We'd like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum... Read More »
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Council Tax Rises Above Inflation – Is there an alternative?
Options
Comments
-
lincroft1710 wrote: »There are approximately 25,500,000 dwellings in England and Wales, so 330,000 is less than 1.3%, probably why the government do not want to alter the status quo.
[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]Yes that's true and the actual figure are a lot less than my original guess but it still means that 330,000 households are paying less property tax than their dues and being subsidised by everyone paying +5.6% this year.[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]I don't think a £100 pa rise in CT is going to put someone off building a £50,000 extension.[/FONT]0 -
In the Welsh revaluation of 2005 there were 1,317,000 properties - 105,300 were reduced but 438,000 were increased, so roughly 30% increased in band.
If there's an English revaluation on the same percentages your looking at 7 million or so properties increasing - (a national revaluation would look at all property again, regardless of improvement markers)
A nice summary of the welsh revaluation here - https://www.theguardian.com/society/2005/jul/12/localgovernment.publicfinancesI no longer work in Council Tax Recovery but instead work as a specialist Council Tax paralegal assisting landlords and Council Tax payers with council tax disputes and valuation tribunals. My views are my own reading of the law and you should always check with the local authority in question.0 -
In the Welsh revaluation of 2005 there were 1,317,000 properties - 105,300 were reduced but 438,000 were increased, so roughly 30% increased in band.
If there's an English revaluation on the same percentages your looking at 7 million or so properties increasing - (a national revaluation would look at all property again, regardless of improvement markers)
A nice summary of the welsh revaluation here - https://www.theguardian.com/society/2005/jul/12/localgovernment.publicfinances
[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]True but 33% with a band increase should not have meant +33% tax raised. The overall tax raised should have been neutral, whether is was I don't know.
[/FONT] [FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]33% up but only 8% down was a result of where the new band changes were set.
[/FONT] [FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]It would be simple to have a revaluation which ended up with exactly the same number of properties in each band as before.
[/FONT] [FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]So if 1m properties were previously in band A you set the new band A max value to capture 1m properties and so on up the scale.[/FONT]0 -
[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]
About 4% up across Wales.True but 33% with a band increase should not have meant +33% tax raised. The overall tax raised should have been neutral, whether is was I don't know.
I would be relatively simple to re-band to a neutral level, if done properly, but they wanted to do the same as in Wales which would mean that potentially 33% of properties went up a band. Regardless of what the charge was on the new band the psychological side of a higher band would have brought an uproar and that's what they wanted to hide from - that and the VOA have already said they don't have enough staff so the costs would be enormous.
[/FONT]I no longer work in Council Tax Recovery but instead work as a specialist Council Tax paralegal assisting landlords and Council Tax payers with council tax disputes and valuation tribunals. My views are my own reading of the law and you should always check with the local authority in question.0 -
It would be simple to have a revaluation which ended up with exactly the same number of properties in each band as before.
"Simple" and "revaluation" are words which do not go together well.
As CT Bands have to be decided before dwellings can be banded and there would probably be more bands, it would be impossible to engineer the same number of dwellings in each band as was previously.
But it is all academic as there are no immediate plans for a revaluation.If you are querying your Council Tax band would you please state whether you are in England, Scotland or Wales0 -
[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]
VOA have already said they don't have enough staff so the costs would be enormous.
[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]That's interesting, when did the VO say that?
[/FONT] [FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]The cancelled 2005 revaluation which was largely completed before it was aborted was entirely in house with support from some temp staff.
[/FONT] [FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]The initial set of values were produced by an automated valuation model so all that was necessary was to update the property attributes and sales data and press a button and out would pop 22m values.
[/FONT] [FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]Yes a bit of checking would be required on these values but it would be a lot cheaper than the commercial revaluation which requires individual expertise for each and every value.[/FONT]0 -
lincroft1710 wrote: »"Simple" and "revaluation" are words which do not go together well.
As CT Bands have to be decided before dwellings can be banded and there would probably be more bands, it would be impossible to engineer the same number of dwellings in each band as was previously.
But it is all academic as there are no immediate plans for a revaluation.
[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]You just have to know the revalued figures before you set the band margins.
[/FONT] [FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]Yes if you add a band on top that might split the previous number of properties in Band H into Band H and band I but that's all.
[/FONT] [FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]But you are right its all academic anyway it won't happen.[/FONT]0 -
...............[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]You just have to know the revalued figures before you set the band margins.
Doesn't work that way, there would be 24,000,000 dwellings to analyse. In different areas where relativities compared to 1991 could be up or down
[/FONT] [FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]Yes if you add a band on top that might split the previous number of properties in Band H into Band H and band I but that's all.
There could be more than one extra band, given the huge range of house prices in England, probably three or four.
[/FONT] [FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]But you are right its all academic anyway it won't happen.[/FONT]If you are querying your Council Tax band would you please state whether you are in England, Scotland or Wales0 -
lincroft1710 wrote: »[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]
Doesn't work that way, there would be 24,000,000 dwellings to analyse. In different areas where relativities compared to 1991 could be up or down[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]The bands are the same for the whole country they are not individual to each LA so there is no reason why, as a whole, there could not be the same number of properties in each band.
[/FONT] [FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]That ought to make 'selling' a revaluation to the public easier.[/FONT]0 -
The cancelled 2005 revaluation which was largely completed before it was aborted was entirely in house with support from some temp staff.
The revaluation was actually scheduled to come into force on 1 April 2007. When it was cancelled in either August or September 2005, there had been very little if any work done on establishing values. Most of the temporary staff had been involved in updating the VOA property record database.
It was most definitely not "largely completed"If you are querying your Council Tax band would you please state whether you are in England, Scotland or Wales0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 351.2K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.2K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 453.7K Spending & Discounts
- 244.2K Work, Benefits & Business
- 599.2K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177K Life & Family
- 257.6K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards