on SVR and only ten percent from
those on Flat Rating. The remainder came from those on Composite Rating, where
the rate was higher on land and lower on improvements. These studies were based
on official figures given in the "Municipal Yearbook", over a period
of twenty-five years, from 1951 to 1984.
Similar studies in USA, by Dr.
Steven Cord, showed that where rates were shifted away from improvements, even
to a small degree, those towns showed a rapid growth compared to nearby towns
in the same economic region.
Prof. Mason Gaffney reported on the
adverse effect which Proposition 13 had in California. This limited the percentage
that could be collected from land values and resulted in severe budget
restraints. It caused the collapse of their education system, law enforcement
and the security of society. Unemployment increased and so did crime. Building
of prisons became the main growth industry.
More than half of the towns and
cities in Australia are on Site Value Rating. Ref. "Land Value Taxation
Around the World", Second Edition, Edited by Dr. R.V. Andelson, 1997,
Robert Schalkenbach Foundation.
Morally, collecting the rent of land
or SVR is the only legitimate form of raising local government revenue. Value
is given to land by the gifts of nature together with the presence of, and
infrastructure and services provided by, the community. This value is not
dependent on what the individual does with the land. This value should be the
subject of rating. The improvements which arise from the effort and capital
applied by the owner should not be rated.
The main opposition to a change from
improvement rating to SVR normally comes from slumlords and land speculators
who are able to hold land out of use whilst contributing little to the
community which gives land its value. With the introduction of SVR they will be
forced to put their land to better use, with resulting benefits to society.
Those who are uninformed about the benefits to themselves and society as a
whole, fall easy prey to the glib words of the slumlords and a small number of
others who benefit from the present system, often at the expense of those who
occupy less valuable properties.
In many cases, those in the least
affluent suburbs are paying three times as much in rates as those in affluent
suburbs, taken as a percentage of market value. Where is the justice in that?
In summary, Land Value Taxation is
by far the better system.
Godfrey R.A. Dunkley