Regarding your second assertion, the construction of local amenities is in fact often paid for by the property tax. And in any case, what has actually driven the strong increase in the prices of houses nationwide is their relative scarcity now that the population has swelled so dramatically.
To me, a tax of under 0.1% is pretty close to 0. If only ETF's enjoyed the same treatment, it might be easier to save up for a deposit!
We agree that scarcity is what makes houses more expensive.
Edit: I can't reply to below but ETF's suffer from deemed disposal, where even unrealized gains are taxed at 41% after holding them for 8 years. https://irishfinancial.ie/how-you-calculate-deemed-disposal/
Isn't the annual property/wealth tax on an ETF €0?
ETF's suffer from deemed disposal, where even unrealized gains are taxed at 41% after holding them for 8 years. https://irishfinancial.ie/how-you-calculate-deemed-disposal/
Weirdly, individual stocks are not affected by this, which encourages riskier behaviour on the part of investors. I really don't understand it.
- Who decides who gets the valuable land (high rent value) and who gets the land no one wants to use?
- What happens when the population changes due to birth/death/immigration? Do you rebalance every 10 years? Can children inherit their parents' land?
- If we rebalance regularly, how do we protect people who built a business on land they had been renting but which is no longer available?
The other thing that usually goes with this proposal is that there would be no land costs other than tax. Land allocation would be like this: Everyone would bid how much they want to pay for the land; the winning bidder pays that much into the tax pool, and gets to use the land. The details of this idea wildly vary depending on who you ask - it's an extremely difficult problem to figure out what exact rules would work well to stop, e.g. Elon Musk outbidding some elderly lady's family farm just because he hates her (yet still balancing that with the need to stop her heirs from blocking development in that area forever). Maybe it necessitates human judgement in such cases. That's getting into the weeds though. You can see how that general kind of system would work, from a bird's eye view.
Skilled labor is not currently taxed as a specific thing, and we can make more of it by educating people, so why on earth bring that up unless it's a setup for some odd rhetorical point?