What the evidence tells us
The route-map draws on the Scottish Land Commission’s 2021 advice, research and insights.
The research on tax and the reuse of Scotland’s long term derelict land concludes that the reuse of derelict land is a public policy priority which does not benefit directly from tax incentives.17 It suggests that a national tax approach is unlikely to address issues around viability given the wide range of end-uses and challenges linked to collecting and distributing taxes. Instead, a more targeted and place-based approach to land and property tax incentives could be more effective. For example, tax incentives could be restricted to defined areas such as areas with clusters of derelict urban sites within areas of deprivation with potential for reuse for employment to support economic development or housing to help meet the housing emergency. That would bring vacant and derelict land ‘into’ the wider tax policy priorities. The findings highlight that Scotland has a regressive and complex land and property tax system and that a single tax treatment ‘solution’ is not easily envisaged.
Research into understanding the impacts of re-introducing rates for shooting and deer forests considers the fiscal and economic effects following removal of the exemption for shooting and deer forests from the valuation roll.18 This was introduced under the Land Reform (Scotland) Act 2016. The aim is to understand the impacts of recent changes to the valuation and bringing certain commercial activities and land into the tax system. The research was undertaken before changes to the Small Business Bonus Scheme reliefs were introduced in 2026 which affected the eligibility criteria for shooting and deer forests.
The findings suggest that only 63 out of 11,280 properties had a rateable value above £12k and just 13 exceed £20k. Before factoring in reliefs, the total rateable value of shooting properties was approximately £13.5 million in 2024-25. After reliefs had been applied, the net revenue of sporting rates in 2025 was around £2.2 million. This represents less than 0.1% of overall non-domestic rates income. Given the relatively small fiscal scale, material sector-wide economic effects are unlikely to have been significant. It points to the need to consider trade-offs between administrative effort and revenue yield. Furthermore, there is no baseline pre-2017, no time series or business-level data to inform decisions stressing the need for better data to monitor policy impact and demonstrate fiscal responsibility.
Research into international approaches to land information systems/ cadastres finds that modern cadastral systems are evolving into multi functional Land Information Systems (LIS) that integrate legal, spatial, and additional datasets such as land value and land use. These systems are fully digital and increasingly interoperable across government, supporting a wide range of functions including taxation, planning, environmental policy, and infrastructure development. The foundation to a successful system is completeness of information and data. Interoperability (how systems interact) can aid the process by providing real-time data exchange between systems and help with tax integration. Similar interoperability could be added to existing databases of non-domestic rates, and potentially licencing and land use planning. Spillover benefits can arise from a multifunctional and transparent cadastral system.
Research on international approaches to land valuation finds that regular, transparent, and data-driven valuations help governments raise revenue fairly and make better use of land. By looking at international comparators, it identifies a need for a transparent and independent approach to valuation, the importance of data and technology in supporting mass appraisal and digital integration to keep valuations current and cost effective, the importance of regular revaluation and the inclusion of environmental factors in valuation processes. This can support fiscal and land use policy in turn.
Research into the international experience of land value taxation finds that there are strong theoretical benefits for land value taxation.19 However, in practice it is complex and there are a number of issues that must be addressed including having up-to-date land ownership, valuation and use information. Factors such as the relationship between the tax and land use planning system as well as public acceptability are significant. International experience shows that any moves toward successful implementation have been accompanied by efforts to raise awareness and a well-informed public debate.20 Rather than introducing sweeping reforms for a single land value tax, it discusses the options for steadily increasing the role of land values in the tax base.
