Second home tax discount may end

molerat

Gas_Powered_Toothbrush wrote: »

You're joking, right?

Why should you consider it a joke, is a local service tax based on those who will use the services, ie adults, not fairer than the present system based on the size of property.

CLAPTON

molerat wrote: »

Why should you consider it a joke, is a local service tax based on those who will use the services, ie adults, not fairer than the present system based on the size of property.

virtually all taxation is a way of redistributing income

the fact that some taxes have names like Council Tax or NI doesn't disguise the truth that they are mainly ways of raising money fromthe better off and providing services to the poorer peoples

whether that's fair is a matter of opinion

lincroft1710

John_Pierpoint wrote: »

It is not quite that simple, selling a stranger a right of way to a remote cottage in a large plot, that goes through your farmyard, would seriously devalue the farm.
Bulldozing the cottage would make sense financially.
It is not just a rural problem, there are parts of this country where houses are standing empty - no jobs = no mortgages = no buyers.

I wasn't referring to unwanted ag workers' cottages, but properties which had been specifically bought as second homes/weekend retreats.

Came across several cases where farmers had unwanted, semi inaccessible houses when I was in VOA. All were sliding into dereliction and were never going to be reused as housing. IMHO they were abandoned and had ceased to be dwellings, so they were treated as no longer being dwellings.

In some respects a shame that properties were being lost from the country's housing stock, but economics and practicalities made them unviable.

Pennywise

lincroft1710 wrote: »

In some respects a shame that properties were being lost from the country's housing stock, but economics and practicalities made them unviable.

And no doubt also the fact that far too many local councils still insist on imposing planning restrictions that mean many "houses" on farms cannot actually be sold for permanent habitation other than the farmer's immediate family. That only leaves them available for use as holiday lettings, the farmer's own family, or to be abandoned to decay. Very clever people, these planning officials (not).

lincroft1710

The properties I was referring to were built well before these planning restrictions came into being and usually the farmer did not want the properties occupied by anyone other than family members or his workforce.

The restrictions are there to allow farmers to build houses/bungalows to house their workforce in places where greenbelt development would not normally be allowed. If it can be demonstrated that there is no demand by anybody who fits the criteria to occupy such a property then the agricultural occupancy restriction may be lifted.

Mary_Hartnell

Line up here jobs for the boys: Planning consultant, solicitor, go to appeal haggle over petty restrictions, be told to improve to incredible energy levels using a qualified and registered contractor - even though the place is heated by a log burner..................................

Then pay extra council tax.

CIS

Ive read the consultation docs today and the second home changes are one of the lesser changes being suggested in the bigger scheme.

Suggestions are:

Giving 12 months for statutory instalments
Scrapping Class A and C exemptions and creating a new more generalised exemption in their place
Scrapping Class L exemptions and covering by the exemption mentioned above
Making mortgage companies liable for repossessed properties