Council tax banding

Theu had a bit in the Times about increases up to 30%

I thought they based the price on the worth of property from like 30 years ago or something?

Our tax is equally as expensive in a little village outside Andover as it was in the centre of Bushey, but truly its a case of 'what can you do?'

Vote Conservetive?

snigger

I also laughed when stamp duty threshold was fantastically doubled from 60k to 120k again, how many properties in the UK fall below 120k? The average house price is hovering at 170k at the moment.

quote:

Originally posted by garyi:
... but truly its a case of 'what can you do?'

Vote Conservetive?

snigger

I also laughed when stamp duty threshold was fantastically doubled from 60k to 120k again, how many properties in the UK fall below 120k? The average house price is hovering at 170k at the moment.

It's difficult not to snigger but I believe that the very high taxes that we are paying will lead to a slow-down or halt in growth. In any event, much of the money collected is hardly spent wisely. Perhaps voting Conservative is really a serious alternative.

...And then we've got an expensive layer of inefficient Euro-Bureaucracy on top. I practically despair.

Incidentally, talking of stamp duty, why does it have to go up in drastic steps as the house goes up in value? Why not, for example, charge it incrementally so that the first part of a house's cost is charged at the lower rate?

"...also laughed when stamp duty threshold was fantastically doubled from 60k to 120k again, how many properties in the UK fall below 120k? The average house price is hovering at 170k at the moment."

37% of sales across the country according the this article from the BBC

If that's 37% of all sales then I guess it would be safe to infer it's a far greater proportion of first-time buyers who'll miss out on the joys of stamp duty now. There's a lot of country out there beyond your/our cosy, expensive south and south-east.

Steve.

It's sign of times..............
Here in Italy governement spent months introducing the "first taxes' reduction ever" and now newspapers shyly confess that there will be an icreasement in fuels, medicines, electric bills, water bills etc etc etc
I.e. cars insurances got 45% higher than all the other countries of europe evenif car accidents are appreciably reduced.
They reduced incomes' taxes to increase all the tariffs you are forced to pay by the law.
From this taxes reduction i'll get about 200 euros' saves, but i'll spend double.
How our beloved prime minister declared :"we are the occidental culture and we are the best".

If you think council tax is bad now, I wonder what it'll be like after the revaluation and rebanding due in 2007. I believe Council Tax has been used by Brown to move more of the tax load into local taxation rather than face a damaging increase in income tax which would break a central manifesto promise.

Council tax has become a far more regressive tax than the Poll Tax, I fail to understand why that was the cause of riots in the street, while Council Tax hardly causes more than a casual shrug. The liberals plan is probably the fairest overall, but its not likely to happen.

I understand the reason given for not making stamp duty 'incremental' was that it would be too difficult to implement - go figure

quote:

"I believe Council Tax has been used by Brown to move more of the tax load into local taxation..." - DS

Agreed. Surely logic suggests that actual bands are irrelevant (so long as they're all kept relative) if the same number of houses are to be used to raise the same amount of revenue as before?

If every house goes up say two bands, then the charge for each band would actually go down if the aim was just to raise the same amount of revenue.

Of course if the houses go up in banding but the charge per band stays the same then council revenue will go through the roof (sorry, awful pun but couldn't resist) - so where's the extra revenue going? More and better services? Or will central government funding decrease by a spookily similar amount? Sadly, I think David's already got the answer to that one right.

Steve

Steve no need to do the high horse thing you are chatting on the naim forum, hardly life or death is it?

I was basing on the average house cost.

Sorry Gary, wasn't intending it to come across as a high horse thing - actually I was rather surprised myself when I saw those figures on the BBC site.

S.

Marvin makes an interesting point about the services he believes he receives for the amount he pays - ie bins and recycling. Most of the council tax in fact pays for education (nearly half the bill), social services (he may be in need one day) and highways (maintenance, street lights, grass cutting etc). Most of us use these services at some time - including highways every day. Also included are waste disposal (upwards of £50 per tonne), planning, environmental health, coast & countryside maintenance and management, heritage, trading standards, leisure, libraries... the list goes on. So is it really poor value??

Government has deliberately shifted the balance of funding to the Council Tax to reduce the burden on national taxation, as well as shifting grant from the south to the north.

Nigel

quote:

Originally posted by David Stewart:

Council tax has become a far more regressive tax than the Poll Tax, I fail to understand why that was the cause of riots in the street, while Council Tax hardly causes more than a casual shrug. The liberals plan is probably the fairest overall, but its not likely to happen.

