来源：《卫报》
原文刊登日期：2022年5月27日
London has just opened a vast and shiny new rail line. Once the 100km track is all joined up, a banker flying into Heathrow will be able to take one train directly into Canary Wharf, while a resident of Southall will be able to visit relatives in Seven Kings without ever having to change carriages, let alone lines.
伦敦刚刚开通了一条巨大而闪亮的新地铁线。一旦这条100公里的轨道全部连接起来，由希思罗机场进入伦敦的银行家将可以乘坐列车直接到达金丝雀码头，而索思豪尔的居民将可以去七王城探亲，不用换车厢，更不用换线路了。
Amid all this wizardry, some aspects of the Elizabeth line remain reassuringly true to the finest traditions of British infrastructure. Naturally enough, it is years over deadline and billions above budget. But one innovation especially worth highlighting lies not in its engineering but its economics. A big chunk of the cash for building came from businesses along the route. Through a special extra tax, sometimes called the Crossrail supplement, bigger companies stumped up over £4bn of the £19bn project. The principle for the levy is a simple one: the businesses along the line will benefit from increased customers and easier commutes for employees.
在这项杰出的成就中，伊丽莎白线的某些方面仍然忠实于英国基础设施的优良传统。很自然，完工比最后期限晚了几年，花费比预算高出数十亿英镑。但有一项创新特别值得强调，不是在工程上，而是在经济上。建设资金的很大一部分来自沿线企业。通过一项有时被称为Crossrail附加税的特别额外税，大公司为这个190亿英镑的项目支付了40多亿英镑。征收该税的原则很简单：沿线的企业将受益于客户的增加和员工通勤的便利。
It is straightforward. So why is the principle so rarely applied to our taxes? Over a century ago, Winston Churchill argued: “Roads are made, streets are made, services are improved, electric light turns night into day, water is brought from reservoirs a hundred miles off in the mountains – and all the while the landlord sits still … he renders no service to the community, he contributes nothing to the general welfare, he contributes nothing to the process from which his own enrichment is derived.” It was a rousing call for a land value tax, a levy to capture rising land prices, and over the decades it has been supported by eminent economists and taken up in various forms in cities across the globe.
这很简单明了。那么，为什么这一原则很少适用于我们的税收呢？一个多世纪前，温斯顿·丘吉尔曾说过：“道路修好了，街道修好了，服务得到了改善，电灯把黑夜变成了白天，水从一百英里外的山里的水库里运来——而在此期间，地主却一直坐着不动……他不为社会提供任何服务，他对公众福利没有任何贡献，他对获取自己财富的过程没有任何贡献。”这是对征收土地价值税的振奋人心的呼吁，这是一种针对不断上涨的土地价格而征收的税。几十年来，该税得到了知名经济学家的支持，并以各种形式在全球各地的城市得到实施。
In the UK, Whitehall reviews have chewed over the issue, but still there has been no significant progress. Although the Crossrail supplement is a partial acknowledgment of the arguments for a land value tax, it is no such thing. The result will be a huge loss of potential gains for the public purse. At the south-eastern terminus of the new Elizabeth line stands Abbey Wood station, which is now just 20 minutes from the City, as opposed to the previous journey time of three-quarters of an hour. Unsurprisingly, developers and investors have rushed into the area, doubling local property prices over the past decade.
在英国，白厅对这一问题进行了审查，但仍然没有取得重大进展。尽管Crossrail补充税部分承认了征收土地价值税的论点，但实际上并没有这样一种税。其结果将是公共财政潜在收益的巨大损失。新伊丽莎白线的东南方终点站是艾比伍德站，现在距离伦敦金融城只有20分钟的路程，而以前需要45分钟。不出所料，开发商和投资者纷纷涌入该地区，使当地房价在过去10年翻了一番。
And yet those huge unearned gains will go almost untaxed, depriving ministers of being able to claim they have funds to build more rail lines. Another example is HS2, now projected to cost the public more than £100bn and to push up land values all along the route – yet with no levy to claw back any of those gains.
然而，这些巨大的不劳而获几乎不会被征税，使部长们无法声称他们有资金修建更多的铁路线。另一个例子是高铁2号，目前预计将花费公众超过1000亿英镑，并推高沿线的地价——但没有任何税收来收回这些收益。
Our current tax system rewards a landlord more than a doctor. We need to shift towards taxing wealth more and better; to that end, existing taxes on property often fail. Council tax is based on bricks and mortar rather than land, and is based on property values in 1991. A tax on land values would be a levy on something that cannot run away. And it would help build a much better public realm.
我们现行的税收制度对房东的奖励大于对医生的奖励。我们需要更多更好地向财富征税；为此，现有的房产税往往会失败。市政税是基于实体建筑而不是土地，并且是基于1991年的房产价值。土地价值税将是对无法逃避的东西征收的税。这将有助于建立一个更好的公共领域。