From: ahk@chinet.com   
      
   Stephen Sprunk  wrote:   
      
   >The house is more interesting.  Take the lot's last selling price,   
   >subtract the land value, and what remains must be the improvements'   
   >value.   
      
   There's a factor for changes to the property to consider to accomodate   
   the house.   
      
   I suppose if one doesn't wish to use the existing building, or the current   
   building is a wreck due to fire, but it's still desireable to build on   
   the site, once money is spent to clear the site, the value of the vacant   
   site could be higher than the value of the site that requires clearance.   
      
   Those are just technicalities; your basic point is correct.   
      
   >(Note that the current vogue is to tax the combined value of land and   
   >improvements, with no distinction.  It would be better to tax just the   
   >land value at a higher rate, but AFAIK nobody actually does that.)   
      
   Well, various towns in Pennsylvania until recently; Pittsburgh   
   was the largest.   
      
   --- SoupGate/W32 v1.03   
    * Origin: LiveWire BBS -=*=- UseNet FTN Gateway (1:2320/1)