So how about this.
What do private landlords add to their property that the State wouldn’t/couldn’t?
The service provided is to treat a home as your own even though it isn’t, and rental agreements have conditions no different to those that could be agreed to with the State. The only difference between this and living in your own home is you don’t need a contract with yourself - the treatment of your living conditions in line with your own preferences remains the same, so long as it’s not devalued at any such time that you wish to move, regardless of who “owns” it.
Nothing is being added through having a housing market, so appreciating housing values denote no service other than sitting on a title deed. You might say there’s an exception of the incentive to develop your own property to add value to it, but the need for planning permission would be the same as if you didn’t own the property. If anything there’s an incentive to not build more houses because that drives up demand for your house, and with it the price that you can ask for it. There’s also nothing to say you can’t build new properties and sell them to the state - the better the property, the more you can ask, and you’re actually providing a service through your construction (unlike with buying/selling a house that’s already built).
Now consider what taxation is for - it’s a rent paid to the state in exchange for benefitting from its infrastructure and necessary public services that are better run publically + being able to build any private enterprise within this environment to much better effect than you could outside of any society + being included in its markets to potentially make you far more rich than you could outside of any society.
Put two and two together.
I suggest once current owners become deceased, ownership of all their residences passes to the State, and any further habitation by anyone is under rent obligation to them. Passing property on to private parties in your will is no longer permitted. This way a slow transition can occur without the need to forcibly remove anything from anyone’s possession, and it removes nepotism that violates equality of opportunity and instead encourages newer generations to become successful by their own efforts and not coasting on the success of others + growing up with a sense of unearned entitlement that benefits nobody.
The outcome? Counter-incentivising taxation from sources like your income becomes replaced by a rent paid to society for being allowed to participate.
It can even be extended to property used for business purposes - again there is no need for the company itself to own the property they use + a lot of the time they choose to rent it anyway because of the flexibility and adaptability this allows. Again, they can be free to develop the property in line with normal existing state rules, but to sell on to them on completion for their service. Again, no service is being provided once the property is built so there is no need for any private party to own it, and thus no justification for their benefit from sitting on it as it appreciates in value. Now taxation incurred by businesses can be replaced with rent as well. Managed properly and no more tax is needed, and its replacement with rent makes far more sense.
An anecdote: I recently saw a local business get set up, attract too little custom and go under not long after, and I wondered about significant reasons for this and who benefits, if anyone. The owner failed and lost money, any loans were probably written off due to bankruptcy, but the property owner? Whether the property was bought outright, and the previous owner got paid for having sat on a title deed, or they were getting paid rent all this time - which was probably the primary cost to the business owner in the first place. They attracted at least a little custom, so some people were getting what they wanted due to his efforts, but when housing costs only appreciate it becomes harder and harder to keep a business afloat in the wake of being charged for the service of others being rich enough to own the property you need and richer still from waiting around while it appreciates in value. There is no sense here.
But my proposed solution?