Because (to grossly oversimplify and based on my subjective memory) the Poll Tax was a tax on being alive. And if you didn’t qualify for the Poll Tax then you were a disenfranchised non entity, not fit to live on the same planet as all those law abiding, respectable. Poll Tax paying citizens.. There was also the argument about small numbers of rich people living in big houses paying less than big, poor families – although a valid argument, that was more tabloid fodder. What caused the riots was the former, allied to the tremendous hike in prices compared to the Rates that hit a lot of people. That’s my memory of the situation
.
The Council tax, on the other hand, seems to be merely an ever increasing taxation mechanism. Not an attempt by the Government to reprofile the domestic landscape to marginalise people who will never vote for them. That’s not to defend it, but I think we need to make the distinction. Not that I’m any less confused than you….

Cheers

Harry

quote:

Government has deliberately shifted the balance of funding to the Council Tax to reduce the burden on national taxation, as well as shifting grant from the south to the north.

Does this mean that people are expected to vent their collective spleens all over the local Council politicos when the Council Tax bill pops through the letter box so allowing those in number 10 to wash their hands of the unrest and moaning associated with this form of tax collecting?

Chaps

I get the impression that you are all longing for a return of Thatcherism.

She brought taxes down by reducing expenditure and that takes a great deal of nerve.

We all want low taxes but the pinkos start whinging when cut backs are made.

My own view is cut like hell and damn the consequences. All economies benefit in the long term from being loosened up.

Regards

Mick

Over here the cost is based on the rateable value of the propery. I was initally pleased when moving over to have our place valued at £360. Then the bill arrived - the acual rates payable are something like £3.50 in the pound, which rockets the cost to £1,260. Water rates are included in the figure, but the latest plan is to have a separate water rates bill circa £400pa - but the main rates will not be reduced to compensate.

This means a potential bill of nearly £1,700.

Now, we live 8 miles out in the country well away from the nearest town. We have septic tank drainage; a wheely bin emptied once a week and that's it.

We do not have kids, there are no street lights here; the road outside is a series of potholes linked by tarmac, the main road to town is a B road - and in serious need of a resurface. The local bus service is infrequent and the last bus back from town is at 1800 in the evening. We are reliably informed that there is no point in having an alarm system as the police do not have the resource (or interest)to hightail it out to our ranch and catch the villains red handed. In a similar vein, the house would probably have burned down before the fire service would get here.

We do not use amenities like libraries, leisure centres etc. - indeed we rarely go into the local town that charges us so much to live here and be part of the "community". So quite justifiably we feel really rather pissed at the whole rates/council tax thing because from our perspective we get bugger all benefit for the money being spent.

It is iniquitous that this tax should be calculated on property value - it should be levied on those who take the most out of the system. People should pay their way in society and not expect to be constantly paid for by others.

GRRRRrrrrr.

Brad

Chaps

The newly elected Tory council for Swindon have slashed expenditure ruthlessly and the rate incrase is now 3%.

The local Labour MP has been howling her head off about the cuts but at least they have done it.

Good luck to them.

Regards

Mick

Brad

Why not make the people who actually use the facilities pay for it 100%. I know that you cannot do that in all cases but I see no reason for the tax payer to cough up for libraries or community services. Let those who use the facility pay for it as they go.

If you want taxes reduced you need to be radical and slaughter a few sacred cows.

No liesure activity should be subsidised, why should we subsidise museums, skating rinks, swimming baths etc.

What we need is a politician with the guts to chop out this waste iirespective of the protests that will inevitably result.

Regards

Mick

Unlike Mick, I have no absolute objection to paying for necessary services and facilities paid for out of local council funds. What I do object to, is that under the present system the amount paid in local taxation bears no relationship whatsoever to either ability to pay or the amount of benefit received from these resources. This seems to me to be fundamentally inequitable.

Predictably, whilst local council tax was at a low level, the inequities didn't matter so much, but now it's become, for many people, probably the second largest monthly outgoing after their mortgage, the unfair nature of this tax has been brought into sharp relief.

Not to forget the widespread corruption and greed that goes along with Pubic Council Office, wastage, and job (Boys) creation, (Mainly TORY), no ensuing prosecusions generally, just pay offs at your expense. I wouildn't be suprised if many in the UK (across the board) would notice a great difference if no taxes were paid, and no services changed.

