Is the freezing of Council Tax levels a good thing when cutting Services?

[mj.scuba]

Why? The 'rich' already pay more (in absolute terms) and use less, by your own admission.

 

Council services are a commodity, Titanic99. If they are frozen, they are frozen for all, i.e. for heavy or light users alike.

 

Neglects also the flipside of the coin. When it goes up, higher band houses will pay more.

[Titanic99]

No they do not. What you said is "Council Tax rates increase with the value of a property" ... which would mean if the value of your home increases, your council tax increases which is not the case at all.

 

If you mean something else entirely, I suggest you re-word your statement. If you do not, I suggest you go read up on council tax banding and how that works.

 

Ok fair comment, it should have read "increases with the value of a property set in 1991"

 

So to be clear, these levels were set in 1991 with the more expensive properties being given a value of H and the cheapest A.

[Titanic99]

What you talking about? If it stays the same, how does it benefit anybody, how is it detrimental to anybody?

 

Each year Council Tax increases (see below from Sheffield City Council), if you freeze that increase and it is a percentage increase then those paying more will benefit the most.

 

"On 5th March the council set its budget and agreed Sheffield's lowest ever council tax increase, at 1.39%."

 

Put simply 1.39% of £2950.49 is more than 1.39% of £983.49, so if you freeze it at the same levels then this is of more benefit to those paying the most.

 

But we are all in this together!

[L00b]

Ok fair comment, it should have read "increases with the value of a property set in 1991"

 

So to be clear, these levels were set in 1991 with the more expensive properties being given a value of H and the cheapest A.

In my direct experience (S62, S25 and S81 postcodes), the band has been reassessed by the Council every time a property has been sold these past few years (well, since 2000 at least, since that's when I first bought and experienced the issue).

 

A house that was banded A in 1991 could very well be banded higher, e.g. C or D these days. Our first house in S62 was banded B (or C ) in 2000, and was rebanded E when the next owner bought it in 2004 (at well over twice the price).

Put simply 1.39% of £2950.49 is more than 1.39% of £983.49, so if you freeze it at the same levels then this is of more benefit to those paying the most.

How so, when those paying the least benefit the most (again, by your own admission), therefore are already subsidised by those paying the most?

[Titanic99]

Why? Council services are a commodity, Titanic99 (they are the same for everyone), and the 'rich' already pay more (in straight, comparative terms) and use less, by your own admission.

 

If services are frozen, they are frozen for all, i.e. for heavy or light users alike.

 

I don't get your logic, sorry (well, I do, but I'm baiting here, as I know perfectly well where you're going with this...and you're wrong )

 

Where am I going with this, surely this is quite a simple argument/discussion and that is should we be penalising the Local Council service users whilst benefitting the better off.

[Titanic99]

In my direct experience (S62, S25 and S81 postcodes), the band has been reassessed by the Council every time a property has been sold these past few years (well, since 2000 at least, since that's when I first bought and experienced the issue).

 

A house that was banded A in 1991 could very well be banded higher, e.g. C or D these days. Our first house in in S62 in 2000 was banded B, and was rebanded E when the next owner bought it in 2004 (at well over twice the price).

 

That's an intersting point as I don't believe re-banding has occured in Sheffield.

 

If it has then it would seem wrong to me that next-door neighbours could have different bandings.

[L00b]

If it has then it would seem wrong to me that next-door neighbours could have different bandings.

Not at all, it's simply the system at work, based on a property's value. Water rating (rather than metered) works the same.

 

Person A bought a house 20 years ago for £X (band A) and did not move subsequently.

 

The market did what the market does over that period of 20 years.

 

Person B buys the neighbouring house today for £(multiple of X) (= higher band), since the value of the neighbouring house includes market appreciation over time, improvements and features (if any) over/above Person A's house, etc.

 

Simples.

[L00b]

Where am I going with this, surely this is quite a simple argument/discussion and that is should we be penalising the Local Council service users whilst benefitting the better off.

Again: how so, when those paying the least benefit the most (again, by your own admission), therefore are already subsidised by those paying the most?

 

Are the "better off" in your point not also "Local Council service users"

 

Don't they also have bins to empty, don't they also use roads, etc?

 

If anything, those paying the most should be more aggrieved (since they are going to get it in the neck from all corners, not only from Councils), and ask for service in proportion to their contribution.

 

It's called value for money, and that notion is the same for everyone, regardless of one's wealth (perceived or otherwise)

[mj.scuba]

Each year Council Tax increases (see below from Sheffield City Council), if you freeze that increase and it is a percentage increase then those paying more will benefit the most.

 

"On 5th March the council set its budget and agreed Sheffield's lowest ever council tax increase, at 1.39%."

 

Put simply 1.39% of £2950.49 is more than 1.39% of £983.49, so if you freeze it at the same levels then this is of more benefit to those paying the most.

 

But we are all in this together!

 

I am perfectly happy with that. When it goes up, they will pay more.

[Titanic99]

Not at all, it's simply the system at work, based on a property's value. Water rating (rather than metered) works the same.

 

Person A bought a house 20 years ago for £X (band A) and did not move subsequently.

 

The market did what the market does over that period of 20 years.

 

Person B buys the neighbouring house today for £(multiple of X) (= higher band), since the value of the neighbouring house includes market appreciation over time, improvements and features (if any) over/above Person A's house, etc.

 

Simples.

 

It doesn't work like that, here's something I got off the Internet which bases the valuation on the same as those when the valuation was first made.

 

Step 1- Check your council tax band, then check your neighbours' bands if they live in similar or identical properties. Since they live in the same area, if their house is a similar size, the bands should be the same.

 

You can do this by going to voa.gov.uk or calling the Valuation Office Agency using the contact details for your area listed on their website. Next move onto step 2.

 

Step 2- Calculate what your house was worth in 1991 compared to now, which will alert you if you think you may be in the wrong band.

 

You need to find the value of a house similar to yours, which has recently been sold. To do this you can visit nethouseprices.com noting the price the house was sold for and the date it was sold, but remember it must have been sold recently so you can make an accurate comparison.

 

Next, work out what your house was worth in 1991 as council tax was being introduced by visiting the Nationwide House Price Calculator at http://www.nationwide.co.uk/hpi. See below on how to use the calculator.

 

How to use the calculator

 

A. Scroll down the page to the calculator

 

B. In 'Property value' note the sales PRICE from earlier

 

C. In 'Valuation date 1' enter the DATE OF SALE from earlier (do ensure you put down which quarter of the year it was).

 

D. In Valuation date 2' enter 1991, and Q2

 

E. Select your region from the drop down list

 

F. Click 'calculate the results'

 

•Now you can compare your correct council tax band in 1991 to the band you are currently in using the Valuation Office Agency's website stated earlier.