Michael Meadowcroft asks why articles on the chancellor’s tax-raising options omit the obvious possibility of taxing land (Letters, 21 October). Perhaps the answer is that our most recent venture into land tax was not a great success. Passing the budget that contained the measure – the Finance (1909-1910) Act 1910 – gave rise to a constitutional crisis, two elections and, it is frequently said, hastened the death of the king. The measures for tax on the incremental value of land were repealed in 1920 and, in what is surely an unusual step for any government, tax legitimately paid under the measure was repaid. The lesson might be that the still-incomplete reform of the House of Lords needs to be fully carried out before the current chancellor chances her arm.
Sue Rumfitt
Sheffield
