Council Tax

Soldato
Joined
6 Oct 2004
Posts
18,300
Location
Birmingham
Adding more devils to the mix, should we apply the same policy to a pint of milk? What's the point of earning more if everything is in proportion to your wage? rent 35%. Council tax 6%. Pint of milk 0.03%.

Pretty sure people don't get forced to buy pints of milk they can't afford?

Does this mean that the person paying the higher amount of council tax because they earn more gets better use of the facilities this extra payment is used for as this tax is different to your normal income tax.

Well actually, you tend to find the people paying more council tax are the ones with nicer houses in nicer areas. Nicer areas with nicer parks, cleaner/better condition streets, etc. So... yes, yes they do.
 
Associate
Joined
21 Jun 2004
Posts
1,603
It shouldnt be linked to salary. My salary is good, but I chose to live in a single occupancy band B flat (£69 a month) so that I can save for a mortgage. Why should I pay more than a family in a 4 bedroom house because they have a lower income and inherited or bought the house with inheritance. Their net wealth is far higher than mine, so I don't see why I should help fund their choices.
 
Associate
Joined
22 Sep 2007
Posts
2,179
Location
Abingdon
Everyone can afford to pay council tax. Even if you're unemployable you still get benefits and discounts which means you'll be paying a lot less than the £191pm I have to find to pay for loads of services which I don't use.
 
Caporegime
Joined
12 Mar 2004
Posts
29,913
Location
England
Everyone can afford to pay council tax. Even if you're unemployable you still get benefits and discounts which means you'll be paying a lot less than the £191pm I have to find to pay for loads of services which I don't use.

Pray tell, what discounts do you get for being retired and on a lowly pensioners wage?

And JSA barely comes to that amount.

Why, this is already taken care of in tax from your pay. Making everything means tested, is just so darn expensive and complicated, just raises the price for everyone as you have to hire thousands of people to check it and sort it out.

You must be joking?

Do you realise how much it costs to have surveyors going round putting all the different properties into different council tax bands? If council tax is based on income it is so much easier to work out.
 
Last edited:
Soldato
Joined
18 Feb 2006
Posts
9,571
Pretty sure people don't get forced to buy pints of milk they can't afford?

What staple food would you like me to use for the example? Or are you forgetting people need to eat?

cool sounds great ;)

What do you want to use to compare peoples ability to pay? Income? Not very fair on those who don't work but are hugely wealthy. So Wealth? Not exactly fair for the banker who rents and spends every last penny on luxuries and therefore at the end of the month has zero wealth like the single mum working part time and struggles to feed herself.
 
Man of Honour
Joined
17 Oct 2002
Posts
50,384
Location
Plymouth
Taxation based on assets rather than income or service usage can never be fair as it is always unrelated to either means to pay or consumption.

Abolish it and replace it with a local income tax or a poll tax.
 
Permabanned
Joined
26 Jun 2010
Posts
0
I think he means it's non-means tested, which I agree is a problem, taxes should always be means tested otherwise they can force people onto the streets who can't afford to pay them.

I disagree when the charge is for services. If you use shared services then you should pay a proportion of the costs of those services. I do think that 'Council Tax' is misnamed as it is not technically a tax at all, but a charge.

Personally I would like to see Council Tax abolished, increase Income Tax and have Central Govt fund most local services such as Policing, Roads etc through grants to local authority and other services such as Refuse Collection being charged directly to those that use them.

This would both simplify the tax system and ensure the ability to pay is protected.
 
Man of Honour
Joined
11 Mar 2004
Posts
76,634
If you do that though, you would have so many people dumping rubbish, burning rubbish etc. as its all bundled together they might as well use the rubbish collection.

And central government isn't very efficient.
But it does need changing.

In an ideal world places would be self governed, in small areas, that decide what level of sear ice they want and the cost. In reality this makes everything really expensive and why its better to do it by county, but the bigger it is less sy you have and more waste. But cheaper or should be cheaper contracts.
 
Permabanned
Joined
26 Jun 2010
Posts
0
Well, it works in other countries, so I suspect that the claim that it would lead to everyone dumping rubbish is overstated.

Central Government is as efficent or more so than most Local Authorities currently, albeit both can and should be reformed and improved, with more devolved oversight so I don't see there being an argument to be had there either.
 
Soldato
Joined
6 Oct 2004
Posts
18,300
Location
Birmingham
What staple food would you like me to use for the example? Or are you forgetting people need to eat?

The price of milk and other staples is defined by a multitude of factors, such as competition, supply and demand, cost of production, etc. None of which apply to council tax, so attempting to compare them is pointless...

Also in case you haven't noticed, there are now thousands of people who can't afford to buy these essentials and are having to use foodbanks. How many of these have been threatened with prison for not paying for this food?
 
Soldato
Joined
18 Feb 2006
Posts
9,571

You're missing my point, the milk was just there to exaggerate it (hence the devil comment) yet you've got hung up on it, and that is, not everything can be done on income as it doesn't capture all those who benefits from the services. It will be too complicated to work it out on a combination of wealth and income so that's out. And the current method based on value of the house while not perfect at least slightly represents wealth and slightly encourages people to live in appropriate homes for their needs.

There is also the single occupancy discount if it is just yourself, a couple can share the CT saving them selves both some money and a family makes the most use of local services yet benefit from paying no more then if they were just a couple. For those who are on low income can see if they qualify for benefits where they may receive a 100% reduction in the tax.


As far as I can see, no one here has come up with a better suggestion then the current system while not perfect. Poll tax included.
 
Last edited:
Soldato
Joined
8 Mar 2007
Posts
10,938
...and other services such as Refuse Collection being charged directly to those that use them. .

As someone who works in that industry that wouldn't work. People would just not pay for the service and fly tip. The only reason we (the council I work for) offer a free bulky waste collection service was because when we charged people just dumped them and we had to pick them up anyway at a cost to the tax payer.

So if people are will to dump huge bed frames and cookers they'd think nothing of dumping black bags on the street.

Under the current system we manage to provide 3 separate collections and a free bulky item collection service for less than a £1 a week per household. Now you go to a private contractor and see if they can match that price.
 
Associate
Joined
14 Oct 2013
Posts
917
Location
Brisbane, Australia
Which happens how often. Once in a blue moon, other than for new properties.

This is creating quite a pricing anomoly now. Properties that have been refurbished since they were valued in 1991 typically have a much lower tax band than equivalent-value properties that have been built since. I've often wondered if home report valuations should be used to update tax bands.
 
Back
Top Bottom