Council Tax - Fairer Share Campaign

[backslashruby]

I'd be interested to know what people think of this, especially considering rumours that the 25% single person's discount may be abolished.

fairershare.org.uk/

The main points are:

Council tax, Stamp Duty and Bedroom Tax would be abolished and replaced with a Proportional Property Tax

Annual and automated valuations*

Exemptions would end

Based on .48% of property value but .96% for overseas investors

Landlord pays, not tenant (but I could not find any reference to social housing tenants)

They claim 75% of households would see a reduction but any increases are capped at £100 per month (but they do not say if this is transitional in any way and the reduction is based on the full Council Tax so not necessarily a reduction for single householders)

Rises annually by average rise in property values over last 3 years but would stay same or reduce if property values stagnate or fall.

• The full explanation is;

• The existing Valuation Office Agency (VOA) will continue to be responsible for valuation, though under our system most valuations will derive from actual sales data and recent changes to house values in your area. We believe the government could use the wealth of data it already has to build an algorithm similar to those used by websites like Zoopla and Rightmove in making their estimates. Such a system would allow each and every home to be accurately valued based on its unique characteristics.

Personally I would be paying roughly the same as I am paying now but most of the houses in my street are occupied by more than 1 person so they would all get reduced bills.

My main reservations are:

They are a bit vague, or naive even, about valuations being accurate although presumably you could appeal

I do not believe that bills would stay static/fall in line with house prices

High house price increases would mean large increases in bills

Tenants are the ones using local services so should pay the tax themselves

What do you think?

A simple per capita fee is the fairest way to fund local services.

You would think so, but look what happened last time they tried that!

Surely if you want it centralized what you're actually asking for is an increase in income tax and then this to be fairly distributed between councils? And get rid of CT altogether?

For those that feel they get nothing apart from their bins collected, I'm sure you still have access to services should you want them. The idea is that council tax makes the area you live in better for everyone. Currently though I would agree with most that this isn't happening, huge potholes etc round here. Maybe simply upping income tax would create an easier to manage system and so less waste leaving more for parks and libraries

Take 2 hypothetical towns, similar size and housing stock (and in a municipal area).

Except one is down south, with an average house price at 500,000. And one is up north with an average house price of 250,000.
One council will get twice the funds of the other, etc be expected to support the same number if people.

No way this can work unless the mo ey goes to a central authority, and is redistributed nationally.

Fwiw, we would benifit by about £400 a year, having already paid stamp duty. We would be quids in if we moved, and didn't have to pay any more stamp duty.

It would be nice to remove the inequality where some of the richest boroughs pay lower council tax for similar house bands when compared to poor boroughs (we live in a deprived area, our council tax is one of the highest around) but I don't think this is the way to do it.

The idea of annual valuations is ridiculous. The cost of administrating that would outweigh any additional tax raised.

Bedroom tax only applies to people receiving benefits towards their housing costs if they are under-occupying a rental property. Owner occupiers don't pay anything. The idea that landlords pay rather than renters is incompatible with it replacing the bedroom tax.

Stamp duty is only paid once every couple of decades if you buy expecting to stay put, and is differentially applied depending on whether it's your main home. Replacing it with a flat annual property tax would discriminate against those who just want to own one property to live in, to the benefit of property exploiters.

Council tax could certainly do with reforming as the wealthy don't pay nearly enough. Reducing income tax by a few % and balancing the tax take to be revenue neutral with higher VAT, stricter VAT rules to ensure no one can use VAT reclaim for anything that is just their living expenses, and a steeper property tax especially on larger homes be a good move because too many people are able to fiddle their tax affairs to appear poor whilst enjoying a very affluent lifestyle, so tax the lifestyle rather than the income.

Take 2 hypothetical towns, similar size and housing stock (and in a municipal area).
Except one is down south, with an average house price at 500,000. And one is up north with an average house price of 250,000.
One council will get twice the funds of the other, etc be expected to support the same number if people.

It's often the people from the more expensive areas who struggle the most. The house prices being higher mean a lot of people have less money - especially as often wages aren't massively higher (and often not higher at all) in the more expensive place.

In every area, including the most expensive, there's locals on minimum wage, and disabled people and carers on benefits.

