Second Home owners doing sad faces in the press about council tax increase

I fucking hate the 'politics of envy' accusation whenever wealthy people are required to pay a bit more. These are people with two homes, when loads of people don't even have one. I'm sure the wealthy second home owners in OP's village can just about afford to pay double council tax.

This was introduced to discourage people leaving homes empty for long periods and to encourage them to either sell or rent it out. It's called an Empty House Premium and people can apply for an exemption if they put the property up for sale or rent.

um, no. Tenants pay their own council tax; that isn’t counted as a second home. Tenants are not going to suddenly have to pay double council tax. That would essentially end the rental economy overnight. No more landlords, anywhere.

I don't really agree with having a second home at all, so I certainly don't care about the sad faces of rich people who not only own a home they live in (an unaffordable dream to many hardworking people, who aren't even poor) but own a second one too. Diddums.

It's pretty immoral in the best of times, let alone during a housing crisis with many people homeless, to own a second home that you just pop to whenever you fancy it. A caravan on a site somewhere as a bolthole maybe, but a whole flat or house? come on!

Aside of Cornwall for which someone said tourism only brings 18% of revenues to the local economy or areas similar to that - areas who obviously have strong businesses / industries that brings the rest of the recenues.

forget those areas for a sec, there other areas with high tourism values in the uk or even in the rest of world but NO economy and no jobs for the local residents if it wasnt for the seasonal tourists in summer and winter. I m not sure about thr UK but in France, in the Alps it is very true. If it wasnt for holiday makers there would be no economy and therefore all the youth, young families, etc would have left.

so whats the answer for those areas. They need hotels, campsites, guest houses AND empty homes to rent

Yes. That's a better example than the newts.

Please can I have a link to their sad faces

Of course they do. They’re multimillionaires. 3-4k surcharge on their £2-5m luxury home is peanuts.

It’s the more modest second home owners, with 3-4beds who were probably planning to retire into them in due course. Unlikely to want to do that if the depth of local feeling as expressed on threads like this is anything to go by. I’d not want to retire to such a community that gloats that I need to pay more CT than everyone else when actually using the services its funds for less than 50% of the time. But I don’t own a second home yet.

I agree with this and we have a couple of holiday properties in U.K. This is our way to fund our future retirement. We do use them ourselves but try to ensure they are rented out as much as possible. I don’t understand people who only keep them for themselves it’s not good for the local economy. I guess those that can afford will carry on in this manner but I do think it will force many to either sell or open up their properties to holiday makers.

Sorry, you lost the right to complain at “decided to buy a holiday home”.

But the money will go into the local community which is the point whoever pays it. If it becomes too expensive to rent a holiday home then holidays makers will go elsewhere and the landlords might then sell to locals.

If it was a long term let it would be someone's home and they would pay normal council tax.

one of my colleagues was talking about it, they are going to do it.

That loophole should be closed immediately.

Then the empty houses can be bought as ‘first’ homes (ie actual permanent residences) by people who have previously been priced out of the area… do use your brain cells…

Why do you assume its "politics of envy"?

Do you life in an area with high rates of second home ownership?

www.telegraph.co.uk/money/property/second-homes/second-homeowners-use-loophole-avoid-300pc-council-tax/

I live in a rural area around an hour drive from a main city and near the local hospital. We have loads of second home owners round here that contribute nothing to the local economy as they are pretty much using the property as a place to sleep then heading back home for the weekend. Annoyingly most of these properties are ex council houses that would make perfect family homes.

So the second home owners disappear and then what? Lots of empty houses and huge problems for local businesses!

Would it disappear or would it still exist with someone living in it full time?

Someone I know has just made a big performance out of selling their second home due to spiralling costs. I have no sympathy as a few years ago, the village was hit by floods and all they cared about was that their cottage was OK and the bridge was still intact for them to get to the pub.
I know everyone isn't like that and I do really sympathise with permanent residents about the effect second homes have on their communities.

I'm not sure it will work. Apparently if you put the home on the market you don't have to pay even if you have no desire to sell.

So the second home owners disappear and then what? Lots of empty houses and huge problems for local businesses!
I am not lucky enough to own a second home, but this "politics of envy" is horrible, and economically stupid.

Not true. it is something for a lot of second home owners.

you have to factor that yes there are some rich people who buys properties and even though they are pissed off at paying more, it s less than a percent of their total budget.

BUT among the second home owners community they are a lot of them who would feel their budget really dented. Yes they can sell or rent it more thats a the luxury they have: choice.

but some second home owners are keeping their grand parents house (my extended family in france. We share the cost), or bought because that area has memories for them, r inherited a property, or moved out of the area and kept their home there (we did and it a now sold and it was in london),
or accidental ones, etc.

of course there are some investors too. I think a reasonable conversation should take place where both parties listen to each other to find a good compromise

Also, the Cornish economy doesn't depend on tourism, and it pisses us off no end when people say that. 18% of the economy is based on tourism- significant but not overwhelming. Tourism also exerts a massive toll on our infrastructure, as well as pushing the cost of housing up. And the jobs it provides are usually seasonal and badly paid.

oh. Phew!