council tax band G & H to double

[StrawberryThief1930]

has anyone seen the rumours that the council tax rates for bands G and H are going to double?

I know everything is just rumours at the moment but im worried this one might stick. easy to implement in an existing system and doesn't require the revaluation of thousands of houses etc.

I'm about to buy a G band house. Seriously questioning whether we can afford it. The current council tax is £4k a year. so £8k a year. Over £300 a month more than we had budgeted. we have spreadsheets coming out of our ears trying to check we can afford this house. Buying with a 40% deposit. im sweating...

anyone have the same worries? or further thoughts?

I agree. I think Labour will try to make some sort of change but will mess it up. It's very clear that the current council tax banding is totally out of date, unfair and favours Londoners in general. They need to revalue properties on current values and probably introduce additional bands at the higher end. Actually, scrap that, they need to reform the entire tax system. There are so many things that make no sense within it.

To your question, @StrawberryThief1930. I would definitely wait before committing to this new house. I suspect that a lot of people are doing this at present, for obvious reasons.

Yes I have. And third.

However
as I watch our countryside demolished it’s not something I would do now
I care too much for nature and our ability to feed ourselves as much as possible

We are band G in an inner London borough (4 bed terraced house) and we pay £290 a month. Doubling it would be annoying but we'd be able to cover it. We'll be reading the budget carefully though as I'm expecting us to be affected in other ways too. Discussion of moving overseas is becoming less of an idle wondering and more of a serious thought.

Not sure AirBnB has been taxed properly yet, that would involve the public reporting people and would need more resources to investigate?

I don’t think so, I don’t see why people are accepting these taxes anyway given the pledges not to, let alone happy someone else has to pay even if it would cause financial stress.

Right, so you did it without the current punitive rates of tax, but now you think they should be increased? Got it…🤦‍♀️

I'm not sure which part of what I said you disagree with. What I have said is born out by the facts and I think it would be very hard to argue that 1991 values are more appropriate or valid than current ones when imposing property taxes.

You seem to be complaining that Labour have broken their manifesto pledge and don't think people should have to pay whatever taxes they impose.
Politicians break their promises. Politicians lie. They all do it so, sadly, it's hardly unexpected. Many people are in financial distress. Those in expensive houses are much better off than the majority, unless they are younger and have just taken on a massive mortgage which they can't afford pay.

If everyone owns multiple properties not occupied full time we’d need twice as many to house the population
So yes
Tax those who do it to the hilt. It will stop the over inflated prices and go to supporting people who want to just buy a home for themselves.
No point ignoring the negative impact second home owners have on society.

So yes
I'm hoping everyone sells up and gives others a chance

for what it’s worth I didn’t bail out because of increased taxes . I moved on because one of our properties was in an area blighted by second home owners and I could see the negative impact on the local area. No point pretending otherwise.
I also see what it’s still having on where I’m living now. Hundreds of acres of farmland being built over whilst second home owners pop down for the odd weekend !
They have no right to ruin local economies.

Some are but going by posts on here the value of property in bands G and H are really varied and not all will have the ability to stump up double.

As for everyone lies I think Labour have messed up beyond lying. They got the last budget so wrong.

Those in expensive houses are much better off than the majority, unless they are younger and have just taken on a massive mortgage which they can't afford pay.

Not true at all. It's not just young people who are struggling financially.

It is actually true because the houses are assets that worth money.

Having all your money tied up in an asset shouldn't be an excuse as to why someone can't be taxed. Otherwise everyone would do it, and to a degree they actually have, which is why housing has got so expensive.

People who live in big expensive houses and have no money/liquidity are not in any way poor. They may have a liquidity issue but there are plenty of ways of solving that.

And to me it is absolutely not fair that someone else should be taxed harder on their earnings because someone else claims that they have a big illiquid asset and no money and therefore should pay less tax as a result, even though their paper wealth maybe 10x the amount the earner has.

Not true at all. It's not just young people who are struggling financially.

Of course having an asset means you are better off than someone without an asset 🙄

Which is meaningless if you can no longer pay for that asset.

An asset is never meaningless as you can sell it.

and if that asset is in negative equity.

investments go up and down. It's still better to have assets vs having no asset's.

It is still just talk at the moment. Nothing has been announced or put into any proposals. Councils are under pressure so ideas get discussed, but big changes usually move slowly and get debated for a long time. I would not base your decision on a rumour. Keep an eye on official statements from your local council or government pages.

If they double council tax band G then houses in that band will be much harder to sell. I could see mine going in to negative equity as I'd have to sell it at a lower price than I paid for it 18 months ago. Who would want a property which comes with an £800 p/m council tax bill when they could get a similar property on the next street which is charged less than a third of that amount.

but the answer to that is to buy a smaller house /lower banded house. the earnings are the same from salary. why would someone choose to be saddled with a penalty rate council tax band?

you can't conflate council tax band with wealth, it isn't true. this thread alone has shown that in different parts of the country a G band means very different things in way of house value but also amount paid per month.

an "earner" lets say earning £100k in an F band house is going to have a lot more available income than in a G band house. The owner of the F band house isn't unfairly subsidising the G band earner's asset!

@HighLadyofTheNightCourt I am sure what you are confused by? It's always a risk to sell an asset when you haven't held it for long. That doesn't negate the fact that's is better to have an asset than not, I am not sure why are struggling with the concept 🤷🏻‍♀️

Why are you assuming I'm confused? I'm not.
I know the risks of selling an asset when you've not held it for long. I know it's better to have one than not. That's why I want to keep it! Some of the proposed tax increases would make that difficult and would mean I'd be in negative equity.

I was challenging the assumptions that it's only young people facing financial struggles. I also want to challenge the assumption that anyone with a Band G house is wealthy and can afford to absorb the proposed increases in council tax.

Why are you assuming I'm confused? I

Because all I said was having an asset was better than not having one & yet you replied to me saying an asset was meaningless...

also want to challenge the assumption that anyone with a Band G house is wealthy and can afford to absorb the proposed increases in council tax.

I certainly having claimed the above & when did the government even propose this?

I live in an expensive, commuter-belt area. Our house is a semi-detached on a very average road which was extended to a 4-bed, and when we bought it 13 years ago, it just edged into band G. Our town is full of houses worth £2m plus. They are only one band higher than ours and pay only marginally more - it's nuts!!