Fucking Council Tax Single Person Penalty

[Honper]

Or: why should I pay 50% more tax than my neighbours?

Council tax is a regressive abomination anyway and ofc like everyone else I resent paying it so my useless council can spend thousands on things like Tree Stories Near You or Four Foot Long Cycle Path Initiatives while failing to patch potholes so big that geese nest in them but still. As a single person I have a very particular axe to grind wrt paying 50% more TAX than someone in a couple.

I know that single life is more expensive, economies of scale yadda yadda and I already pay out proportionally more from my wages for bills, food and so on. I get that and it's not great but it's how it is.

But why is my tax liability so much greater than that of my married neighbours? I pay 50% more tax than each of them.

Come on, that's not right is it? It's not a bill. It's a tax. Single people's tax burden should not be so much more.

Or should it? AIBU?

@Q2C4 exactly, we already tax income too much and assets too little.

Why?

It wouldn't be rocket science to re evaluate the higher bands... the most expensive properties in Cornwall pay just over double what a band D property pays, yet the value of that house could be 4 or 5 x + as much.

or do you mean the Cons don't want to upset their base?

The UK cannot borrow, it can't really tax the average worker more... yet has huge social and health issues which only money can solve, so where does the cash come from?

I agree. If it only covers 25% of the bill anyway then just add it to income tax.

I guess singles pay more for the « luxury » of living on their own vs a household with several adults (couple or roommates).
As the poll tax is not coming back, paying per household is the fair alternative.

As a single person you are taxed the same as anyone else. Tax is individual: married or not. And You can also qualify for all benefits your circumstances are applicable for the same as anyone else ( there are no benefits only paid to legal couples vs not paid to singles…in fact single parents can often be penalised for moving in with new partner even when new partner is not contributing to step children)

yep, one exception…marriage allowance. Paid between £500-900 to the poorest couples. It is means tested . Yep, give you that, it’s a bit of a shit allowance introduced in 2013 to encourage Tory values of marriage and voters…fairly new allowance and one I expect a labour partly will drop for its unfairness and go back to including the money in standard UC calculations. Whilst you could claim married man’s tax allowance until late 90s, in reality few families qualified unless very poor, you’d need to go back to 60s to have felt real benefit from it.

Your turn, list all the benefits you are so angry on missing out on because you are single….

as for benefits you miss out on for being child free…yep, there are a few. But you are not paying for feeding, heating, clothing, housing a few unwaged little people. That costs more than even average salaried people can afford these days and qualifies for various tax allowances. We do actually need population regeneration as a society. Take away those benefits and you’ll plunge millions of women into even more poverty for their entire lifetime simply down to the fact that they’re the ones that have to grow a baby from 2 cells to 7lb of flesh and bones from their own bodily resources, and that does take a toll on a human body, as does, for many women, growing that 7lb to 30lb of flesh and bones through their own resources. Having kids doesn’t make you wealthier cos of extra benefits, it is a poverty trap for millions already, even the relatively well paid today struggle . The allowances and benefits are all means tested today and it means an offset to the cost that having those extra humans to care for. Nobody gets richer or better off than a single person for having kids

you want to feel angry about that? I don’t know why you are single and childless and maybe you’ve reasons to be angry. But I think most of society agrees it’s sensible to ensure we have a future generation and we give them all the best start we can with targeted support that we as society as a whole pay up a bill for. Just like most of uk society thinks having nhs means paying for idiots who’ve done things to risk their health, to ensure it is always there to support our hugely expensive cancer treatment, heart attack etc.

taxes will never be fair - that’s not the point- the point of tax is to pay for the needs of society as a whole . Yep, they could be made fairer in many ways but that depends on your own political leanings and what government wants to bribe which voting group 🤷🏼‍♀️. I personally think it is outrageous that corporations are paying big dividends and big bonuses, whilst having workers who need tax credits to survive. But, the principle of paying my taxes as a way to pay back to society and hopefully pay where I can for people who cant, is actually a pretty good feeling.

and I live on my own. No partner. No dependants.

so you’ve basically just argued that children can live on fresh air?

I never said I was angry. Who said I was angry but you....

I can have an opinion without being angry.

I don't have a problem paying my taxes for society needs. But when those groups of people who get help and still want more its a bit rich really yet its perfectly okay to moan about how the help is not enough. Yet here I am saying the help is not enough and people like you just say whatever get over it basically.

What got right up my nose was that adding a man to my car insurance brought the premiums way down
When my DP added me to his insurance it brought everything down. I'm a woman and I only have a provisional licence... misses point of thread

@Newlifestartingatlast I think it was pretty obvious that I was saying that nobody can live on fresh air, so why are adults without children expected to? I’m obviously glad that kids don’t starve because I’m not a sociopath.

But it costs less to feed one adult than it does to feed one adult and three children.

My friend has three children and her grocery bill is about 2.5 times that of mine and my partner's.

