Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

To think an annual property tax is incredibly unfair?

966 replies

Itchthescratch · 01/07/2026 10:06

I come from an area with low house prices. It is great! My friends can generally afford houses even with lower salaries as the earnings:house prices ratio is better. Rents are also lower so they have proportionately more disposable income.

I have moved to a more expensive area where house prices are higher and people have really had to push themselves to buy a property. Salaries are higher but not high enough to make up the difference. They have had to pay more stamp duty , pay more interest and have less disposable income each month.

I am really struggling to understand why my friends in the South should also automatically be paying more property tax under the new proposals being suggested by Burnham supporters? What is the justification? They would love to buy a large detached house for £300k like my friends from home but this isn't possible. It feels like they are being double penalised.

Just to add house prices haven't risen in real terms in the area in live in now for 20 years so the value of my friend's houses is simply money they have paid in.

OP posts:
Thread gallery
18
EasternStandard · 05/07/2026 23:23

mathanxiety · 05/07/2026 20:17

There are some elements of life in the US that nobody in their right mind would want.

But local control over locally raised taxes isn't one of them.

I understand people in the US are used to it but the system won’t be the same here. A wealthy area won’t get to fund its own services under Labour / Burnham.

To the same extent that is, eg schools.

NorthXNorthWest · 05/07/2026 22:35

mathanxiety · 05/07/2026 20:17

There are some elements of life in the US that nobody in their right mind would want.

But local control over locally raised taxes isn't one of them.

Do you think we have the skills for a devolved power? What about places like Blackpool?

BIossomtoes · 05/07/2026 21:29

Council (and other "Government" employees have pensions that most of those who pay for them can now only dream about. Paid out of council tax. Sort that out first. But they wont because of the unions

Many local government pension schemes are currently in surplus and they compensate for lower salaries. “Sort that out” would mean salaries would have to increase.

www.barnett-waddingham.co.uk/comment-insight/blog/surpluses-in-the-lgps-cutting-through-the-noise/

ThatFlakyHam · 05/07/2026 21:15

New taxes always have massive unforeseen consequences. If council tax is changed it will be a disaster. Those old enough to remember when council changed to Poll tax will remember that.

Conservatives have never been forgiven by many (including me) for trying that, and it was one of the things that ended Maggie. My council tax doubled by the time the Poll tax had been and gone. And I lived alone then

Sure there will be winners and losers, but isn’t the key point about council tax is that it’s meant to pay for the local services. Not be a wealth tax? A family of the same size and age should in theory consume similar council costs (police, fire, schools, roads etc,) irrespective of the value of the house.

Council (and other "Government" employees have pensions that most of those who pay for them can now only dream about. Paid out of council tax. Sort that out first. But they wont because of the unions

Obviously sure there will be local effects between areas, but larger homes pay more anyway via the higher council house bands. As many have said already living in a larger/more valuable house doesn’t automatically mean you have more disposable income

There will be many consequences. Just watch what happens to house prices close to or over £2m

mathanxiety · 05/07/2026 20:17

NorthXNorthWest · 03/07/2026 20:57

I don't want a US system. There is not much I would want to import from the US.

There are some elements of life in the US that nobody in their right mind would want.

But local control over locally raised taxes isn't one of them.

mathanxiety · 05/07/2026 20:05

palran · 04/07/2026 09:26

Other countries have residential property taxes, how do they do it?

I suspect that it may be self assessed based on market value within bands, with severe penalties for false valuations based on targeted audits. HMRC will know from their vast sources of data what properties are selling for within certain bands in different areas, so if you are selected for an audit and found to have undervalued deliberately, you will pay dearly.

Self assessment means there will not have to be armies of valuers trekking the land to value each and every property. It has massive administrative advantages, and if the penalties for undervaluation are severe enough, it is carrot and stick. It works for non PAYE income tax doesn't it?

I'm not saying that WILL be the case, just what I think might work with the least admin cost, which is eventually paid by us anyway.

No self assessment in my neck of the (American) woods. And no armies of assessors either.

Assessment is handled by the office of the county assessor, an elected post. Residential units are assessed based on recent comparable values, the data on which is available to the assessor periodically throughout the year as deeds change hands at time of sale.

Different sections of the county are subject to reassessment on a periodic basis - maybe every five years or so. You can appeal your new assessment. It's quite a legal cottage industry. Also, the assessor can be voted out of office - it's always a hotly contested election here.

People in some parts of the suburb where I live pay as much as $50k annually. Most pay a lot less. The public facilities and services that are provided by the portion of the tax that goes to the local municipality are superb.

