Why do tenants have to pay council tax?

[Goodnightseamer]

It's a domestic property tax. But tenants don't own any property, so they're paying tax on something they don't own. They didn't use to have to pay rates, but they have to pay council tax. Why? NB council tax is not a tax for use of services so that argument doesn't wash. It is a tax where liability is created by the existence of a domestic property. Which tenants clearly do not own.

peachesforfree

And stamp duty and other property taxes AND capital gains as well.

I don’t think I’ve ever seen such a wilfully ignorant post!
OP if your beef isn’t with landlords, is it with property owners in general?

You come across as having a big chip on your shoulder about property owners. Yes I’m a (mortgaged)property owner, and also a landlord of an un mortgaged property. I pay my way in life. I’m in a relatively comfortable position in life, but my situation is such because of decisions I made from the age of about 12, and I will not apologise for it.
Just spit out your issue

The alternative to council tax is to increase income taxes and then allocate to local authorities.

Remove council tax altogether- the amount we pay doesn’t go directly to the local authorities, it goes into central government who then share it back out (well they’ve cut the amount they share out massively).

However governments are scared to change council tax after what happened with the poll tax.

If landlords had to pay, then they'd just raise the rent accordingly. They set the rent, so there's nothing to stop them doing that.
You'll pay exactly the same, so the whole thought is pointless.

Christ, people really do have short memories. Also will swallow whatever they are told.

For the last time, taxpayers are not purchasers. Taxes don't buy you anything, whether services or roads. You therefore aren't "paying for" council services through council tax, the vast majority of which are funded by other public revenue streams anyway.

Historically - and I mean, for centuries, until thirty years ago - local domestic taxation was levied purely on property ownership. As such the amount was based on the value of the property.

Then in 1988 this was converted to a flat per person liability which, following widescale refusal and a degree of civil protest, was again converted back to a domestic property tax which retained an element of personal liability, which is the bit that doesn't make sense, in that the amount is set based on the value of another person's asset.

Rates were never about payment in return for access to local services. Council tax isn't now, effectively, because those services are largely funded through other means. But people are told that they're "paying" for services, even though they're not, and thus the personal element is justified, and I'm honestly amazed at how many on this thread are trotting out such inaccurate justifications.

It's a tax on using local services. Which are used by the person living in the property.

It really isn't.

OK op, just tell your landlord you're not prepared to pay council tax and he/she will add it to your rent every month. If you're living alone you'll get single person's allowance.

There are areas where council tax is high and other areas where it isn't so bad. You have the choice to live somewhere cheaper if you can't afford anything more but most people like to live somewhere decent.

I'm happy with how my council tax is used.

The "payment for using local services" argument might just work if said services were wholly funded by council tax. But they're not. The vast majority of the money spent by local authorities comes from elsewhere.

I've lost track of what you're ranting about, Goodnight! But as you seem to accept that any rationalisation of tax is just a superficial explanation, and that the state just needs to raise money as best it can to pay for things that need paying for, surely there's nothing more to rant about. Just pay the bloody tax and move on!

But are you disagreeing that they're part funded by council tax? What are you saying that council tax is spent on?

Travellers don't own the campsite they live on, but they pay council tax the same as you.
Who knows what else LA's do with the money but it pays for services.
We all have to pay
HTH

But people are told that they're "paying" for services, even though they're not, and thus the personal element is justified, and I'm honestly amazed at how many on this thread are trotting out such inaccurate justifications

But we all know services need to be paid for.

Council Tax is weirdly administered, true, but am not sure why owner occupiers should pay towards the council infrastructure and people who rent should not?

OP it does pay TOWARDS services provided by the council - which tenants use, not landlords.

Ok. The introduction of personal flat liability through Community Charge was a regressive step the effects of which remain in council tax liability now. Basically, people without assets are paying more tax. I mean, everyone is paying more tax than under the rates system, but people without assets are paying more again. But because councils send out pie charts "showing where your money goes" that's ok, apparently.

Travellers on council and private Traveller sites pay rent, council tax and for services (water , electricity etc).

The "payment for using local services" argumentmightjust work if said services were wholly funded by council tax. But they're not. The vast majority of the money spent by local authorities comes from elsewhere.

So it's only ok if it funds all of it.

So you rather all council tax goes to fund everything.

How does that impact your original point?

I mean, everyone is paying more tax than under the rates system, but people without assets are paying more again.

And??

For the last time, taxpayers are not purchasers. Taxes don't buy you anything, whether services or roads. You therefore aren't "paying for" council services through council tax, the vast majority of which are funded by other public revenue streams anyway.

Nurse...…!

So you rather all council tax goes to fund everything.

No. I'm saying it doesn't fund everything, so you're not "paying for" services, plus taxes are taxes, not purchase monies.

One of the other places the council get funding are business rates. A tax based on occupation. The vast majority of businesses rent their properties so should they not pay either? Where would the councils get their funding??

Can’t understand where you got from the notion council tax not being for services, of course it is, how do you think the council funds libraries, schools, parking wardens, road sweeping/bin collection. If councils changed from taxing properties in their area to taxing people who live in the area, renters would still have to pay.

Your premise seems to be that tenants didn't pay rates but, as people have pointed out, they did.

This seems an utterly pointless rant anyway. If landlords rather than tenants paid rates, it would simply be added on to the rent so it would make zero difference.

I'm saying it doesn't fund everything, so you're not "paying for" services, plus taxes are taxes, not purchase monies.

It's to pay towards it.

In France the person living in the property on 1 Jan is liable for the year. This tax is collected nationally. There are also local/village taxes for a different layer of services.

We pay/paid a separate tax for owning a property. The logic being if you are rich enough to own a house you are rich enough to pay an extra tax.