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?

And quite a chunk goes to local government final salary pensions. Still one of the better schemes.

I think the Community charge had some merit. Would a local income tax be fairer? In our case it would. We are a fairly low income pensioner couple who don’t pay income tax, but we don’t get any benefits, so pay full council tax. Our single neighbour has an income of double ours, but gets a 25% discount.

Everyone will have their own idea of fairness, usually depending on their own situation.

I don’t think there’s any way equaling it out for everyone
There’s too many variables
what would you do if there’s 4 people in the house charge 200% of flat rate

the only way you could do it would be like the poll tax and the overwhelming view of the country was we didn’t want it
there was riots

Ask for banding to be reassessed.
Council tax is an abomination. Unfair extortionate and unfairly higher is poorer areas.

Well, you could choose to live with another person (flat-share) if you don't like it?

sorry I think yabu.
the economies of scale are not restricted to people who are in relationships, you can access the same efficiency by having a lodger/houseshare with another single person. it's fair enough that you choose not to do so but living with one person per dwelling is inherently less efficient, just like travelling one person per vehicle is. it costs the council just as much to collect the bin & recycling from a single person household. it costs just as much to light, police and maintain a street full of sole-occupancy dwellings as it woukd if the same street had twice the occupants. the 25% discount for sole occupancy is about right. your dwelling having only one adult in it does not halve the costs of serving that dwelling. It's possible that with some complex calculations there might be a way to split the costs in a more transparently fair way, but the additional admin cost would be a significant additional cost pitting everyone's tax up, making such tinkering unwise. better to have a broad and easily applied simple rule, which we have.

Is ‘get a lodger’ the new ‘cancel the cheque’?

I will admit my maths isn’t the best but surely everyone saying in a bemused tone ‘but but what is the solution then’ - for single people to have a 50% discount, not 25?

Surely?

But by that same logic should a single parent with say 4 kids get the single person discount as they are likely to be generating more rubbish than a couple

It isn’t about rubbish, it’s about bins. Everybody’s bins are emptied once a fortnight (which I think is revolting personally but that is by the by.) Full or empty, that is what happens.

But by that logic, imagine three houses in a row; all the same size, all taking up the same plot and all receiving equal services (and imagining council tax is £200 a month).

House A has two adults and their two adult children living there and all working. They pay £200 between four.

House B has two adults. They pay £200 between two.

House C has one adult. That person pays £100.

Now household B is being treated ‘unfairly’.

Unless people want to start being charged by number of occupants, there has to be some acceptable that the tax is being paid on the chosen property, regardless of the number of people living there.

Ooh, that reminded me of another gripe of mine. I used to have a car with a fairly big (2.7 litre) petrol engine. Tax based on emissions. It was 10 years old and only had about 36,000 miles on the clock when I sold it. Tax was over £500 a year. Tax bracket changed to emissions based after Id bought it. So with that mileage it produced barely any emissions (because it spent most days parked outside my house going nowhere) than my current 6 year old 1.6 litre car which has got about 40k on the clock but is used every day.

shakes fist at sky

we have tried that. Its called the poll tax. Its never worked out well, has it

Although I see your point, personally I don’t mind paying for the bins being collected and the police. Though I am lucky in that I live in a rough town but the council work very hard to make it better.
I also made sure to move to a band a property as well-it was a big part of why I bought my flat.
Maybe you should get more upset about how the government as a whole bang on about ‘hard working family’s’ while completely ignoring the needs of the large single household population.

OP, you are right, as a single occupier you pay more council tax per head than couples. On the other hand, couples receive less per head in benefits than singletons. I'd imagine if there was to be some sort of 'levelling up' the overall outcome would be higher taxes for all.

Like the Poll Tax? I was loads better off under Poll Tax as a single person but there were legendary riots as people thought it was the most evil thing ever.

You're just introducing a whole new topic - should people with children pay more council tax than people without? I would say No don't bring children into it stick to the number of adults in a property as that is controversial enough!

It is already accepted that single people in a property pay less than a couple (25% less). The only question is should that be reduced to 50% less or 40% less or is a 25% reducation for single people fair?

I don’t disagree with this (and I say this as a married person) but isn’t that what the Poll tax was?

I’m still not quite sure what was wrong with it, but it caused loads of riots in the 90’s.

I think alongside this councils need to actually offer equal services. My general waste bin was stolen and I had to pay £30 +P&P to replace it but in my parents borough they’d have replaced it for free 🤔

It is the house that is taxed not you. The couple next door are not getting separate tax bills they are getting one for the house. You are getting a discount as your house only has one person.

I’m with you, OP, speaking as a married person who is totally aware of the benefits of being in a couple and sharing the load.

The ‘my husband pays the bills’ comments upthread sound so smug and totally miss the point 🙄

Er cos children are dependents who cost money but cannot earn money?

Agreed - and I'm also married but I can see it from the point of view of a single person. Lots of people on this thread seem to lack empathy alongside basic maths skills.

It’s not ideal but I can’t be bothered to waste my energy stressing about something I have no control over.

My Mum added me to her insurance so I can borrow her car occasionally, and it reduced the premiums - it isn't about adding a man, it is adding another driver who has had a licence for years and no accidents.

You have a choice too. You choose to live alone. Therefore you pay the 50% property element alone and get 50% discount on the person element. If you had a flatmate you'd share your space and also share both the 50% property element and pay 50% each of the person element. Your choice to live alone is expensive.

Single people have the option not to live alone.

When you get your council tax bill it shows yiu what the money is spent on.

50% of your bill does not go on emptying your bins.

Some people on this thread appear to think that's what it mainly pays for!