Thanks for these thoughtful comments.

I suggest that if offered in furtherance of policy objectives, and at the price government would offer, equity for tax could be a option which the company could choose to take up or not. If it were voluntary, who could object?

Both sides would need to proceed slowly to learn when (and at what price) to opt in.

In essence it is a public interest cheeseparing of the shareholder interest in the balance sheet in the same way as directors share opions.

There could be cash flow and investment financing advantages and it could contribute to a defence against a hostile takeover.

A straight investment method might be difficult to harmonise with EU rules.

Fair enough, but for about a decade i’ve been asking proponents of LVT the same basic questions and I’ve never really got a straight answer from any of them.

Peter.

There are lots of people who have property but low wages and it effectively means that poor people in areas of rising values are forced out. That happens over time as rural villages fall in to commuter zones because young people can’t buy where they were born but an annual tax would accelerate it.

The other killer from a UK point of view is that a small house with a big garden would probably pay more than a big house with a small one. From a Green perspective focusing on land use that is a good thing but in a nation full of garden loving middle income budding alan Titchmarshs it would be close to political suicide.

I do think equity for tax might be worth looking at but it’s not that different from the treasury buying corporate bonds or shares to boost industry and I suspect it would probably be best to do that on a case by case basis as part of a defined industrial policy as opposed to incorporating it into an already complex tax system….

Peter.

I’d rather aviod presidents and the fact that we have one in practice doesn’t mean we need to accept it. It’s toomuch loke the Aztecs who killed the warrior/religious leader of he failed to bring rain or win a battle. I think we need more than one brain and keep alpha males under control.

Thanks for Henry George. That’s the man. Whether they know it or not, the Scottish Green Party’s Land proposed land tax would seem to be on similar lines.

My tax idea is to make company tax voluntary. Insteas of paying in money, you could pay in shares. Not for every company of course, just if the Government wants to do it and at the price they want to do it.

Shares could be sold or held. There could be a national investment fund, or not. The government could be an active shareholder or not. In any year the fund could be increased or reduced.

Companies could distribute more in dividends, invest or pay down debt. Government would have the same choice, reducing personal tax instead of paying dividends. They would have to decide whether (at the rate offered for shares) they would prefer to pay the tax or not.

Think about the potential from the perspective of each party in turn.

The Greens can use it to take a controlling share in polluting companies or make investment funds cheaply available to developing companies whom they wished to support.

Socialists could part nationalise “the commanding heights” or take a stake in companies with a bad labour record.

Nationalists could take a stake in iconic companies to prevent them moving abroad.

LibDems could promote rural industry, and even have regional investment funds.

Conservatives and Labour would just use it to pay back their financial backers.