They won’t. This means that there will be properties eventually owned by a local taxing authority.

What people don’t get is that you need some houses to sit empty. This allows people to find a place when they move. This allows people to move around within a territory.

Also not all secondary houses are bad. I want to buy a plot of land for a small farm and a place to go in case of hurricanes. Presently there is no house. Should I be taxed for improving land for personal ways that didn’t remove housing?

Many of the comments so far are emotional. We need to do better when making policies.

> Should I be taxed for improving land for personal ways that didn’t remove housing

I’ve never done this so don’t know the answer, but when you build a house don’t you then also start to get government services in support of that house?