If property (land + building) taxes are significant, then property is already leased.
E.g. in NZ you buy property, but the local government taxes it, so you are essentially paying a small lease. Enough so that some retirees with no income have to downsize because the rates are a significant burden.
That would be the general idea. I think calling it a lease instead of tax has some benefits from an ideological perspective. But for this discussion suffice it to say that it should not just be an arbitrary tax.
I also think a substantial amount of the revenue from such lease should be tunneled back into the economy as a public dividend. Also for ideological reasons. But in practice to allow for higher prices (100% of market value would be ideal) while not impacting the retirees you mention quite as much.
