Accordingly, HoREA proposed to determine the principles of land valuation according to market principles instead of prescribing the principles of land valuation methods according to market principles and adding the basis of location (location) of the land plot or land area for valuation.
It is recommended to develop and perfect the principles to ensure independence between real estate project investors, valuation enterprises, review experts, the Department of Finance, the Department of Natural Resources and Environment, the Land Valuation Council, and the agency or person with the authority to decide on land prices in order to have measures to ensure independence to prevent collusion and price fixing that can cause loss of State budget revenue.
According to HoREA, there are currently 4 entities participating in land valuation and land appraisal activities to decide on land prices for real estate projects at the provincial level, namely the Department of Natural Resources and Environment, the Land Valuation Council, and the Provincial People's Committee that decides on specific land prices. In addition, there are enterprises participating in auctions and review experts invited to participate in the Land Valuation Council and perform the task of "independent review" of land valuation and land appraisal activities before submitting them to the Provincial People's Committee for decision on land prices.
According to HoREA, the current land law stipulates 5 land valuation methods including: comparison method, deduction method, income method, surplus method, land price adjustment coefficient method. Currently, the surplus method is widely applied to determine specific land prices to calculate land use fees, land rents for real estate projects, commercial housing, urban areas, but the land valuation results are not really reliable. Because, according to experts, for the same real estate project, if only 1 valuation enterprise is implemented but 2 different land valuation methods are applied, it will give 2 different results with a value difference of about 17%. If the same real estate project is implemented by 2 different valuation enterprises but both apply the same land valuation method, it will also give 2 different results with a value difference of about 17%.
Land auctions still have many shortcomings
The above land valuation methods all have limitations and shortcomings, especially the implementation of the comparison method, the surplus method, and the land price adjustment coefficient method must be based on the input database of land prices. However, this database is incomplete, inaccurate, and not updated in real time.
It is worth noting that the current land law does not stipulate a method for mass land valuation, although in practice this method has been applied to build land price lists. This is an advanced land valuation method that has been applied in many countries.
According to HoREA, it is advisable to assign a state agency, the most suitable being the Department of Finance, to preside over and advise on all land valuation and land price appraisal activities, as stipulated in the 2003 Land Law, and not to "cut" the land valuation and land price appraisal work as stipulated in the current 2013 Land Law, which is assigned to two places, the Department of Finance and the Department of Natural Resources and Environment.
Source link
Comment (0)