Professor Niamh Moloney:

I thank the Deputy for the question. When we considered the site value tax, our thinking about this measure was, and here we are really looking to the LPT, that the most effective taxes are those that have the widest possible scope in principle. In principle, therefore, everything is being brought into the scope of the tax. We were acutely conscious as a commission of the particular issues raised in the context of agricultural land. One of the great advantages of a site value tax is that it creates incentives to develop and to build on property. Of course, there is a distinct difference in this regard when it comes to agricultural land.

The thinking of the commission, therefore, was that everything would come within the scope of consideration in this context, but then at the design and construction phase the differential position of agricultural land would be taken into account in respect of how the system is designed. Aside from any particular structural design features specific to agricultural land, given in particular its function and there being limitations on what can be built on it, and so on, as the Deputy said, I refer as well to phase-ins, deferrals and transition periods. It was a principle-based analysis that was undertaken and it was important in that context that all land would be brought into the scope of the measure, other than that subject to the LPT. There is, however, a very specific context for agricultural land and that must be part of the planning and design in this regard. Perhaps Dr. Roantree might like to comment on this point.