In Argentina, they will use Google Earth to prevent tax evasion
According to a news published in AFP, the tax authorities of the province of Buenos Aires will make use of Google Earth, in order to look for constructions not declared before the Treasury.
For those of us who once had a Cadastre department in a municipality, we are aware that people do not have the habit of declaring for their new buildings. To do this, you usually create excise taxes that fine the person who builds without asking for a permit, or who, after completing the construction, does not declare the improvements.
We are also aware of how uncomfortable and expensive it is to have a squad of staff looking for these tax evaders in the field, since they are often lent for bribery or often more expensive than what is recovered. The existence of satellite images with details of pixels smaller than the meter allows to be detected in this way those buildings that have not been declared.
In this way, the crews can be sent in a planned way to the buildings that have already been detected, and yet they can be assigned tax charges even if they have not been visited in the field; We had previously seen in the legislation of Mar del Plata, However one of the intentions is to take it to a general normative level. In the graph, an area of the Delta del Tigre
I do not know where googleearth can be used to have the legal and economic cadastre information; I think Spain uses it and it must be for something. I believe that the lack of precision disables it to use it to make the physical cadastre; so I think that making a very rational use and taking advantage of this tool can use it anywhere, it becomes an interesting alternative so that people can see information of their interest via the internet.
I am currently head of cadastre in my city and they left us a cadastre all in paper, but the google earth in this month of work became an interesting tool when they come to claim of payments in taxes; I use this free program, I locate the land and almost always the taxpayer turns out that he was wanting to evade some tax.
And as they say above, if it does not show very well, is sent inspection.
I can say that almost always the mistake is to evade tax, but now we are improving this situation.
If you have ideas of computer programs that can be used for tracing or cadastre tracking send me to the mail
Respectfully, I fully agree with what Fernando says about the use of Google Earth, a special, determined purpose that does not have much to do with coordinates accuracy.
Changing the subject I want to take advantage of your knowledge.
I have a concern and I hope someone in this community can answer me.
Are there reference points in Google maps (Point image), comparing them with what Google Earth is telling me, show me the margin of error ?.
I am from the City of Iquique, Chile and I am very interested in this topic and I believe that if these points existed, this would help improve the accuracy of Google Earth immensely.
I thank you immensely for this forum and those who participate.
I believe that this system is important, if someone bothers you is that you have some strange plot that you do not want to be divulged, I hope that with this program you can locate almost at the moment when a very particular fact (robbery, kidnapping, death, etc.) ,) Is discovered for the tranquility of the family itself,
The idea seems excellent to me, although I read erroneous comments that if errors of 400 meters that is false ... and it can be shown mathematically ... to catch those tax evaders, google earth is here to stay, all the work is simplified ... the property is located Check the files if it is registered and ready ... what else can we ask of this versatile tool ... and I repeat to get closer to the problem, the tool is good ...
THE OLD ISLANDS OF CATASTRO OF THE SUNARP. IQUITOS USE THIS METHOD PA ARMS YOUR MOSAIC AND SEE THAT THE SIGHT FAILS
As far as I understood NOBODY said that the government was going to use the images ...
it is for PLANNING ... we also know that they are sometimes years old.
But if through google earth we see very large lands, buildings that are seen in google earth but are NOT declared… we can send an inspector to THAT place specifically… isn't that more effective than going all over the places?
Then when the inspector arrives will verify if it is correct and under what conditions is the land or construction.
I feel great.
I believe that in a country where resources are scarce, and if they are used to control, they are hard criticized (read photomasts, vehicular radars, construction of unreported pools, undeclared quinquos and / or mansions declared as uncultivated lands or works under construction , Etc.), the use for the verification of new surfaces (which will surely be verified by surveyors and / or inspectors) seems to me very useful. I think those who see hair in milk are because they do not like to be controlled.
Thank you for your comment Ben, I think it is important what you mention, define the relevance and quality of the information. It is not bad to use google earth data, the bad thing is not to say the origin and precision.
If the data says, "survey method" = "photo-identified in google earth" it will be enough... of course the twenty meters of error, to go to a job that will be defended in court is to dare to defend what is wrong.
The disadvantage of using a reference like Google Earth is that there is no constant in the level of precision, if when we used a conventional stereoscope the circular error of a chinograph point was 7 meters ... at least it was known, with Google, the error as it can be one meter, it can be 50 and there the reason why you cannot have the precision constant.
The images of Google have the resolution enough to identify in a first instance a good part of the illegal constructions of the territory of Argentina.
The quality of Google's georeferencing does not allow the automation of the process of identifying undeclared constructions, but it allows a trained operator to prima facie identify suspect consutrcations and then send field inspectors with more accurate data than is available today .
I do not think anyone in Catastro is thinking of using those iamgenes as evidence in a trial. They serve only to approach the problem.
When I say that it is a viable alternative I do not say that it is the best. Only if it is carried forward in a serious working protocol, it can give results at low cost and offers a very favorable cost-benefit equation.