Increases in taxes to fund local municipal projects are subject to local approval via referenda. Keeping this level of local control over the tax is extremely important in maintaining public confidence in the concept of property tax, at a fundamental level.

Thepeachboys · 05/07/2026 19:04

BIossomtoes · 05/07/2026 18:42

there are plenty of pensioners that pay their council tax annually in April

Only the ones who haven’t invested their money sensibly. The interest’s better in our savings account than the council’s when we can pay it from income.

They were the pensioners still dealing in cash and trooping to the post office in April to withdraw the money from their post office account and pay using the barcode in the post office all at the same time. The are often the pensioners that do not do any type of credit or debt and want the entirety demand paid at once.

BIossomtoes · 05/07/2026 18:42

there are plenty of pensioners that pay their council tax annually in April

Only the ones who haven’t invested their money sensibly. The interest’s better in our savings account than the council’s when we can pay it from income.

Thepeachboys · 05/07/2026 18:31

Pickles16 · 05/07/2026 17:59

Here in Ontario Canada you have the option to pay your Property Tax yearly, half yearly or monthly which saves a bloody great bill once a year. Again based on area and price of the house.

there are plenty of pensioners that pay their council tax annually in April, instead of in areas through the year

council tax can be set up for quarterly payments or half year along with 10 months, 11 months and 12 months in some cases

BIossomtoes · 05/07/2026 18:19

Most of us pay our council tax in ten instalments.

Pickles16 · 05/07/2026 17:59

Here in Ontario Canada you have the option to pay your Property Tax yearly, half yearly or monthly which saves a bloody great bill once a year. Again based on area and price of the house.

suburburban · 05/07/2026 17:34

Babyboomtastic · 04/07/2026 16:19

But it's ok to have council tax based on bandings on a property's value from 30+ years ago?

They are relative and have gone up and up

Allog · 05/07/2026 15:50

outside of London, Labour has little support so they conclude that they can simply tax people there more and it won’t affect their vote.

NorthXNorthWest · 05/07/2026 13:41

RedRock41 · 05/07/2026 10:40

Is this thread still doing the rounds? Jeez OP it’s not half triggered you. Mind it might not happen.

The irony of calling the OP "triggered".

Is there a rule on how long a thread can run for, or whether it can be about something that has happened or could happen?

Or can it only run for as long as it meets some arbitrary standard set by you?

There is no obligation to continue reading or posting. If you don't like what you see, in the words of Dionne Warwick: "Walk on By."🎵

Spamham · 05/07/2026 12:16

RedRock41 · 05/07/2026 10:40

Is this thread still doing the rounds? Jeez OP it’s not half triggered you. Mind it might not happen.

Fair point - I’m unfollowing this post now 😉
The voting result speaks for itself.

Although I will say that the South subsidises the North as we pay more income tax.

NorthXNorthWest · 05/07/2026 10:51

pimlicopubber · 05/07/2026 04:41

Stamp duty is the most horrid tax.

We live in London and haven't bought because of it.

We will most likely move in a few years time and it's just a lot of money down the drain.

Besides being prohibitively expensive it means you are forced to rent unless you're sure you will stay in the place for many years.

“Besides being prohibitively expensive, it means you are forced to rent unless you're sure you will stay in the place for many years.”

Stamp duty may be expensive, but it doesn't necessarily force you to rent. Most people on a normal wage choose housing security and buy where they can afford rather than where they would really like to live, because every £ paid towards your own home is £1 more in security and £1 saved from lining a landlord's pocket.

The irony of the Fairer Share or evrn mansion tax is that you might be able to afford to buy in an area but wouldn't necessarily be able to afford to live there for a long period of time. Because today's value of your home decides your tax, not your salary, which decides what mortgage you can get. Keen to hear your thoughts on why today's valuation is a fairer measure of someone's ability to pay than the mortgage they could afford when they bought the house?

Ask anybody who has bought their home in the last five or ten years if they could still afford to buy that home if it came onto the market now. Especially in overspill areas, where people priced out of more desirable areas nearby start buying, pushing up prices in your area.Yet your ability to afford to continue living there hasn't necessarily "increased".

RedRock41 · 05/07/2026 10:40

Is this thread still doing the rounds? Jeez OP it’s not half triggered you. Mind it might not happen.

TheignT · 05/07/2026 08:57

pimlicopubber · 05/07/2026 04:48

As the other commenter states even 1M doesn't buy you anything particularly luxurious in London.
Example:

https://www.rightmove.co.uk/properties/89988807#/?channel=RES_BUY

Why should someone in an expensive area pay 3-6x more tax for the same property? Are they consuming more public services? Often it's the other way around, the expensive area have high density and are cheaper to serve than areas with houses far away from each other.

