Another reason for LVT can be found in the Guardian today:
Property tax leaves cities ‘looking like broken teeth’
Â· Government adviser attacks Darling policy
Â· Empty buildings torn down to avoid payment
I won’t bore you endlessly with the details, suffice to say that LVT is charged on the land itself, irrespective of what is currently built on it. So, you couldn’t avoid it by demolishing buildings, yet it would still function as a means of encouraging land owners to fully develop their properties. If Swindon BC are willing to find half a million pounds just to bulldoze over a perfectly functional industrial estate, you can bet that with LVT they would find a tenant to cover their bills in no time.