My doubts are focused on the ability or interest of Catastro to set up a system of serious, continuous and far-reaching work around this simple application. Most likely, the main objective is only mediatic. For a few days I have received comments from people who have read it, in many cases, not without some concern.
Regarding the errors of georeferencing of the images, I was surprised to see that in my work zone, (coastline from San Clemetne to Pinamar) did not exceed 50 meters and that in most cases it was less than 20 meters, compared to Geodesic GPS points. So once the probable error has been measured and evaluated if that error is acceptable for our work, it is possible to use the GE margins with a high level of confidence.
The only thing I can say is that if someone can send me an answer to my msn ... because in the part of Rosario (Santa Fe - Argentina) you can't see well ... I'm looking for patches or something similar so that I can improve the quality but I do not meet ...
if someone can help me please do so ... to this msn Elcheo7@hotmail.com
Very much in agreement with you Omark, I have had to see rustic (rural) survey works inked on google earth orthophoto, that when trying to make them paste with conventional orthophoto have georeferencing problems so serious that it is better to redo the work.
It is necessary that the people in charge of making decisions of a territorial nature have a good knowledge of geography. The Google Earth application is simply an instrument that allows us to see high and medium resolution images of almost any part of the world, this is due to the fact that it has a partnership with the Digital Globe company (the one that provides the high resolution images of the Quickbird satellite ) this in order to be a marketing tool for this company and to continue buying the updated images (those from google earth are not) and with metric quality, otherwise I doubt they would donate the product they received allows you to have income and maintain it as a "company"
I agree with what was expressed by ERM, the project undertaken by the Government of the Province of Buenos Aires, here in Argentina does nothing but generate the feeling that the Cadastre is managed based on Google Earth. In my municipality they decided not to invest in products with higher resolution, fewer errors, and more recent if the province uses a free product. In addition to the normative and the technical, the budget issue plays an important role too.
What this shows us is that our officials often do not get enough advice regarding decisions that are more than normative, they are technical; especially since many trends in the area of cadastre and cartography after accessibility to CAD / GIS applications have been oriented to the final products and not to their origin.
What appears here as a technological innovation is nothing more than what we call in Argentina "A Patch" or a precarious solution to a situation that in this case is the lack of cadastral surveys in the province of Buenos Aires. I believe that the solution presented is not serious and that it is not developed according to the transcribed text of the cadastral law that says: "...alternatives of territorial delimitation that guarantee levels of precision, reliability and comprehensiveness comparable to the acts of measurement"
In fact, Goggle Earth has a design that prioritizes the display of some type of information taken on an unknown date, in unknown conditions and who knows what other things. It is not a product that can be considered technical. A cadastre with all of the law that guarantees both collection and respect for the rights of the citizen requires the application of the techniques and quality standards corresponding to the survey of this type of information and not a "blackmail" (Argentina: negligent improvisation) .
Goggle Earth is a great tool and very good if used in the context in which it was created. The extension of its capacities in lands that do not correspond to it by unsuitable people quickly leads us to completely absurd cases such as the one mentioned above about "to know how to use Arc-View it is not necessary to know cartography".
Look at what a deputy to the General Director of the Cadastre of Spain has to say….”Furthermore, phenomena such as Google-earth have not only expanded the use of geographic information but also do so for free and in a very simple way, producing in many structures traditional authentic convulsions. Why pay traditional aerial photography providers when an image of sufficient quality is available for free online? On the other hand, who is responsible for geographic information, now that anyone can create it and distribute it easily through the network?
Come on, even the top managers of the "great Spanish Cadastre" think that Google images are the panacea...the thing has flats 😯
Google Earth images have error margins of up to 400 meters… EASILY VERIFICABLE….
Is not it little serious to use images with so much error for something as delicate as the tax collection ????
It seems to me that as long as they appear in the newspapers or generate comments, the officials are capable of any stupidity….
PS: Someone said “Human intelligence is limited…. STUPIDITY HAS NO LIMITS!!!! “
An example of why google earth images should not be used for serious issues ...
Well, according to TXus, we recently did a job using those Google images, and that was for geocoding purposes, when we went to the field with the GPS some streets were almost 30 meters.
In addition to the veracity, the metric quality of the ORTOIMÁGENES, that orthophotos, of google leaves much to be desired.
But it is true that people think that Google and its images are the panacea, in fact, in a course that I took on Cadastre, the speaker explained to us that for some updates, especially in areas where they had orthophotography, and there has been a construction of a new secondary road, have used Google images ……. I stayed checkered !!! …… well, that's how Catastro goes.
I think it is not serious to use Google Earth in a case as important as Catastral issues.
The tax authorities of the province of Buenos Aires should acquire their aerial or satellite images certified in authenticity and date. Because otherwise, citizens complained about can easily revoke the evidence based on Google Earth in a court of law, since Google Earth can not guarantee the veracity of the information provided by third party suppliers for other purposes.