Student Houses - does the landlord pay council tax?

mchale

Numberlock wrote: »

in my opinion, the local town is losing out because all these properties are not contributing to the Council's coffers. Am I the only one who has a problem with this?

Not quiet, the local town benefits from income the students spend there, which pp will no doubt be more than the CT bill.

jennifernil

Numberlock wrote: »

My problem with this particular situation is that someone can own dozens of properties, cram 4 -5 students into a house which is really only suitable for 3 people (for example) and charge extortionate rent and yet that landlord is not liable to pay a tax in lieu of Council Tax. What a loophole, that is!

Of course students should be exempt from Council Tax but I do think the landlord should contribute as, in my opinion, the local town is losing out because all these properties are not contributing to the Council's coffers. Am I the only one who has a problem with this?

So how would you deal with properties that are actually owned and occupied by a student? Plenty of them around too.

Numberlock

jennifernil wrote: »

So how would you deal with properties that are actually owned and occupied by a student? Plenty of them around too.

Don't see the relevance of your comment to my thread.

Numberlock

mchale wrote: »

Not quiet, the local town benefits from income the students spend there, which pp will no doubt be more than the CT bill.

The students would live in the town irrespective. My point is that cash-strapped councils are losing money from properties which could be generating revenue.

G_M

Numberlock wrote: »

My problem with this particular situation is that someone can own dozens of properties, cram 4 -5 students into a house which is really only suitable for 3 people (for example) and charge extortionate rent and yet that landlord is not liable to pay a tax in lieu of Council Tax. What a loophole, that is!
Don't understand. Whether there are 3, 4 or 8 students in the property, no CT is payable if they are all sudents.
(income tax, of course, is another matter)
If the property is only suitable for 3, there may be H&S issues. Bear in mind also, the LL is not 'cramming in 4-5 students' as if they have no choice - They are probobly only agreeing to live in 'crammed' conditions because by sharing they get the place for a cheaper rent. Otherwise they' not choose to live there.

Of course students should be exempt from Council Tax but I do think the landlord should contribute as, in my opinion, the local town is losing out because all these properties are not contributing to the Council's coffers. Am I the only one who has a problem with this?

If the LL was forced to pay CT (which happens with HMOs as machale reminded me above, unless all the occupants are exempt), the LL will simply add that calculation into his rent

Your concern, of course, applies to many areas of tax/benefits leglislation. Councils coffers lose out from rent when council house tenants claim Housing Benefit.
Central governement coffers 'lose out' when someone's income drops below the level of their tax allowance.

When people (whether students, unemployed, low earners, disabled etc...) are exempt from one or more taxes, or are entitled to receive a benefit, it costs the local or central government money.

That's how our system works. The alternatives are a pure communist system where 'to each according to his needs, from each according...." or a pure capitalist system where each individual must stand or fall on their own resources!

CIS

My query is: does this mean that all these properties do not generate income for the council whatsoever?

Your correct and its one of the biggest issues we deal with my authority - we have a lot more students than most cities and many live in HMO's for which the landlord is liable and claims the Class N exemption. Many landlords move non-students in to the property and 'forget' to tell us so that they still receive the exemption - this deprives the council of upwards of £750 per property per year and were looking at a probably a good few hundred properties.

scottishblondie

Numberlock wrote: »

Don't see the relevance of your comment to my thread.

Well what if there are lots of students buying flats, and then living in them with 2 or 3 mates paying rent? Would you also consider those students to be depriving the council of income? Would you also want them to pay something?

Students pay no CT wherever they live, and even if the LLs rented to normal people the LL themselves still wouldn't be liable. So no, I don see your problem with it really!

theartfullodger

Nice Troll flare-up , numberlock..

Who's next then to whinge and moan about ... The unemployed, pensioners, mothers getting child benefit???

Blimey, what happened to good old British tolerance and decency??

CIS

Well what if there are lots of students buying flats, and then living in them with 2 or 3 mates paying rent? Would you also consider those students to be depriving the council of income? Would you also want them to pay something?

The problem is so much the students or landlords in student HMO's not paying council tax - the regs are clear on Class N exemptions for students. The problems come with landlords of HMO's renting to students and non-students and then 'forgetting' to mention the non-students so that they don't have council tax to pay. We know who these landlords are but proving it is a separate issue.

Students pay no CT wherever they live, and even if the LLs rented to normal people the LL themselves still wouldn't be liable. So no, I don see your problem with it really!

The landlord would be if was deemed a House In Multiple Occupation.

G_M

CIS wrote: »

Your correct and its one of the biggest issues we deal with my authority - we have a lot more students than most cities and many live in HMO's for which the landlord is liable and claims the Class N exemption. Many landlords move non-students in to the property and 'forget' to tell us so that they still receive the exemption - this deprives the council of upwards of £750 per property per year and were looking at a probably a good few hundred properties.

But this is a totally different issue. You are now talking about investigation & fraud.

The question posed was about policy, not enforcement.