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.

Jesus wept. Are you writing a first year politics essay?

I've got bad news for you. You're not going to be acing your course.

It replaced the 'Rates' and covers things you use. Without it you would still have to pay for a household waste collection and recycling, or take it to the dump yourself. Street lighting, you must use that surely. Street bins, Dog waste bins, grass verges, green spaces, sports facilities, public swimming baths.
Look at what is provided by paying it and work out what you don't use, then ask the landlord to pay the rest.

Do you pay the water rates? I have lived in various places, some included it and some didn't but I still used the water, not the landlord.

This threat is awesome

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.

So what are those other public revenue streams that do purchase services on behalf of everybody if they aren't taxes?

people without assets are paying more tax.

Who says that taxes are only levied on assets? Income tax isn't as people on PAYE have to pay tax on their monthly earnings before they even see the remainder of their monthly income (most or all of which still won't become an appreciating asset). VAT isn't levied on assets. NI is another form of tax and that isn't levied on assets.

If you believe that non-homeowners shouldn't have to pay towards having their personal/family waste taken away, their children educated and the local roads that they travel on repaired, you might as well say that they shouldn't have to pay the hairdresser for a haircut or IKEA for a bookcase or Tesco for their food.

Yes, rents can be very expensive and I completely understand how infuriating it is to be paying MORE each month in 'dead money' than you would for a monthly mortgage payment towards actually owning your own property, if only you could get a deposit and a mortgage - but that's just how life is, sadly.

Just because you don't own a house doesn't mean that those who do own their own homes (or are paying mortgages towards them) should pick up the bill for everybody's daily living costs. That's kind of infantilising towards renters to suggest that they should.

Street lights are not just for car drivers, they are to help muggers find a victim, or to help you find your way along the uneven paving in the night time. The paving that the council can only afford to repair when they have their budget for the year.

why don't students pay it? They certainly use services, especially when they all fly tip at the end of their tenancy.

Generalisation much? I'm out.

Whatever you do OP, don't buy a second property! The 5% stamp duty would have you fainting in the aisles.

It is a tax raised in a local area for use in that local area....the area YOU are living in. So suck it up, or, if you feel you are not getting the benefit complain to YOUR local council.

Would you feel better OP if it had a different name... Such as services tax? Council subsidiary payment? Personal usage tax?
This is a very long thread and from what I can take from it you are arguing with the definitions of the words, taking them too literal. The 'tax' is a contribution to services not a purchase of the services.

@Goodnightseamer OP what do you mean that tax payers aren't purchasers?

@Elmo230885 I'd feel better if it wasn't regressive and also if it didn't include non asset owners, as was the case prior to 1988. Introducing the personal liability flat element means that those on low incomes without assets have consistently paid a greater percentage of their wage in tax.

For example, a tenant on minimum wage in a band A property here pays an additional 6.27% in council tax as a proportion of take-home pay after income tax and minimum pension payments levied against an asset they don't own. For someone on £50000, who is more likely to own the asset, council tax is 2.35% of what they take home after income tax and minimum pension contribution.

@Goodnightseamer are you ok? That's a lots of weird complaning about council tax... Are you having some money issues? Or landlord issues? There is lots of help available so just ask...

So a non asset owner on a low wage pays 4% more tax than an asset owner on a high wage.

I'd feel better if it wasn't regressive and also if it didn't include non asset owners, as was the case prior to 1988

Ita got nothing to do with assets.

Do you believe all homeowners are rich?

Is that your issue?

So a non asset owner on a low wage pays 4% more tax than an asset owner on a high wage.

I'm not really sure what asset ownership has to do with it.

Should people who don't own houses not pay income tax then?

@MsRomanoff nah, just not a fan of disproportionate/regressive taxation and also frustrated that people paying it think they're buying something because the council sends them pie charts.

It is vaguely proportionate to the size of their home, according to the banding system, if that makes you feel any better.

Thanks for the reply. I do agree that proportionally lower income people can end up paying more. There maybe is a fairer way of deciding the banding. When it is done purely on the property, then yes, it isn't fair on renters however I do believe they should still pay and it shouldn't fall to the landlord.

@TriangularRatbag not really. The example I gave was for the lowest banding taking into account the 25% discount, excluding the rate for travellers etc ie most people won't pay less than that, but the minimum wage earner is still stuffed, relatively speaking. That they're stuffed by a tax raised against something they don't even own just adds insult to injury.

You’re wrong about non property owners not paying rates. In fact, according to Wikipedia, they were based on rental values when first introduced.

^As local government developed, separate rates were collected by parish authorities, borough corporations and county authorities. The County Rates Act 1739 ended the practice of separate rates being levied for individual purposes, such a highway rate and provided for a unified county rate.

Rates on residential property were based on the nominal rental value, reassessed periodically in revaluations. By the Rating and Valuation Act 1925, revaluations were supposed to take place every five years but in practice they were frequently delayed or suspended. Revaluations took place in 1928/1929, 1934, 1956 (but based on 1939 values), 1963, and 1973. A revaluation due in the early 1980s was scrapped by the Secretary of State for the Environment Michael Heseltine in June 1979, with Heseltine urging householders to tear up the forms already sent out by the Valuation Office.[1]^

Council tax pays for your council services - street lighting, bins, schools, fire brigade etc.

The tenant uses these services so the tenant must pay for them.

It really is that simple

If they passed this tax to the landlord rather than the tenant the landlord would just add it on to your rent anyway.

OP I do understand your point about percentage of earnings paid in taxes, and it something that needs to be addressed, but any home-occupier should pay towards their bin being emptied. Also, you have quite rightly stated that most of a council's revenue comes from sources other than council tax, so you realise that the amount we pay is peanuts compared to what they actually need to run their services.

For example, a tenant on minimum wage in a band A property here pays an additional 6.27% in council tax as a proportion of take-home pay after income tax and minimum pension payments levied against an asset they don't own. For someone on £50000, who is more likely to own the asset, council tax is 2.35% of what they take home after income tax and minimum pension contribution.

You seem to be under the impression that tenants are all very poor and homeowners are all very rich. This is not the case at all - plenty of poorer people have mortgages. Maybe they got the mortgage before they lost their job or got divorced or live in a very cheap area etc. Equally, many people prefer the flexibility of renting and actively prefer not to be tied down with a mortgage on a house in a fixed location. Have you seen the WEEKLY rents for some of those studio flats in Knightsbridge? They most certainly aren't poor people.

We 'own' our own home on an interest only mortgage, so effectively renting. Our council tax is about 6.2% of our family take-home pay after tax.

If what you're actually asking is why council tax isn't abolished and income tax increased to replace current CT revenues, then that makes a lot more sense, whether people would agree with it or not. However, assuming that only the poor rent and only the rich have mortgages is absurd.

Tenants have the sole legal right to use the property for the duration of the tenancy.

VED is added to rental payments under PCH car leasing, it is not paid by the asset owner but passed to the person with the legal right of exclusive use.

Who pays the VED on a lease car?
Many people wonder if you don’t own the car and hold the v5 how you tax the car?

When you lease a car most funding companies will tax the vehicle for you including the cost of the vehicle excise duty (formally known as Road tax) in your monthly rental.