The progressive tax on idle land has several potential benefits for Indonesia:
- Discouraging Speculative Holdings: By making it costly to hold idle land, the tax discourages speculative investments and encourages landowners to sell or develop the property.
- Increasing Land Accessibility: As land becomes more accessible, property prices may stabilize, making it easier for middle- and low-income families to afford housing and for businesses to acquire land for productive use.
- Supporting Government Revenues: Progressive taxes on idle land create a valuable source of income for local governments. These funds can be reinvested into community infrastructure, urban development projects, and public services.
- Environmental and Social Benefits: Idle land, when repurposed for green spaces or public use, can enhance the environment and improve quality of life for city residents. The tax structure provides an incentive for landowners to convert vacant land into green areas or public parks.
 Challenges to Implementation
Despite its potential, implementing a progressive tax on idle land has its challenges:
1. Data and Compliance: Tracking land ownership and ensuring accurate reporting of idle land status requires a robust land management system. Administrative inefficiencies may hinder accurate assessment and enforcement of progressive taxes.
2. Market Impact: Some argue that the progressive tax could deter investors from entering the real estate market, potentially affecting the broader economy. Additionally, landowners with legitimate reasons for leaving land idle may face undue tax burdens.
3. Fair Application: Applying the tax progressively and fairly across different regions and types of land can be complex, especially given the wide range of property values and land uses in Indonesia.
4. Resistance from Speculators: Speculators and large landholders may resist the tax, using legal avenues to minimize tax liabilities or lobbying against higher rates.
 Lessons from Other Countries
Indonesia's progressive tax system has drawn inspiration from other countries with similar policies. In South Korea, for example, a progressive tax on land held for speculative purposes has helped curb land hoarding and make property more accessible. China also limits idle land to specific periods, after which rights can be forfeited if development does not begin. These cases demonstrate that progressive taxation can be a powerful tool when coupled with robust enforcement and clear regulations.
 Conclusion