Fritz Von £5+ to get me pension at ATM magic, wotta bargain

quote:

Originally posted by Mick Parry:
We all want low taxes but the pinkos start whinging when cut backs are made.

I would prefer taxes to be higher and fairer - specifically, for a start, local income tax instead of Council Tax.

I like the idea of:

1) A citizens'/legal residents' income [to simplify and increase the efficiency of the benefits system, ensure that nobody need beg and prevent miscarriages of justice that can result in people having no income at all].

2) Abolition of as many non income or expenditure related taxes as possible - the TV license being a prime example.

3) no tax on income up to the median - an arbitrary but natural-seeming point.

4) a fixed rate of income tax / NI contributions on all further income. [Local income tax would start at the local median]

There's probably some reason why this is stupid but I almost don't want to hear it - it seems sooooo right to me, and I'm feeling happy today, for a change .

IMO, a good starting point for tax reform in general would be to do away with National Insurance and unify it with the Income Tax regime. As the money all goes into the same pot anyway, it seems ridiculously bureaucratic to run two tax schemes side by side. It also helps chancellors to hide the true tax take.

At the same time the upper earnings limit on NI should be done away with. As I understand it, those with earnings up to around £630/wk pay 22% tax and 11% NI. Over this level tax rises to 40% but no further NI is payable. So high earners pay only 7% more than those on much lower incomes. That hardly seems fair to me.

David

NI is capped because the pension is capped.

There is, I agree, a good case for local income tax but that is a seperate issue from the level of expenditure being made.

I have no problem in funding essential services, but liesure activities such as swimming pools and libraries are hardly essential.

If you want a reduction in overall tax, you have to make cuts.

Regards

Mick

To a curtain extent (pulling myself together) Michael I agree with you, barring kids (on Education budget) and subsidised tickets for the poorer for swimming I have to agree, where books are concerned most people aren't interested (or can't read properly anyway) better texting centres maybe would be more appropiate ? All Civil Servants, especially Police & Service people must also be immediately banned from doing any other paid employment while serving (as should elected locally paid Councillors). Most of Berlin's residences are rented, so one pays utility costs normally as part of that rent (varying as in UK on area one lives in), water meters are being fitted now in all buildings and a seperate bill will ensue in the near future (the water being very drinkable and non chlorine saturated). TV licences are free for many folk after means testing, and as a pensioner. 60-65.
Rubbish collection here (split by us daily into, paper, glass (green & white) plastic, etc, and bio-rubbish), as has been the case for manmy years, and is a treat to behold the guys working, they are simply brilliant (and generally happy) as are the postmen, and staff on our fantastic (cheap) Public Transport system, no excuses, they just get on with it, and talk directly with management & union when a prob arises, rather than the automatic Us & Them Bullshit.

Fritz Von Teak makes for luvvly BBQ's

N.B And Cheers to ex PM Jim Callaghan who's just died at age 93, top man so he was, innit. AS well as being the oldest living PM in British hiostoryx, he also 'Uniquely' held all 4 high offices, ie, Chacellor, Home Secretary, Foreign Secretary, and P.M. not a bad run really, innit.

Not a bad old duffer really (Jim that is!) but he had a good innings as they say! not that many people make it to 93 - my dear old Mum missed it by a week.

I'm totally in favour of unifying tax and NI - the simpler the system the better.

I'd like to see a flat tax system with those on low income untaxed. A low flat tax system would result in far more efficiency, less evasion and higher overall revenue.

I'd also like to see income tax applied on a local basis as this would bring more accountability and responsibility. Of course we'd need and eventually get, a far higher standard of local government. Central government should be as small as possible.

May I remind people that higher overall tax results in lower growth, low tax leads to higher growth. A high tax system benefits no one, young or old, rich or poor, healthy or ill.

Regards
Steve M

PS: My personal view is that swimming pools, playing fields and libraries are essential services.

Sorry to hear that, but it seems Jim missed it by a day too, and his wife's funeral only being less than a fortnight ago, like many long term partners left behind nature often seemingly takes a swift caring hand to re-unite them, dunnit.

Cheers, Fritz Von As good as it gets I reckon

Chaps

Forget sentiment, Jim Gallaghan was a total flop, remember the winter of discontent and then "what crisis". His lot must go down in history as the most incompetent bunch of losers we have ever had the misfortune to be lumbered with.

He will not be missed.

Regards

Mick