So the town with cheaper house prices can sometimes get more funds because the lower house prices mean people have more disposable income (the more expensive areas, people's money goes on mortgages or rents).

Council tax based on property value actually unfairly penalises people from more expensive towns. A single income household from a more expensive area, on a low or average income, renting a 1 or 2 bedroom flat can be in a higher council tax band than a dual income owner occupier of a 2 or 3 bedroom house in a less expensive area.

Also not every council spends the council tax well. Especially areas generally thought of as expensive. Poorer people from those areas are often left to flounder with little in the way of council services.

The poorest and most vulnerable from these areas are often massively overlooked - not just by the wider public (who assume everyone in those areas are rich) but by their own councils.

No.

It should be per adult head not on property value.

Awful if they get rid of the single person discount as well- in my opinion that should be 50% anyway!

Anyone who thinks all exemptions/disregards/discounts/band reductions should end doesn’t understand what all the exemptions etc. are for or why they are in place.

No way this can work unless the money goes to a central authority, and is redistributed nationally.

I think that's the best option. Essential public services - access and quality, shouldn't be a postcode lottery and should be nationally funded. Might also be better to just scrap council tax and increase income tax. Perhaps have a local income tax to fund nice to have but not essential services/, facilities/activities.

Retuning to previous posts re council tax and more expensive areas.

Take London for an easy example. Average income/wealth figures there are distorted by the fact that, although there's some very wealthy people there, it's also got some of the highest levels of deprivation in the UK.

It's a city of extremes including extreme inequality. It actually has the lowest wages in the UK - despite also the highest house prices (see below).

https://www.timeout.com/london/news/the-five-lowest-paid-areas-in-the-uk-are-all-in-london-022424

And although a couple of London councils have low council tax, not all do - and London public services are pretty much nothing non existent (officially exist but in reality there's no help for those in need.

(I thought my council (not London) was bad for public services but I know from friends in London it's even worse there).

In London in particular but also other areas with inflated house prices, social cleansing happens and homelessness (eg. London has the highest homeless rate in the UK). As does the existence of the "hidden poor" in substandard rentals. I say "hidden", because these people are ignored and left without essential council services.

As I've said upthread, it's not as if everyone from more expensive areas can just move. Especially not the poorest and most vulnerable, who need local connection for social housing, and also need to be near support or who are caring for vulnerable family.

Also, as I've said if loads of people did relocate that simply moves or spreads the problem. House prices go up where they move - as does demand on local council services there... necessitating a higher council tax...

Interested our group d townhouse is almost exactly the same under .48 property tax. Anywhere cheaper in the country though may struggle to get enough revenue as it's not cheap around here. In the expensive neighbourhoods and areas it could mean people selling

So it's clearly not popular then, which I'm glad about. The tax going up in line with house prices is madness, very expensive madness. Ty all for your thoughts.

This, they're absolute fuckers, they hate anyone who works/has worked and will bleed these groups dry, and if any disquiet is raised at the unfairness, the labour supporters who are either- wealthy enough to pay this without issue; have wily accountants who help avoid; are net takers, all shriek.... 'so you want people to STARVE?!!, I'm happy to increase taxes...' but somehow those who say this on here, never answer to the question about why don't they offer to pay more tax now?

In theory I would pay nothing (saving over 2k) but my landlord would pay 1.3k so I’d no doubt have a rent increase. I am looking to buy in 18 months though once DD goes to Uni (heading back north, where housing is considerably cheaper than London)

I've been trying to get the VOA to reband my property for 4 years after changes to the property and no sign of it yet, they don't even respond to emails. So good luck with getting them to revalue 30 million properties a year.

It shouldn't be this difficult

£X is what the local council pays for services per year

Y is the number of people living in the borough

(£X / Y people) x the number of people in the house = the household cost

Why isn't it just done like this?

They won't scrap the single person discount. That has been completely manufactured by the media.

They'd have to really look at single parent families and any unintended consequences for child poverty or making it harder to get out of abusive relationships.

The elephant in the room is not the council tax take (whether it’s rates, council tax or a proper value tax, and central govt subsidies) - it’s the almost unlimited increase in LA social care and special education costs.

Put in a social care insurance scheme (mooted by Theresa May) to help reduce the burden on LAs before you start messing with tax systems, IMO. There are worse ways to collect local tax than the current council tax system.