Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Government announcing doubling council tax double for band G & H

174 replies

spookymelon666 · 07/11/2025 07:51

I know it’s not yet set in stone. We can’t afford it. There’s an assumption that these are high value houses. My house is worth no more than 300K 3 bedroom detached 125m2 with no front garden or driveway or garage and a tiny back garden and we are band G in Scotland. I’m so frustrated by the cost of living. We already can’t afford any holidays. AIBU that this isn’t fair?

OP posts:
MidnightPatrol · 07/11/2025 09:42

Sunshineandoranges · 07/11/2025 09:31

Outer london and we,two older people, pay more than four thousand pounds per year council tax. State pensions plus ten thousand teacher pension is our income plus some savings.Lived in my house thirty years. House prices are insane.

Imagine being in your thirties/forties or below - same set up but the mortgage on the house is also £3-4k… a month.

Agree cost of housing just ridiculous - making it even worse is… just wow really.

vellichoria · 07/11/2025 09:43

I don't think they are going to double anything. Personally, I think it's a red herring designed to horrify people at first with huge numbers, so that any increases they bring in later on don't seem so bad by comparison and people feel relieved rather than angry at the government.

A bit like Trump with his 100% or 200% tariffs that then turn into 10%-25%. In his case, it's a negotiation tactic. In case of our government, a manipulation of public perception and opinion.

vellichoria · 07/11/2025 09:49

monkeysox · 07/11/2025 08:01

Yanbu. Council tax system is a joke.

Completely agree. Especially, the idea that it should be based on the value of people's homes, which is only relevant if they wanted to sell their houses. Until that moment, it's a purely hypothetical figure and only God knows why people have to pay their tax on that basis. It's like taxing people based on career progression potential and hypothetical salaries of the future.

My council tax rises by 5% every single year. If you compound that over the next 20 years, it will be like paying mortgage. We are already taxed on absolutely everything and every public service is still abysmal: everything is falling apart, nobody has enough capacity to provide any good service, it's never enough money... It's time for the public to start asking questions like what do they actually do with our money? Maybe the issue is mismanaging it rather than not taxing people enough!

ContentedAlpaca · 07/11/2025 09:49

vellichoria · 07/11/2025 09:43

I don't think they are going to double anything. Personally, I think it's a red herring designed to horrify people at first with huge numbers, so that any increases they bring in later on don't seem so bad by comparison and people feel relieved rather than angry at the government.

A bit like Trump with his 100% or 200% tariffs that then turn into 10%-25%. In his case, it's a negotiation tactic. In case of our government, a manipulation of public perception and opinion.

A bit like the tactic that was adopted during COVID. Keep people on shaky ground then introduce a slightly less bad thing.

A constant drip drip drip of anxiety and doom should not be adopted by any government.

Bruisername · 07/11/2025 09:51

So Bristol council spend 198k sending out apology letters because the council tax letters had a typo

so agree mismanagement costs a lot!!

SpaceRaccoon · 07/11/2025 09:54

It's also such a scam because you're paying CT on already taxed money.

Alexandra2001 · 07/11/2025 09:54

Gair · 07/11/2025 09:20

It would not be overnight but it can happen. Wales has already done it. Council Tax in Wales is currently paid according to house revaluation in 2003 (as opposed to 1991 in England), and a new law was passed in 2024 to revalue again in 2028 and every five years thereafter. So, it clearly can be done!

25.4m homes in England, 1.4m in Wales

The two are not comparable and we are already, by the time of the Budget, almost 18months in, 3.5 years to implement a CT re-banding?

The changes would kick in months before a GE.... i think not.

CandidLurker · 07/11/2025 09:57

The northern Labour Mayors will be under a lot of pressure if this happens. As someone else has said house prices have not risen to anywhere near the same levels in the north so you have ridiculous situations where someone in a terrace in Liverpool is paying more council tax than someone in a £10M property in Westminster.

Angela Rayner was actually meant to be looking at doing something to make council tax fairer across the regions. That’s probably gone the way of all things.

MidnightPatrol · 07/11/2025 09:57

vellichoria · 07/11/2025 09:49

Completely agree. Especially, the idea that it should be based on the value of people's homes, which is only relevant if they wanted to sell their houses. Until that moment, it's a purely hypothetical figure and only God knows why people have to pay their tax on that basis. It's like taxing people based on career progression potential and hypothetical salaries of the future.

My council tax rises by 5% every single year. If you compound that over the next 20 years, it will be like paying mortgage. We are already taxed on absolutely everything and every public service is still abysmal: everything is falling apart, nobody has enough capacity to provide any good service, it's never enough money... It's time for the public to start asking questions like what do they actually do with our money? Maybe the issue is mismanaging it rather than not taxing people enough!