But families costs are SO much higher @fitzwilliamdarcy. They have extra people to feed and clothe plus childcare costs as much as rent or mortgage! And people say that having children is a choice - which it is - but if everyone stopped having them then who would pay the pensions / healthcare / whatever when today's adults retire? Plus living alone is a choice too.

No. Highway maintenance comes from council tax.

I wasn’t suggesting we start impoverishing families. I was saying that when I was single I was pretty much destitute, living on pot noodles, never having the heating on etc. That isn’t an acceptable way for anyone to live in a rich country. Pointing that out isn’t suggesting that anyone else should live like that, for gods sake. Your grocery bills may have been higher than mine so you got more help - great. But that doesn’t mean that I didn’t need any help at all.

That we can’t literally talk about this on a thread aimed at the financial difficulties single people experience without families telling us we don’t care about kids or society is completely maddening.

But there is help for single people - they can claim benefits. There are additional /higher benefits for people with children as it recognised there are additional costs involved in raising children.

For example if you are single and you need to reduce costs you could move to a studio flat or a house share, you can't do that as easily with four children.

@Ginmonkeyagain The benefits for single people are laughable - try and live on jobseekers. I wasn’t eligible for anything as I earned just over the threshold but my housing and commuting costs ate up my salary.

And I don’t know about you but I don’t think 45 year olds should have to flatshare because wages are so low and there’s no help, just because they’re single. Not in a rich country.

@Memeagain

bitter about what ? Having to pay an extortionate amount? She’s right to! Or did you mean bitter about something else?

I mean yes low wages are an issue, single working people can get UC but obviously the qualification thresholds and amounts are different.

High housing and commuting costs are an issue but why should housing or commuting costs be subsided because you are single? Fixed costs like council tax, water bills and rent are always going to be higher if you have no one to share them with. That is life and why any people have lodgers or flat share.

How little did you earn? Because during my training year aged 21 I got £10100 which came to £700 take home back in 2004/2005. Rent was £350, council tax was £70electric and has £30 each, so I'd around £200 to pay for everything else. It wasn't great, I was essentially vegetarian because meat was too expensive, I cooked everything from scratch using frozen veg and fruit from farmfoods and most meals were pasta and homemade sauces or homemade soups and value bread, treats were rare but I wasn't destitute even under minimum wage

Why shouldn't a 45 yr old flatshare but a 25yr old should?

@Forgooodnesssakenow I’m not going to break it down but my rent was more (I’ve not had rent that cheap since I was a student) and my commuting costs were around £150 per month. So out of that extra £200 you had, I had less than £50.

Yes arguably I could’ve moved cities, left my family behind and lived with total strangers and had an extra £100 but what an existence.

@Forgooodnesssakenow Because sharing a flat at 25 is very different to sharing a flat at 45. How many 45 year olds do you think would enjoy living with strangers? I did my time sharing and it was very draining even for a young un.

I’m going to stop commenting now as I don’t think either of us is going to change our mind on this and it’s not a great use of our time.

but you are not paying double are you? You are paying 80% they are paying 100% collectively, They get one bin you get one bin etc.. if we went back to a clone of poll tax I would bet your amount would increase it always happens when the decide to make things "fairer" (aka that man who complained about the woman's pension age at 60 look what happened when the government figured they could adapt that

I dont disagree with it is appalling that 45 year olds need to flat share. But the issue is poor wages, corporations paying out huge dividends and bonus and expecting tax payers to make up wages that aren’t enough to live on. And high housing costs- partly cos governments have stripped this country of good council housing and created profit in the business of running affordable houses .
Thats an issue that impacts ALL people on low wages and insecure jobs. And it’s not getting any better. that’s the root cause - the benefits that come to larger families would then be reduced and more money could be paid into stuff we need like a working nhs . The issue right now and for short term future lies with the extremely right wing government that is willing to bung money for contracts at their mates, piss money down the markets on stupid disasterous mini budgets, or get a large proportion of this country deluded into thinking brexit would make them better off. And now they then pretend it’s wage inflation at fault and they’ve got to stop pay rises that would get wages back to where they were 10 years ago.

the Only power you have to do anything is to ensure you vote.

I think it was becuase the discussion started with tone that families have it easier than singletons…that was the pitch. A point that it wasn’t fair for singles to pay 75%.

if this had been pitched at how unfair or expensive tax system is and how it hurts different groups differently, then yep, you’d have had a more balanced discussion.

the real issue here, is not the single people who struggle pitching arguments with families who struggle over who gets what, and how much worse it is for their group…the real argument is the proportion of tax paid by the wealthy vs the poor which is really, really not fair . Or the proportion of tax paid by corporations vs bonuses/ dividends/profits . It’s the inequality that is obscene.

it is very deliberately divisive for any one just about managing/ not managing to post an argument to divide singles vs families. Just what the rich want you to do- divide and rule 🤷🏼‍♀️

I agree. It's another unfair tax on single people.