People pay different amounts in council tax now. Might be based on band your house is in or how much your council needs.

Poll tax was fairer.

Dailymash · 05/07/2026 07:30

So for decades our council tax in the North os sent to central government and our local council receive a smaller % back. The North is subsidising the South.

Job opportunities, public transport, even things to do socially, are all better the further south you go. It is more valuable to live in the South therefore you pay more for a house.

Move North, treat yourself to one of those £300K detached houses.

pimlicopubber · 05/07/2026 04:48

Libertoo · 04/07/2026 20:04

If £6k is 0.48% of their property value, that means they live in a property worth around £1.25m? My heart bleeds 😂

As the other commenter states even 1M doesn't buy you anything particularly luxurious in London.
Example:

https://www.rightmove.co.uk/properties/89988807#/?channel=RES_BUY

Why should someone in an expensive area pay 3-6x more tax for the same property? Are they consuming more public services? Often it's the other way around, the expensive area have high density and are cheaper to serve than areas with houses far away from each other.

Check out this 3 bedroom terraced house for sale on Rightmove

3 bedroom terraced house for sale in Brooke Road, London, E5 for £1,175,000. Marketed by Julian Reid Estate Agents, Stoke Newington

https://www.rightmove.co.uk/properties/89988807#/?channel=RES_BUY

pimlicopubber · 05/07/2026 04:41

Bellic · 01/07/2026 10:20

I tell you what I think is unfair. I live in Edinburgh. There was a thread on here recently about someone who wanted to downsize to reduce her mortgage. When added in all moving costs they would come to about £15k. If I wanted to downsize to say a 3 bed bungalow in a less attractive area I’d be paying £700k and my stamp duty alone would be £43,350. So I don’t move. Ever. It’s obviously a financially daft thing to do.

Our current tax system is preventing me from moving just because I live in an expensive area. It’s such a stupid system. It traps the elderly in their expensive, unsuitable housing, and stops people moving to change jobs. It’s flagged as the single most damaging tax for the UK economy.

The proposed tax would remove stamp duty, and get the same amount of tax out of everyone living in a street, not loads out of those who just moved there and not a lot out of others. It’s so much fairer than the current system.

And expensive areas generally mean higher income. £100k salary is fairly common in London. It’s no big deal though because it’s soon eaten up by the costs of living in a city. So Londoners paying higher council tax? Just add that to the higher house prices, commute, childcare etc and take it off the higher incomes.

Stamp duty is the most horrid tax.

We live in London and haven't bought because of it.

We will most likely move in a few years time and it's just a lot of money down the drain.

Besides being prohibitively expensive it means you are forced to rent unless you're sure you will stay in the place for many years.

Olive123456 · 05/07/2026 01:33

Bellic · 01/07/2026 10:48

Wealth taxes where you take say 1% of someone’s wealth a year don’t work. They never have and never will. But this is a form of wealth tax that does work. It taxes the value of an asset (home) a person owns. Yes people may have a big mortgage and that’s les fair, but trying to build that into cal a makes the tax more complex and easier to game.

A revaluation of house prices would have to happen before the tax is brought in which is why this particular can has been kicked down the road for so long. But this is good. This is progress to a fairer tax system.

It wouldn't be fairer for me. My house has doubled in value since I bought it 30 yrs ago, partly because my area has become popular with middle class lefties. I still exist pay cheque to pay cheque on minimum wage though, so taxing me based on my house value would totally screw me.

Zzam · 05/07/2026 01:12

Can't wait to leave

AlexiaH · 05/07/2026 01:09

Itchthescratch · 01/07/2026 10:29

Yes, but surely how it impacts you personally doesn't totally dictate your idea about what is fair?

Someone in my hometown with a family of four living in a detached home in a lovely area will be paying £1.5k a year. In my local area the equivalent would be closer to £6k. They wouldn't use more services or anything that would justify them paying more. They would have a higher mortgage, pay more interest etc already.

💯 🙌🏼 I think it’s terrible, potentially expecting people to stump up 6k a year on tax. This gov just pretending people have £ the affordability to meet more and more demands. 🤦🏼‍♀️

Itchthescratch · 04/07/2026 21:40

Libertoo · 04/07/2026 20:04

If £6k is 0.48% of their property value, that means they live in a property worth around £1.25m? My heart bleeds 😂

They are living in an equivalent house to my northern friends though. A detached house in a nice area. The difference is that they are saddled with an extremely high mortgage. They don't actually own any more of their house equity wise than my northern friends.

So why should two people with the same amount of equity in their house pay such different amounts for their local services? Explain to me the rationale. It's hardly a wealth tax is it when one isn't wealthier than the other.

OP posts: