I HATE paying Council Tax. It's the bill I hate the most.

[flashbac]

Council Tax is regressive and unfair.

It takes more money from lower income individuals.

It has no link to the actual value of a property.

In addition to linking council tax to value, the bands also need to increase in range in order to reflect the vast difference in property values.

How can it be right that a million pound property in Westminster is the same or (often lower) CT rate than a 2 up, 2 down house in Yorkshire?

The aspect of CT which angers me most is that it is not related to USE. Parents pay nothing extra for the resources which their children suck up and are heavily subsidised by single person households. A 25% discount simply does not cut it.

@simitra

The aspect of CT which angers me most is that it is not related to USE. Parents pay nothing extra for the resources which their children suck up and are heavily subsidised by single person households. A 25% discount simply does not cut it.

Matilda they didn't.
What's the justification for this rule anyway? Does anyone know?

@simitra

The aspect of CT which angers me most is that it is not related to USE. Parents pay nothing extra for the resources which their children suck up and are heavily subsidised by single person households. A 25% discount simply does not cut it.

What does USE mean?

@simitra

The aspect of CT which angers me most is that it is not related to USE. Parents pay nothing extra for the resources which their children suck up and are heavily subsidised by single person households. A 25% discount simply does not cut it.

I agree it would be much fairer to bill it per person in the household rather than on the value of the house had everyone pays no discounts. That would be much fairer than the current house value system as that has no bearing in facilities used.

@simitra

The aspect of CT which angers me most is that it is not related to USE. Parents pay nothing extra for the resources which their children suck up and are heavily subsidised by single person households. A 25% discount simply does not cut it.

And what about the childless people who paid for your schooling?

It's a bit like state pension, the working people pay for those who are retired. The adults pay for the current generation of children, who in turn will pay for the next generation.

They are saying your council tax isn't based on what you use...its cos its in caps it looks like an acronym

I agree it would be much fairer to bill it per person in the household rather than on the value of the house had everyone pays no discounts. That would be much fairer than the current house value system as that has no bearing in facilities used

You could be on to something there. However, you'd have to take ability to pay into account or else we might see a re-run of the poll tax riots of the 1990s.

I agree it would be much fairer to bill it per person in the household rather than on the value of the house had everyone pays no discounts. That would be much fairer than the current house value system as that has no bearing in facilities used

They tried billing per person, called the poll tax / community charge, which certainly wasn't fair, why should a young person on a trainee wage or the office cleaner pay the same as the Chief Exec?
How do you deal with second homes and holidays let's?

I still don't know what USE means, but clearly its something to do with not having kids.

I don't have them, but as they're going to be looking after to me when I'm in a nursing home, i accept I need to fund their education, health and safety now. I'm not disabled but still happy to fund their care as well.

@Dreamstate

They are saying your council tax isn't based on what you use...its cos its in caps it looks like an acronym

Ahh....sorry. I thought it stood for something!

@simitra

The aspect of CT which angers me most is that it is not related to USE. Parents pay nothing extra for the resources which their children suck up and are heavily subsidised by single person households. A 25% discount simply does not cut it.

Not sure my son has sucked up resources, actually. What are you referring to? Schools are the one thing that comes out of the central grant, so council tax doesn't pay for that.

Libraries and leisure centres are for all, and you pay to use leisure centres.

What resources do you think children suck up. What about adults who fly tip and suck up resources when the council has to clear their rubbish up?

I said above, I'd just increase income tax and have a grant from central government to councils. I'd also streamline councils to have fewer layers of government - where I am we have parish/district/county - I think one unitary authority could probably do it all.

And then punitive local taxes on holiday lets and second/third/multiple homes. and I mean punitive. £1000 a month or similar to "encourage" those landlords to put the houses back into residential use (obviously with exemptions for things like farm buildings which can only be used for holiday lets).

@thegcatsmother

Notcontent CTax is based on a combination of a property element (50%) and two personal elements (25% x2). You get a 25% discount on the personal element, which your neighbours don't.

What should have been done in 1989 was to give a choice between Community Charge and domestic rates, after a revaluation had been done and the rate poundage had been increased. I bet people would have chosen Community Charge.

Community Charge was not that hard to collect ( it used to be my job), but properties don't move the same way people do, so it stopped. I far preferred Community Charge as it was fairer imo. People were paying their share, so 4 adults in a house contributed more than 1 person in terms of paying for the services they used.

I agree. As a couple of very moderate earners when the Community Charge was introduced, we were very much in favour. We prioritised housing, and bought in the nicest area we could afford in the town we lived in. That meant before CC our rates were more than those of an identical house in another part of the same town, where the household income could be far more.

The government of the day lost an opportunity because the publicity around the Community Charge was very negative, even though it was based on individuals, IMO fairer.

I hooe people are aware that Local Authorities pay increasing % of their income from Council Tax on final salary pensions. Staff have secure employment, many roles are equally, if not more highly, paid than the private sector equivalent, and are often jobs for life.

There are certainly an awful lot of taxes people have to pay from council tax, income tax, NI (and soon the new 1.25% social care tax), VAT, on and on and on - even insurance premium tax seems to go up every year.

It is very hard to be "fair" - whatever fair is. I do think having all council income coming from central Government including anything from business rates might be simpler - if we could have fewer taxes even if they were higher that might work better but instead year on year we build more and more taxes and tax complications on the complicated tax edifice that already exists.

A few years ago I lived in a road with vastly different properties.

Our tiny house, which was worth about 200k 5 years ago, paid the same amount of council tax (band D) as the massive 5 bed houses on the same road for around £350k.

I challenged this, sending recent sale prices etc but it was thrown out on the basis of 1991 figures.

As it was a newish estate in 1991, I figured the valuation office had done a lazy drive by valuation and bunged our property into the same band as those much bigger houses. I had no evidence though of my sale price in 1991.

I spent a day at the library poring over old newspapers from 1991 in the property section. I found houses on our estate of a similar size to ours, along with the much bigger houses. The bigger houses were clearly band D prices but the smaller ones price and size fit band C.

I sent off my research and my house sale prices over the other years post 1991, asking why we paid a higher rate on a property that would so clearly have not been band D in 91, had had no extensions or modifications etc. To no avail.

It's a totally ridiculous, unfair system that needs overhauling.

@cptartapp

Matilda they didn't. What's the justification for this rule anyway? Does anyone know?

Then your solicitors were incompetent.

I do not know if there is any particular justification as such, but there does not need to be, it is what it is. Any rebanding has always taken place on sale and if you want to appeal you only have six months after purchase.

If you think everyone paying the same amount towards council services is a fair tax, when for some it will be tiny percentage of their income and for others a great big chunk of it...bloody hell!

@lockdownmadnessdotcom I'd guess the pp was referring to things covered by children's services eg everything to do with adoption, fostering, services for children in need (that's not the current term I dont think), support services for children w disabilities, child safeguarding. Also council run childcare provision (heavily subsidized) and things like playgrounds. But why parents should pay extra for these I dont know, I think they are things all good societies would provide.

@Yogsgirl

If you think everyone paying the same amount towards council services is a fair tax, when for some it will be tiny percentage of their income and for others a great big chunk of it...bloody hell!

That is the problem with "fair", it is always subjective. Why should people who make the least use of council services pay the most? Why should those with a higher value property pay more? Why should those with a higher income pay more? If the everyone nominally uses the same services (bin collection, roads, fire brigade etc.) then why should the cost not be split equally etc.

What you think is "fair", will not be something that everyone else agrees is fair. The reality is that many people will think that any proposed solution is unfair, so instead we have to look at what is practical.

@Yogsgirl

If you think everyone paying the same amount towards council services is a fair tax, when for some it will be tiny percentage of their income and for others a great big chunk of it...bloody hell!

What most definitely isn't fair is why a single person or parent pays more per person than someone who is lucky enough to found love and either married or living with a partner where more often than not there is 2 income streams coming in.

As always it the single person/parent who is always penalised when it comes to nay type of tax. That is what is most disgusting. And every time they roll out the big budget do you ever see anything for single people...never! There is always helps for all other types but the single person with a sole income stream.

@Yogsgirl

If you think everyone paying the same amount towards council services is a fair tax, when for some it will be tiny percentage of their income and for others a great big chunk of it...bloody hell!

Other goods and services aren't charged according to income though so it's not really any different. For example you don't pay less for food or services such as your phone, gas, electricity or water rate than a higher earner.

Our council tax bill went up 5.9% this year and takes it to over £4K . I looked up what council tax in our area covers - all essential services which we may need at some point in our lives. As much as I hate paying it, I wouldn’t like services to be cut or reduced.

Adult Social Care
Housing
Waste & Cleaning Services
Environment (Parking, highways and transport)
Regeneration, planning and economic development
Culture and communities
Public Health Support Services
Housing Benefit and Council Tax Benefit
Education
Supporting vulnerable families
Early Years & Young People

That's because phones, water, food, etc.are provided by private companies, so not a tax- they are profit led services!

Council tax pays for a plethora of things including libraries, roads, refuse collection, street lighting, social care, parks, museums, leisure facilities etc. Hopefully things that benefit society as a whole and support those who are less fortunate. As someone who is lucky enough to be able to afford a nice house in a higher band then I don't begrudge paying a little bit more to allow others who are less well off to pay a bit less!

On the whole the council tax is fairer, unless of course your only view of fair is equal!

@Yogsgirl

If you think everyone paying the same amount towards council services is a fair tax, when for some it will be tiny percentage of their income and for others a great big chunk of it...bloody hell!

But that is actually what the current system very often does. My neighbours are a couple who both work full time and their Council Tax bill is a much smaller percentage of their income than mine is. So yes, bloody hell!