Chamber wants tax on land value increases to speed up housing construction | Politics

The value of land can increase significantly if, for example, a new owner plans to build homes there. This increase in value currently accrues entirely to the selling party, but a majority of the House wants to levy a one-off tax.

The value of land is determined by what you can do with that land. For example, agricultural land is worth much less than land on which houses are built. If such a piece of agricultural land is zoned for housing, the value of that land will increase considerably, even before it is sold. The selling party therefore benefits from this.

Outgoing Minister Hugo de Jonge (Public Housing) opened the debate on this issue last year. He wants not only the owner to receive this financial benefit, but also for the government to benefit from this increase in value. This can be done, for example, by introducing a planning benefit tax, he wrote in a letter to Parliament. For example, the money that ends up in the treasury can be used to build roads and other facilities.

According to proponents, a planning benefit tax can also combat land speculation because it ensures lower land prices. Land speculation is one of the obstacles to stalled housing construction.

It is quite special that the House is discussing the issue and that there is a majority in favor. De Jonge already emphasized this in an earlier debate. He concluded that for the first time since 1977 there is a parliamentary majority in favor of introducing the planning benefit tax. That year the government fell over land policy. “Since then, the policy adage has been ‘shut your mouth about soil’.” From that moment on, “nothing really happened on land policy,” he said.

It is not yet clear what the plan benefits tax should look like. The outgoing cabinet is currently conducting a policy study into the various forms. But since the tax affects the principle that the increase in the value of land in principle belongs to the owner, De Jonge previously emphasized that the House must consider this “fundamental issue”. He wanted to leave a decision to a new cabinet anyway.

Whether such a planned benefit tax will actually be introduced will also be in the hands of a new cabinet. Remarkably, the forming parties voted differently on Tuesday: PVV and NSC in favor, and VVD and BBB against.

In any case, a new law is needed for its introduction. So it is not simply arranged.