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?

@amillionrosepetals I am assuming you are single. Don't you get a single person reduction?

[quote Yogsgirl]@amillionrosepetals I am assuming you are single. Don't you get a single person reduction?[/quote]
Yes, I do claim it. But I'm retired now so my income has reduced by a fair bit. No reduction in Council Tax though. It just seems to be a choice of a bill per person irrespective of income or a bill per property irrespective of income so no fairness anywhere.

The assumption is, if you can afford the house you can afford the tax.

@Yogsgirl

The assumption is, if you can afford the house you can afford the tax.

This, plus it's not up to the taxpayer to assist people who have chosen to live in a much more expensive house than they can afford the council tax for or, if they're the typical 'asset rich cash poor' pensioner who has benefitted from massive unearned untaxed housing wealth growth, they have options to help them solve the affordability problem, ie downsizing or equity release, neither of which are generally available to younger people who have large mortgages to pay and the costs of raising children.

@Yogsgirl

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!

It's not because those services are private. Even when they were nationalised people still paid for what they used rather than on the basis of what they earned. Nobody ever argued that they should pay less for gas, electricity, water etc because they earned less before the companies were privatised.

@Belladonna12 maybe, but most things are self regulating- if you have less money you choose to us less and the smaller your property the less it costs to heat etc. The user has some control, whereas this is not true of other services such as refuse collection, street maintenance, eduction etc.

If you start arguing about only paying for what you use, where does that leave things like Social Work, many of us never need their help until we hit old age and become vulnerable?
The special needs teacher in school, I don't need it my kids don't so I'm not paying?

It just doesn't work like that, in a civilised society we all pay to support the weakest.

exactly @Lockdownbear

Okay if we are going to go down that road of its not up to the taxpayer to assist people who choose expensive houses, well I'm a taxpayer and childless, its not up to be to pay for other people who choose to have children. Yes thats right in majority of cases you choose to have a child. Why should I who through medical reasons not have one assist those who CHOOSE to have them.

Where shall we go next....okay why should I as a taxpayer have to assist those who CHOOSE to not have healthy lifes that leads to problems and need the NHS more

[quote Yogsgirl]@Belladonna12 maybe, but most things are self regulating- if you have less money you choose to us less and the smaller your property the less it costs to heat etc. The user has some control, whereas this is not true of other services such as refuse collection, street maintenance, eduction etc.[/quote]
People with smaller properties are likely to have less money than those with larger properties and/or there are fewer people in them using services.

For people on minimum wage, council tax band b in this region is 15% of their take home. So yes absolutely it's a great big chunk of their income.

@Belladonna12 I agree- that's what I just said!

@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.

Really? The biggest spend on council's budgets is social care. Children and adults in care. Most people will not use children's social care but thankfully it is there to support those children and families who need it. As for adult social care, what about those who have made no provision for their old age? Well we support them as any civilised society should do. A few parks and libraries is nowhere near the cost and charging more fir families would make barely any difference

@Lockdownbear

If you start arguing about only paying for what you use, where does that leave things like Social Work, many of us never need their help until we hit old age and become vulnerable? The special needs teacher in school, I don't need it my kids don't so I'm not paying?

It just doesn't work like that, in a civilised society we all pay to support the weakest.

I quite agree.

The welfare state, with all its faults, is a marvellous safety net and don't grudge a penny of my income which contributes to 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.

Surely families pay more council tax on average because they occupy bigger properties than the average single person?

@Yogsgirl

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.

Surely families pay more council tax on average because they occupy bigger properties than the average single person?

Of course they don’t. MN is constantly throwing its toys out of its pram about all the old people rattling about in their huge houses. There are lots of couples living in three and four bed houses without a child in sight.

Maybe so but I think the majority of larger houses are occupied by families with children, at least until the children leave home.

I live alone now in a three bed semi, not huge obviously but bigger than average; I'm quite happy to pay towards the needs of children, why would I not be? Children are the future and need to be nourished!

Yes, and if those singletons rattling round in big houses pay more council tax then surely that's only right!

@Yogsgirl

Yes, and if those singletons rattling round in big houses pay more council tax then surely that's only right!

It’s not if you think, like the pp, that the amount you pay should be related to use. I don’t agree with her. I believe in societal responsibility.

@Yogsgirl

Yes, and if those singletons rattling round in big houses pay more council tax then surely that's only right!

It still makes no sense that it is related to the size, or value of the home. How does a singleton in a six bedroom house cost the council more than a singleton in a two bed house?

It still makes no sense that it is related to the size, or value of the home. How does a singleton in a six bedroom house cost the council more than a singleton in a two bed house?

There is an assumption that if you can afford a big house you can afford to pay more. In principle it makes sense but I do think the single person discount should be higher 35%

A singleton could be quite costly if that singleton is relying on the Social Work to send carers multiple times per day.

None of us can say that we won't be involved in an accident next week and need carers when we get out of hospital.

This thread is just going round in circles.

Some people don't understand how taxes work and there are more people than I realised only willing to put in what they directly take out.

A staggering number of people seem only want to pay what they get out. But I can guarantee when they need that extra support they'll be bouncing around trying to get it.

Me, I've thrashed out some of my own thoughts on this thread concluded some sort of tie to property size / value makes sense. Any sort of personal / income sort of tax isnt really going to work with the number of empty or only occasionally occupied houses and people who pay themselves dividends.

Seems an age ago since the Poll Tax riots

Surely it would be more efficient to just increase the rate of income tax? So much money must get spent administering council tax!