Council Tax Model - why based on House Valuation? 12 July 2022 at 10:38AM in Reclaiming mortgage fees, council tax, etc 23 replies 293 views

amarcusj69

When I see what I’m paying CT for it is directly linked to “number of people”. So why do we have a model that says “your house is worth X so we’ll charge you Y - regardless of what TYPE of house you live in”. 

Let’s take two 3-bed houses in the same town … 1 at £200k the other at £300k. Both have 3 occupants = they’re the same impact on council-related services. Yet one pays more just because it’s in ‘that area’. What am I missing? Surely the singular model of “house valuation alone” is flawed and there should be the extra dimension of “occupancy”? Thoughts? 

Grumpy_chap

amarcusj69 said:

When I see what I’m paying CT for it is directly linked to “number of people”. So why do we have a model that says “your house is worth X so we’ll charge you Y - regardless of what TYPE of house you live in”. 

Let’s take two 3-bed houses in the same town … 1 at £200k the other at £300k. Both have 3 occupants = they’re the same impact on council-related services. Yet one pays more just because it’s in ‘that area’. What am I missing? Surely the singular model of “house valuation alone” is flawed and there should be the extra dimension of “occupancy”? Thoughts? 

CT is based on the house with a discount for single occupancy.

lincroft1710

You are missing the fact that there is a 25% discount on CT payments where there is only one adult occupier of a dwelling.


However, paying more for having a more valuable property predates CT and was also a feature of the old domestic rating system, so would have been in existence since at least the beginning of the 20th century and may even date back to the 19th century.

amarcusj69

It appears Wales (at least) is proposing to stop the 25% discount as part of the 2019 report into how CT is calculated. 

My question remains - why are there no models being proposed that account for both property value AND occupancy (either potential or actual)? … such that we have a model that - like almost everything else in ‘resource costing and planning’ a is based on and includes “number of people” who will use the service(s) and the charges are representative of that simply principle. 

DE_612183

amarcusj69 said:

It appears Wales (at least) is proposing to stop the 25% discount as part of the 2019 report into how CT is calculated. 

My question remains - why are there no models being proposed that account for both property value AND occupancy (either potential or actual)? … such that we have a model that - like almost everything else in ‘resource costing and planning’ a is based on and includes “number of people” who will use the service(s) and the charges are representative of that simply principle. 

Yes, and with labour running the WAG we can see how that will pan out....

Van_Girl

amarcusj69 said:

It appears Wales (at least) is proposing to stop the 25% discount as part of the 2019 report into how CT is calculated. 

I don't suppose you have a link for that, I can't find anything about it? I know they're planning a re-banding exercise, but it would have a huge impact if they end the single person discount - which I don't think is enough in any case

Exodi

amarcusj69 said:

Let’s take two 3-bed houses in the same town … 1 at £200k the other at £300k. Both have 3 occupants = they’re the same impact on council-related services. Yet one pays more just because it’s in ‘that area’. What am I missing? 

In relation to the value - I'd think for similar reasons a millionaire pays significantly more in income tax and national insurance than someone on minimum wage, despite receiving virtually the same level of benefit. People with more are generally expected to pay more.

In relation to occupancy - A better way to frame the question would be two houses of identical value, paying the same council tax, but one has two habitants whereas the other has four. Why should the two residents pay double the council tax of the other house when they individually benefit from the services the same?

The only reason I can think of is it prevents 'creative accounting' of people living in the property.

lincroft1710

amarcusj69 said:

 

My question remains - why are there no models being proposed that account for both property value AND occupancy (either potential or actual)? … such that we have a model that - like almost everything else in ‘resource costing and planning’ a is based on and includes “number of people” who will use the service(s) and the charges are representative of that simply principle. 

Because successive governments are happy with the status quo.  So it you want a change you will have to lobby your MP.


I forgot to mention earlier, but Council Tax is not a payment for services, it is a tax which goes towards funding local government spending

DE_612183

Van_Girl said:

amarcusj69 said:

It appears Wales (at least) is proposing to stop the 25% discount as part of the 2019 report into how CT is calculated. 

I don't suppose you have a link for that, I can't find anything about it? I know they're planning a re-banding exercise, but it would have a huge impact if they end the single person discount - which I don't think is enough in any case

Huge changes for council tax in Wales planned by the Welsh Government - Wales Online

Grumpy_chap

amarcusj69 said:

My question remains - why are there no models being proposed that account for both property value AND occupancy (either potential or actual)? …

The current CT system does do that.
The base line is the property value. That assumes two or more residents.
There is a discount for single resident.
There are also discounts that result in NIL charge (e.g. students)
Also surcharges that increase the rate above standard 100% (e.g. second-home)

Rather than simply say the current system is not as you feel would be best, why not set out your proposal in detail and send to your MP which may solicit change.

If your proposal is too similar to the Community Charge / Poll Tax, then I doubt it will gain much traction. 
Community Charge / Poll Tax replaced the previous rates system (solely property value) with one that was solely occupancy based
The current CT replaced the Community Charge / Poll Tax and was a reversion to a property-based system with some adjustment consideration to occupancy.  It is the nearest we have had to a system that accounts for both property value AND occupancy as you seem to desire.

Exodi

lincroft1710 said:

I forgot to mention earlier, but Council Tax is not a payment for services, it is a tax which goes towards funding local government spending

I think this is probably not so black and white, council tax bills are made up of provisions which in part include social services, as well as fire & rescue, and police & cc services.