And for those that already own the property, does that mean that there income has gone up commensurately? Council tax bands are important when you are buying and changing them retrospectively could make things very difficult financially.
pakies stuff their houses with multiple families and only pay one set of rates
what about all the massive house extensions ? ...
That's a 25% "discount".
Perhaps 50% woud be better (with "normal" council tax being regarded as being for a minimum of two adults).
Eh?
Rates didn't change according to the number of people in residence. A single occupier paid the same as a family of six, with (say) four earners, next door in an identical house. But the singleton only got one vote compared with their potential of six.
The whole point of the replacement (the Community Charge) was to protect households with one or two adult members.
Such property was in Band A then and is in Band A now, almost without reference to location. It's hard to see it being in anything but the bottom band now.
Or are you actually complaining that "1 bed studios" (WTMB) are *too*
*cheap*?
What sort of council was it?
Rates were never supposed to be an income tax. But for loony left commentators, no tax is "fair" unless it charges their hate figures more than it charges them. Even the VAT on a Mars Bar.
What about them?
And what's it got to do with the local authority?
Why should the addition of a conservatory mean that the local council is entitled to an extra slice of your earnings?
because they will be
Yup. I barely use a car, only need my bins collecting once a month, have no kids in school, don't want streetlamps or speed chicanes or speed limit signs everywhere. Or a police and crime commissioner.
So I end up paying more than a council house with 5 kids at school two cars and an ASBO...
Remember back in the late 1980s when a much fairer system was introduced but those who wanted a free ride objected ?
Well, those who complained then are probably whining now.
At least with the Community Charge more people were expected to contribute so the burden on those who paid was lower.
Well that's why the 'poll tax' was a better solution.
Sounds like she was paying too little under the old archaic rates system with all its quirks that allowed some people to get away with paying very little.
Moan, moan moan.
A house bought in the 1950's for a few hundred pounds now sells for hundreds of thousands. Britains housing stock is worth £trillions.
Meanwhile the NHS is now guzzling £150 billion per year and the state pension the lions share of the DWP £200 Billion budget.
If you want to keep on getting this, then someone has to pay for it.
And how much tax-free profit have you made out of relentlessly rising house prices ?.
Why does it matter what your income is ?. If you couldn't afford to buy the property (which was the case from 1999 to 2007 when people were just lying about their income) then rampant house price inflation made them a fortune. Far more than they could earn and save, so these people have no right to complain about council tax.
Even now half the actual domestic council tax bill comes from direct money from the treasury. Take that support away and council tax would double, but then income tax could be cut (but it won't happen).
It might put the house into a higher council band, but this only happens when the house is sold (AFAIK).
DO you want local services ?. And I don't mean getting your bins emptied, I'm talking about all the people needing car packages, kids with autism etc needing special schooling. A massive list of spending requirements.
If you don't want to contribute then you need to emigrate to somewhere like Doom lives, but remember, there is probably no 'free' NHS there.
Yes. And if the owner has stupidly put a radiator in it to try and 'heat' it (impossible with all that glass area) stick their council tax up even more.
Charging on the basis of house value, real or notional (which is what is used), is hardly fair or sensible.
A per head system, like the Community charge, is more equitable. Those in the same area pay the same. Not perfect but better. It was called the Poll Tax, it should have been linked to the right to vote. If you don?t pay, you don?t get to vote.
Charging someone more who has a large house but gets one bin emptied, probably doesn?t use social services, ??. is just unfair when, at the other extreme, someone pays half of naff all, gets one bin emptied, but uses every service going.
Worse in some ways with those who use all the services available not having any income at all apart from welfare.
That's not viable, those who have no interest in voting would be able to get away with never paying the tax.
What profit? It is locked up in the house and if he moves, whatever property he buys will also have gone up in price. On top of that, 25 years of compound interest adds up to (depending upon interest rates over their years) as much as 3 to 5 times the value of the house when they bought it.
For many elderly people now, they also went through the days of 15 to
17% interest rates, while buying on a single income.<shrug>
So you haven't got an argument.
So what?
So what?
We all do.
It's nothing to do with the local council.
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.