Well in the case of council tax, we know what the problems are. Primarily the councils responsibilities around:

  • Pensions
  • SEN provision
  • Social care

All of which are spiralling at an astonishing rate, and they are legally obligated to fund.

HighLadyofTheNightCourt · 07/11/2025 09:58

Completely agree. Especially, the idea that it should be based on the value of people's homes, which is only relevant if they wanted to sell their houses. Until that moment, it's a purely hypothetical figure and only God knows why people have to pay their tax on that basis. It's like taxing people based on career progression potential and hypothetical salaries of the future.

It's based on the value of your house in 1991! Some areas of the country have seen house prices rise significantly whereas as others have seen more modest rises. You could be in a property in London worth millions and in band C but a property elsewhere which is worth a quarter of that is in band G. It's ridiculous.

vellichoria · 07/11/2025 10:00

ContentedAlpaca · 07/11/2025 09:49

A bit like the tactic that was adopted during COVID. Keep people on shaky ground then introduce a slightly less bad thing.

A constant drip drip drip of anxiety and doom should not be adopted by any government.

Indeed! As we know, during covid, the government leaned on the behavioural unit which helped manipulate public behaviour and opinion. I think it very much continues on every topic starting from our taxes to foreign policy and affairs (e.g. Ukraine)

MidnightPatrol · 07/11/2025 10:02

HighLadyofTheNightCourt · 07/11/2025 09:58

Completely agree. Especially, the idea that it should be based on the value of people's homes, which is only relevant if they wanted to sell their houses. Until that moment, it's a purely hypothetical figure and only God knows why people have to pay their tax on that basis. It's like taxing people based on career progression potential and hypothetical salaries of the future.

It's based on the value of your house in 1991! Some areas of the country have seen house prices rise significantly whereas as others have seen more modest rises. You could be in a property in London worth millions and in band C but a property elsewhere which is worth a quarter of that is in band G. It's ridiculous.

I don’t follow the logic that people who live in more expensive areas should be financially penalised for that though - while everyone is receiving (in principle) the same services.

Locally ranked - yes. Nationally - no.

vellichoria · 07/11/2025 10:02

HighLadyofTheNightCourt · 07/11/2025 09:58

Completely agree. Especially, the idea that it should be based on the value of people's homes, which is only relevant if they wanted to sell their houses. Until that moment, it's a purely hypothetical figure and only God knows why people have to pay their tax on that basis. It's like taxing people based on career progression potential and hypothetical salaries of the future.

It's based on the value of your house in 1991! Some areas of the country have seen house prices rise significantly whereas as others have seen more modest rises. You could be in a property in London worth millions and in band C but a property elsewhere which is worth a quarter of that is in band G. It's ridiculous.

I am aware of that and still think it's mad to base tax on hypothetical values which are irrelevant until someone sells their house. The idea that someone who lives in a huge house can pay less tax than someone who lives in a tiny house is even more ridiculous.

Bruisername · 07/11/2025 10:03

It’s depressing that they want to use division and anger to manage the population rather than hope and positivity

I think back to the time around the London Olympics and things were so positive. I feel sad that my kids are becoming adults in the current state of affairs.

SpaceRaccoon · 07/11/2025 10:03

MidnightPatrol · 07/11/2025 10:02

I don’t follow the logic that people who live in more expensive areas should be financially penalised for that though - while everyone is receiving (in principle) the same services.

Locally ranked - yes. Nationally - no.

It's mad. Either the person in the higher banded house already pays a lot in tax, if they have a higher income - or they don't, in which case they can't afford a doubling of the bill anyway.

ContentedAlpaca · 07/11/2025 10:03

HighLadyofTheNightCourt · 07/11/2025 09:58

Completely agree. Especially, the idea that it should be based on the value of people's homes, which is only relevant if they wanted to sell their houses. Until that moment, it's a purely hypothetical figure and only God knows why people have to pay their tax on that basis. It's like taxing people based on career progression potential and hypothetical salaries of the future.

It's based on the value of your house in 1991! Some areas of the country have seen house prices rise significantly whereas as others have seen more modest rises. You could be in a property in London worth millions and in band C but a property elsewhere which is worth a quarter of that is in band G. It's ridiculous.

When we moved into our house 11 years ago it was reassessed. This seems fair so that a home owner is not charged for any improvements made on their own home

goingundergroundnextyear · 07/11/2025 10:06

Devolved gov't or not, SNP could easily decide on a similar tax increase.
I live in NE Scotland where we have one of the highest house price falls in the UK.
My Band G house would be lucky to even fetch £400k, but a £1M+ Band H only pays £1k more in council tax.

vellichoria · 07/11/2025 10:07

MidnightPatrol · 07/11/2025 10:02

I don’t follow the logic that people who live in more expensive areas should be financially penalised for that though - while everyone is receiving (in principle) the same services.

