Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Mega

Labour New Tax

Recommended Posts

Council tax is loosely based on the value of the property. These factors all add value to a property. Why should they not be assesed. Why shoud someone living in a 2 bed luxury riverside apartment with a fantastic view not pay more council tax than someone living in a 2 bed ex local authority flat?

Pathetic journalism for the rabid mail reading middle classes. This IMO is a non story.

I still hate Gordon Brown though ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Council tax is loosely based on the value of the property. These factors all add value to a property. Why should they not be assesed. Why shoud someone living in a 2 bed luxury riverside apartment with a fantastic view not pay more council tax than someone living in a 2 bed ex local authority flat?

Pathetic journalism for the rabid mail reading middle classes. This IMO is a non story.

I still hate Gordon Brown though ;)

yep

Bring back the rates - at least they were more clearly related to the value to the value of the house.

The only thing council tax has going for it is that it's not the poll tax. We had a tiny 2 bed semi in Leeds when the poll tax came in, and we were paying the same as my parents in a huge 5 bed in Cheshire.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They have to pay those gold-plated public sector pensions somehow. There will come a time when the country will no longer be able to sustain a bloated public sector and the natural course of events that will follow.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
yep

Bring back the rates - at least they were more clearly related to the value to the value of the house.

No they weren't. Absolutely the opposite!

At the time rates were abolished, my rates were £640 on a 1-bed flat. Two of my colleagues lived nearby and paid rates of £310 and £330 on a 3-bed and a 4-bed house.

That was quite typical of the rates, and why the system was broken.

The reason, repeated around the country, was that the flat had been re-rated when the big victorian house was converted to flats. Very largely it was just another tax on younger adults (those who couldn't afford a bigger house).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest UK Debt Slave
They have to pay those gold-plated public sector pensions somehow. There will come a time when the country will no longer be able to sustain a bloated public sector and the natural course of events that will follow.

Yep. They'll tax everyone to death to try to keep the game going. The British are so lame, they'll take it up the ar$e until they have nothing left. I find the apathy of the British people far more shocking than the contempt with which we are treated by the people we elect to rule us. Quite astonishing when you think about it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest UK Debt Slave
No they weren't. Absolutely the opposite!

At the time rates were abolished, my rates were £640 on a 1-bed flat. Two of my colleagues lived nearby and paid rates of £310 and £330 on a 3-bed and a 4-bed house.

That was quite typical of the rates, and why the system was broken.

The reason, repeated around the country, was that the flat had been re-rated when the big victorian house was converted to flats. Very largely it was just another tax on younger adults (those who couldn't afford a bigger house).

Arguing about the merits or downsides of the Council tax, the poll tax or the old property rating system is as pointless as discussing the pros and cons of political parties. At the end of the day, the government (whichever party) has to raise enough revenue to fund our national debt, public sector and all the other stuff that needs to be funded and they'll contrive new ways to meet those costs. The burden gets shuffled around a little but they always end up robbing the people somehow. If it isn't via property taxes, they'll steal from you somehow else, speed cameras, fining you for leaving your bin out on the wrong day of the week, etc etc etc. They're all thieving scum and they'll always get their pound of flesh, most usually from the middle class.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
They should base the tax on the householder's own valuation of their property. And this would go up by wage inflation each year.

And when it comes time to sell up and leave they would not be allowed to sell for any more than this.

EDIT: Alternatively if they do sell for more, they have to pay the back tax due on the difference between this and the council's official valuation.

let's price-fix everything. The government can make up the shortfall.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Council tax is loosely based on the value of the property. These factors all add value to a property. Why should they not be assesed. Why shoud someone living in a 2 bed luxury riverside apartment with a fantastic view not pay more council tax than someone living in a 2 bed ex local authority flat?

Pathetic journalism for the rabid mail reading middle classes. This IMO is a non story.

They already do, a three bed house in posh area say near a golf course is already likely to be in a higher tax band than a three bed ex local authority house on an estate but in the same council district.

This new stuff amounts to double taxation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've never ever understood why the value of the home you live in should be relevant to how much council tax you pay.

Assuming we need a system for local taxation, why can't it just be income based?

How do rich people living in a big house make any more demands on local services than poorer people? They probably don't produce more rubbish per head, need more policing per head, use the library more or consume any more street light.

