Camden plans council tax hike on empty second homes

brit1234

Camden plans council tax hike on empty second homes


A north London council has revealed it plans to charge people 150% council tax for leaving their second homes empty for more than two years.

Labour-run Camden Council said the move would tackle the one in 16 homes left vacant by owners.

Second home owners would also lose a 10% council tax discount on habitable homes left empty for six months.

But some in the property sector argue that London should not be preventing inward investment during a recession.:rotfl:

Camden Council is making its plans with a view to using the Local Government Finance Bill, which will give councils discretion to increase council tax on long-term empty dwellings.

'Necessary and fair' The Bill will be read in the House of Lords on 10 October.

Theo Blackwell, Camden Council's cabinet member for finance, told the BBC: "We think this is a necessary and fair measure."In Camden at the moment there are over a thousand homes that are just lying empty for investment's sake, part of someone's property portfolio.

"I think this sends a signal to people that maybe they should be thinking of using their assets in a more productive way."

A report by estate agent Savills in July found 59% of buyers in prime central London areas such as Kensington, Chelsea, Marylebone and Mayfair were from overseas.

For 37% of these their London property is not their primary residence, the report found. :mad:

'Revenue generator' A spokesman for Conservative-run Kensington and Chelsea Council said its cabinet was likely to consider in January whether or not to change the 10% discount currently available on second homes left empty for six months.

In July the Smith Institute, a left-wing policy think-tank, reported that in the first half of 2011, 60% of newly built property in central London was bought by overseas investors.

Paul Hackett, director of the institute, welcomed Camden's proposal and said he thought other councils would follow its lead.

But Naomi Heaton, CEO of London Central Portfolio, which specialises in acquiring proprieties for investors in central London, said the policy would not lead to an increase in property occupation. She said: "It's a good revenue generator but won't cause people to get their properties occupied." She added that the council tax increase equated to an extra £1,300 a year. "If you can afford to have a home left empty for two years, the likelihood is that £1,300 will make very little difference."

She added that foreign investment into London pays for a large number of jobs, from lawyers to cleaners, and should not be discouraged when the economy needs it the most.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-19790896

Lets hope more councils do this.

Graham_Devon

One in 16 houses in London left empty for over two years is a considerable amount of homes.

But why only 150%? For many, this will bring it up to the same costs as many of us pay over the rest of the UK, as London has, in many areas, much lower council tax costs.

And can they really claim it from those foreign investors?

Loughton_Monkey

Camden. The hotbed of Champagne Socialists. I suspect that if any of these council lefties are up at the conference right now, they are getting a few taps on the shoulder.....

Nearby Kensington & Chelsea are probably quaking in their boots in case this means a migration of smelly Blairites into their own conservative haven, where they give 10% discount for unoccupied properties.

kabayiri

£1300 a year. It won't even dent these individuals, should they manage to collect the money.

We all expect police and fire to respond to calls to vacant property, so it seems fair that we are expected to pay for this.

Eellogofusciouhipoppokunu

How will they know that a property has been empty for 2 years or more? I assume that while it was financially advantageous to notify the council that a house is empty in order to obtain a council tax rebate, people notifed the council. I can't see this happening if they are going to be hit with a higher council tax bill, so will the council employee snoops to check the bins and peer through letter boxes to check up on people?

One also wonders how many properties are marked as uninhabited for council tax purposes that are nothing of the kind. I'd imagine that this 'one in 16' figure will miraculously change if the council removes a tax incentive and charges more. The council members will then pat themselves on the back for bringing empty properties back into use.

Red_dog_Sam

If the empty property were to become occupied by one person for at least six weeks then the 150% bill turns into a 75% bill. Pay that and who will argue? Or even be able to check the validity of that occupancy? After 6 weeks occupation, the empty period clock is reset and starts again. So 2 years until the empty surcharge kicks back in?
Large organisations will have to play it by the book but private investors? Just a thought...

System

Graham_Devon wrote: »

One in 16 houses in London left empty for over two years is a considerable amount of homes.

Camden. Not London.

globalds

Telford council is planning the same 150 % for empty 2nd dwellings.

System

150% doesn't sound high enough, if you can afford to keep a place in London empty for 2 years I'm sure you can afford 50% extra council tax.

chewmylegoff

i find it difficult to believe that 1 in 16 homes in camden has been left sitting empty for 2 years. i can believe that 1 in 16 second homes in camden hasn't been occupied for 6 weeks continuously over the last 2 years, but that is rather different.

also, any property that is empty for that period of time is likely to be owned by a foreigner through an offshore company, so good luck collecting the council tax.

chewmylegoff

Joeskeppi wrote: »

150% doesn't sound high enough, if you can afford to keep a place in London empty for 2 years I'm sure you can afford 50% extra council tax.

i expect this is a revenue raising exercise, rather than a piece of social engineering.