Locally ranked - yes. Nationally - no.

Taxes are never fair unfortunately.

I have a number of elderly neighbours who have lived in their houses since 1970s when their houses were built. I also don't see how it's their fault that house prices have been rising like there is no tomorrow since then. Their pensions certainly haven't been catching up! And I certainly don't believe that the value of their homes should come into determining the level of tax they pay: these people haven't moved anywhere since 1970s. I don't see why anyone should be penalised either for the fact that their house prices have gone up or that the area they live in is seen as expensive.

ContentedAlpaca · 07/11/2025 10:08

HighLadyofTheNightCourt · 07/11/2025 09:58

Completely agree. Especially, the idea that it should be based on the value of people's homes, which is only relevant if they wanted to sell their houses. Until that moment, it's a purely hypothetical figure and only God knows why people have to pay their tax on that basis. It's like taxing people based on career progression potential and hypothetical salaries of the future.

It's based on the value of your house in 1991! Some areas of the country have seen house prices rise significantly whereas as others have seen more modest rises. You could be in a property in London worth millions and in band C but a property elsewhere which is worth a quarter of that is in band G. It's ridiculous.

A lot of London properties are rented. My son's one bed attic flat that could only comfortably be rented by two earners is band C. It is in someone else's million pound home that they run six tiny flats from. He doesn't see much of the other tenants but none of them are wealthy.

randomchap · 07/11/2025 10:08

SpaceRaccoon · 07/11/2025 09:54

It's also such a scam because you're paying CT on already taxed money.

And vat, stamp duty, car tax, etc all paid on previously taxed money. I don't get your point. Are you suggesting we get rid of all taxes but income tax?

Alpacajigsaw · 07/11/2025 10:08

Whole council tax system is shit. We are in a 3 bed semi in a not particularly posh area near Glasgow and are band E. Meantime I recall during Covid people in multi million pound houses down south getting rebates as they were band C and D.

GCAcademic · 07/11/2025 10:09

ContentedAlpaca · 07/11/2025 09:49

A bit like the tactic that was adopted during COVID. Keep people on shaky ground then introduce a slightly less bad thing.

A constant drip drip drip of anxiety and doom should not be adopted by any government.

I agree, it's a terrible tactic to sustain constant fear. It completely stalls the economy.

Gair · 07/11/2025 10:11

vellichoria · 07/11/2025 09:49

Completely agree. Especially, the idea that it should be based on the value of people's homes, which is only relevant if they wanted to sell their houses. Until that moment, it's a purely hypothetical figure and only God knows why people have to pay their tax on that basis. It's like taxing people based on career progression potential and hypothetical salaries of the future.

My council tax rises by 5% every single year. If you compound that over the next 20 years, it will be like paying mortgage. We are already taxed on absolutely everything and every public service is still abysmal: everything is falling apart, nobody has enough capacity to provide any good service, it's never enough money... It's time for the public to start asking questions like what do they actually do with our money? Maybe the issue is mismanaging it rather than not taxing people enough!

I agree with many of your points. However, your Council Tax is not based on the absolute value of your, it is based upon the value of your home in relation to those in the same local authority. Which us why you can end up paying more Council Tax on a modest but nice house in a deprived area than on a mansion in Kensington.

There might well be tax wastage through mismanagement, but I don't think that this is a significant issue tbh. The main problem is that we want great (European style) services whilst not paying comensurate levels of tax - tax take as a percentage for Basic Rate payers is much lower than in many European countries.

mo25 · 07/11/2025 10:16

Council tax is bonkers. People living in expensive areas in the same local authority as more significant deprivation will be absolutely hammered even if nationally they are not particularly wealthy. The whole thing should be centralised as the current system is manifestly unfair. The value of my home is expensive for my city but would be average in the SE. I can’t earn what I would in London though. Yet I am likely to be paying £10k a year if the papers are to be believed as the bandings reflect local value (and the gap didn’t used to be so significant).

mo25 · 07/11/2025 10:18

vellichoria · 07/11/2025 10:07

Taxes are never fair unfortunately.

I have a number of elderly neighbours who have lived in their houses since 1970s when their houses were built. I also don't see how it's their fault that house prices have been rising like there is no tomorrow since then. Their pensions certainly haven't been catching up! And I certainly don't believe that the value of their homes should come into determining the level of tax they pay: these people haven't moved anywhere since 1970s. I don't see why anyone should be penalised either for the fact that their house prices have gone up or that the area they live in is seen as expensive.

This. Inflation is just a tax grab.