play_circle_filled In progress

Housing Housing

Reinvest locally the increase in land value created from house building

Last updated: 08:28pm 19 July 2018

And we will work with private and public sector house builders to capture the increase in land value created when they build to reinvest in local infrastructure, essential services and further housing, making it both easier and more certain that public sector landowners, and communities themselves, benefit from the increase in land value from urban regeneration and development.

Conservative Party Manifesto 2017, p.71

Our verdict

Benefitting from the increase in land value for public interest is the phenomenon of land value capture (LVC). Especially in major cities, land value has been growing consistently since the 2008 crisis. Where this value is created from a change in the use of land, public investment or community growth, the government wishes to capture it in order to invest in housing, transport and other public services.

In 2011, the government implemented the Community Infrastructure Levy, still active today. In February 2017, Transport for London (TFL) published a report on the potential use of LVC for its improvement and expansion. Alongside fares and taxes, land value capture will be another funding source for London’s transport services.

In addition, the Communities and Local Government (CLG) committee has initiated the land value capture inquiry to examine the impact of past practices and the potential of future ones in this field. An oral evidence session took place on 11th June 2018 to discuss the evidence submitted.

This policy is ‘in progress’ as we are seeing movement in the domain of land value capture. It will be considered ‘done’ once the government not only discusses the idea, but actively pushes for its expansion through legislation or further cooperation with house builders and other organisations.

Want the detail?

There's always room for debate

We’re serious about providing clear, up-to-date, non-partisan information. We focus on being consistent and fair in how we reach our verdicts, and always explain our reasoning. But there is always room for debate. So if you see it differently, we’d love you to tell us why. Or even better, submit an edit.