Council tax very unfair to single people

Life is hard for single people. Council tax, bills, renting (let alone buying). Weddings, holidays abroad, eating out, weekends... society has not got our back!

Your household is still having the bins emptied as often as theirs, the street lights benefit you as much as them etc etc… your receiving 100% if the benefit so be grateful you only pay 75%. Are you saying we should try to bring back poll tax??? We all know how that went.

Not sure if it's been mentioned but in Ireland we pay Local Property Tax (LPT). It doesn't include the collection of waste disposal mind. I pay €25 a month LPT on a €300k house and €30 a month for bins (in GBP, £45 total). You guys are fleeced. Oh, and no water bills - we took to the streets over that and they rescinded bringing them in!

See I think it is fair that loving alone gets you a discount but that we don't pay per adult. Surely if you can afford to live alone, statically you're more likely to be wealthy than people loving in a shared house?
And considering there isnt enough housing in the country and house prices are nuts I can see why there aren't incentives to encourage people to love alone. Seems perfectly fair to me.
OP if you don't like it you could always get a lodger.

You need a meter then

I wonder this as well, especially with the increase in numbers of single parent families and single adult living.

we were a single parent family when poll tax was brought in, and it was a massive relief to my mum as poll tax for one person was far less than what had been before.

as for council tax- I found a really shitty loophole once when I was a student. My sister needed somewhere to live and I needed a flatmate, so she moved in with me. I was exempt council tax as a student, she was exempt as she was on Jobseeker’s Allowance. However, as she was living with “family”, family were expected to pay the council tax, which meant I was now liable for the full amount of council tax.

Or decreases the risk as there’s more a chance of something being spotted and brought under control sooner?

Well I'm with you on the reform bit.

Getting the electorate politically engaged is more challenging in a large conurbation. In the particular case of Birmingham, I think many people feel fairly disempowered right now, whoever their councillor.

Yep I was very surprised when living in London that not only is a house worth 800-900k Band D, council tax is also cheaper than Band D (properties worth 300-400k) in my northern town.

apart from the actual cost of houses, I found living in London cheaper than in the north as so much is subsidised. Transport is cheaper, no need for a car, council tax much cheaper, subsidised sports clubs/leisure centres and baby groups etc etc.

i hear a lot about levelling up but still see money spent on London rather than elsewhere.

I do wonder if the poll tax would have been more acceptable today?

If you don't mind me ranting about this here, I recently discovered that the council aren't allowed to spend any money from land sales etc on basic maintenance.
@EmmaEmerald quite right, Capex shouldn't be mixed up with Opex for a reason. When you sell off an asset, you get a windfall of cash but that's only a one-off. If you use it to fund maintenance then how will you do any maintenance next year when you no longer have an asset to sell.

Mind you, the government ought to follow those rules itself. Cancelling a public transport infrastructure project in the north in order to fund road repairs in the south really rankles.

My council tax bill, as a single working mum to 3 under 18's is higher than my parents. They live together in a bigger house than me! Council tax is about the property unfortunately

@Morph22010 I'm 67, so yes, I was there. Even so, I think charging tax per capita is better, and fairer.

Yes this a real issue.

Taxation is what buys us a functioning society. We need public support for taxation and public services from enough people or we will continue on the current downward spiral.

If the poll tax came back in, but it won't, the council tax take from our current household of three adults would increase from £3.7k pa to nearly £12k. I do tend to think it would solve a great many financing problems short tern for the council. In practical terms, it wouldn't increase so much because it would be levied per capita so there wouldn't be the assumption that sq ft was the yardstick.

Yes, in 50 years time, are we still going to be taxing properties based on what they were worth, (or, would have been worth, had they existed) in 1991. It's madness, yet no political party is proposing to change it.

But that is mostly because your council grant from central government has been cut - and the government is working on the assumption that many people (like you) don't understand how councils work so they will blame the council instead of central government.

Don't fall for it. Educate yourself as to what has happened to your council grant since 2010.

I don't mind paying. However there's clear confusion on this thread of what council tax is based upon. Its that outdated it's a ridiculous rule.

Consider the different ways the bin lorry will empty different types of property. A block of flats might send their waste down a chute into a bulk bin, the lorry will lift the whole lot up in one go - job done. On a terrace the bin men will empty half a dozen to a dozen bins before the lorry needs to move forward. In a really low-density area (think American-style suburbs with massive gardens etc.) they might only be able to empty one or two bins before moving the lorry forward to the next property. Incidentally I love the way that some Dutch cities now handle bin collections, no need to have four (or more)bins cluttering up the street outside every single house:

Then look at provision of infrastructure and utilities (I know that many of these are not council provided, but the same principle applies to standing charges). The further apart the houses are, the longer the road, water pipes, electricity cables and phone lines must be.

Transport costs more in less densely populated areas. Dense areas can easily support bus services without need for subsidy. You are more likely to walk or cycle to amenities. In a sprawling suburb on the other hand you'd probably have a car or two which wears out the road.

Social care too. In a high-density area a home help worker could walk or cycle between clients as they won't be far apart at all. With low-density development they'll need to drive (which costs money) and it'll take longer (time is money).

Educating kids is cheaper in high-density areas too, low density areas tend to require the council to lay on buses for the kids to get to school. You get economies of scale with a three form entry primary school compared with a single form or even a village school with only 50 pupils.

For this reason, I'd be charging council tax (at least partly) on the physical footprint the property occupies. Not on some semi-arbitary valuation from the '90s but a proper physical measurement. If you want to live in a sprawling detached house with massive garden then you can pay the extra. Obviously agricultural land and woodland would be exempt.

Were you alive in the late 80s early 90s? this is what the poll tax was, goggle poll tax riots

I'd be fine with that, I live on my own.

I think council tax should be levied and paid per person individually. This works against me and my family; it would double our council tax which is already over £3,700 pa. We should be charged individually (excluding children) so that every adult makes a contribution to the cost of providing services.