Maybe I'm thick.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I've never ever understood why the value of the home you live in should be relevant to how much council tax you pay.

Assuming we need a system for local taxation, why can't it just be income based?

How do rich people living in a big house make any more demands on local services than poorer people? They probably don't produce more rubbish per head, need more policing per head, use the library more or consume any more street light.

Maybe I'm thick.

Thatcher tried a more even handed approach, people just didnt pay up, and eventually started rioting.

Even with current system the rich with their mansions have it quite easy due to a maximum banding, compared to people in the US where they dont seem to be capped and are 2%+ a year in some states. $80K tax on a $3million house!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I've never ever understood why the value of the home you live in should be relevant to how much council tax you pay.

Assuming we need a system for local taxation, why can't it just be income based?

How do rich people living in a big house make any more demands on local services than poorer people? They probably don't produce more rubbish per head, need more policing per head, use the library more or consume any more street light.

Maybe I'm thick.

I think you will find that the amount of demand for council services is conversely proportionate to the income of a house. So a middle to high income household uses very few council services whereas the lower income families are more likely to use the police, library, local comprehensive, fire service etc etc. Council tax is an unfair tax, pure and simple. What we need is to charge at the point of provision. So you pay tax on the services you use and don't pay for services you don't use (although a 'core' payment would need to be made for schools and OAP homes etc). Why should I pay for a Council Housing, Library or a local Sports Center when I never use these services? Also, why should I pay for council employees pensions when I can barely manage to pay for my own?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The will not be in power to implement this.

However, it could provide a 'filip' to be prices of 'luxury apartments', as these icons of contemporary living are usually situated on busy main roads or adjacent to railway lines, situations that would have been ridiculed 30 years ago however cheap they were.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Where Thatcher went wrong with the poll tax was not the concept but its execution. Not to exempt (without compensation) student nurses etc was daft. The poll tax was a rallying call for all the disafected elements of Thatchers' Britain.

I suspect the reason for handling it the way she did was political. The urban myth at the time was if you weren't on the electoral role then you didn't have to (weren't registered to) pay. Millions didn't register to vote as a consequence and this helped the Tories in 1987 & 1992.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think you will find that the amount of demand for council services is conversely proportionate to the income of a house. So a middle to high income household uses very few council services whereas the lower income families are more likely to use the police, library, local comprehensive, fire service etc etc. Council tax is an unfair tax, pure and simple. What we need is to charge at the point of provision. So you pay tax on the services you use and don't pay for services you don't use (although a 'core' payment would need to be made for schools and OAP homes etc). Why should I pay for a Council Housing, Library or a local Sports Center when I never use these services? Also, why should I pay for council employees pensions when I can barely manage to pay for my own?

I've never understood why so many people seem to accept property based taxes as reasonable. Most people seem to agree that taxing people on the basis of their income is reasonably fair for national government, although I do realise that there is a (somewhat loose) connection between someones income & the value of the proprty that they occupy.

The last time I paid rates, I paid the same amount as the five wage earners living next door (whose combined income was probably at least triple mine). Next door to me on the other side were two pensioners who presumably also paid the same amount.

At the same time, my parents (who were in a similar sized house to mine) paid less than a third the amount that i did.

I do take the point that those who pay the most in generally get the least back. But that will probably always be the case as long as living on benefits remains a lifestyle choice & not just a last resort option. The British people are far too compliant to bring about any real change on that front.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think you will find that the amount of demand for council services is conversely proportionate to the income of a house. So a middle to high income household uses very few council services whereas the lower income families are more likely to use the police, library, local comprehensive, fire service etc etc. Council tax is an unfair tax, pure and simple. What we need is to charge at the point of provision. So you pay tax on the services you use and don't pay for services you don't use (although a 'core' payment would need to be made for schools and OAP homes etc). Why should I pay for a Council Housing, Library or a local Sports Center when I never use these services? Also, why should I pay for council employees pensions when I can barely manage to pay for my own?

Gordon has told them they are entitled to your money.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:   291 members have voted

    1. 1. Which of the Prime Minister's options would you choose?


      • Leave with the negotiated deal
      • Remain
      • Leave with no deal

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic


×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.