Cyclone Posted January 25, 2011 Share Posted January 25, 2011 I cna't understand how the size of your house effects the level of council services you use. Surely it should be a flat fee levied for every adult in the house? You think tax should be regressive? A flat fee would mean that the poor pay a larger % of their income to pay for council services. Doesn't seem entirely fair. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
donuticus Posted January 25, 2011 Share Posted January 25, 2011 You think tax should be regressive? A flat fee would mean that the poor pay a larger % of their income to pay for council services. Doesn't seem entirely fair. Where everyone receives the same level of service yes. You don't get charged a differing price depending on your income when buying a bottle of coke or a newspaper. A service is a service you're charged for it. It doesn't cost more to send a police officer to Dore than it does to Gleadless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
discodown Posted January 25, 2011 Share Posted January 25, 2011 Where everyone receives the same level of service yes. You don't get charged a differing price depending on your income when buying a bottle of coke or a newspaper. A service is a service you're charged for it. It doesn't cost more to send a police officer to Dore than it does to Gleadless. So by that rationale each household receives the same services from the council. Council Tax is based on 50% property and 50% people. Thats why theres a single persons discount available. 50% property + 25% + 25% for adults Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rupert_Baehr Posted January 25, 2011 Share Posted January 25, 2011 On the current system we have in this country without adding an extra band or two at the top end any house currently in Band A will still be in Band A as the system is not run on a property value. It would need a couple of top end bands adding and then allocating a value range to each band and then revaluing all properties again in the entire country and moving them into the relevant band for that price bracket....[combined quote]...I would never suggest an estate agent should value a property that is not what they do. A fully qualified chartered surveyor is the only one qualified to do this job and the council do employ them because my partner is one of them. He actually goes into councils to put right what they haven't done in the past 10 years or so (he does doe commercial though not residential). That would certainy mean plenty of work for chartered surveyors. They would be fully employed for some years (though they would actually produce nothing which could be sold or expoerted) and the cost of re-valuing every domestic property in the UK would be extremely high. How on earth could the country ( or rather the people in it - because they are the ones who would have to do the paying) afford it? The only way to change this to stop anyone from saying they pay too much or too little is to adopt the american system of paying property taxes on a property value. As the property value rises the tax property tax also rises - BUT if the property value falls the property tax also falls along with it. In the figures worked out are also costings per 1000 of value toward schools, roads, emergency services and so on. So you pay to these along with your property taxes for the services you receive in your local area. Each year your property is re-assessed and given a relative value via the local govenment office and your taxes are based on that evaluation. I'm not saying that this is the way to go but this is one way so that everyone pays equally. The UK banding system is supposed to relate to the value of the property. Thinking about property values in Florida, the value of the piece of land I own there has halved. So if the State/County cuts my poperty tax in half I only have to pay half as much - but if everybody's property decreases in value by 50%, how are they going to pay for all the services they hope to provide? Just as a side note...... in Florida if I rent out my property to a tenant I as the owner pay the property taxes but if I rent my property here in the UK the tenant pays it! In the UK, the property taxes used to be called Occupiers' (as opposed to Owners' ) rates. Fair enough, I suppose because it's the occupier not the owner who uses the services. IT doesn't reallyt matter who pays the property taxes. - I have a house I haven't been able to sell yet and I rent it out. I too pay the property tax, but I pass the cost on to the tenant - He pays more rent that he might otherwise do. Unfortunately, when we moved out of that house and rented it out, the property traxes soared because we were no longer for the homesteader's exemption, nor is the tenant because he doesn't pay the tax. Effectiveley, the state screws us both for more money. The property taxes on my house in Germany are very low. - About £215 a year, payable in quarterly instalments. That money goes to pay services provided by the local council. The majority of the funding is provided by the State and Federal governments from income and other taxes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bullerboY Posted January 25, 2011 Share Posted January 25, 2011 Most places in Sheffield are Band A council tax. Band A properties are those which were worth less than £40k in 1991. However most of the houses in Sheffield are supposedly 'worth' a hell of a lot more than what they were comparatively in 1991. Anything over £90000 now should have its council tax band increased, if it is band A. All properties should be re-banded. Advantages of this would be to encourage people to price property realistically, people with expensive property would pay a fair amount of tax. Council revenue would increase and cuts need not be implemented. What do you think? I think you ought to tell me what you'r on to take me out of the real world to the land of make believe.:huh::huh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted January 26, 2011 Share Posted January 26, 2011 Where everyone receives the same level of service yes. You don't get charged a differing price depending on your income when buying a bottle of coke or a newspaper. A service is a service you're charged for it. It doesn't cost more to send a police officer to Dore than it does to Gleadless. Everyone receives the same level of service from central government. So we should abolish income tax, NI, etc... and pay a flat fee? Sound fair to you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scentral Posted January 26, 2011 Share Posted January 26, 2011 Surely most of the workers in Councils - Veolia, Kier, Streetforce etc. - have been hived off to ALMOs leaving only the pen-pushers, failed social workers and 'admin' staff to drift along until they get their (taxpayer-funded) pensions? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carosio Posted January 26, 2011 Share Posted January 26, 2011 I have a house I haven't been able to sell yet and I rent it out. I too pay the property tax, but I pass the cost on to the tenant - He pays more rent that he might otherwise do. Unfortunately, when we moved out of that house and rented it out, the property traxes soared because we were no longer for the homesteader's exemption, nor is the tenant because he doesn't pay the tax. Which house in which country are you referring to here? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carosio Posted January 26, 2011 Share Posted January 26, 2011 What this means, simply, is that if you had to pay direct for everything you use (and only what you use) you would very quickly see your costs rise substantially. The only answer to this problem is to introduce progressive taxation where the wealthy pay more and, if you want more local control, supplement this with a local income tax also. Unless, of course, you have the money to live like a king over the great unwashed masses! If you have, you should pay more. But let's go further - you should be ashamed that you don't pay more! I presume that your use of the word "you" refers only to the select ones that are actually liable to pay the tax - one of the main bones of contention, of course. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andysm Posted January 26, 2011 Share Posted January 26, 2011 Over the last few years house prices have fallen, but over the long term they usually go up. Many years ago my grandfather bought a perfectly good house for £212. The house my parents live in cost them £13,000. If the house price attached to each band is not updated, but houses are reassessed based on current values, then eventually everyone in Sheffield is likely to be in the highest band paying the maximum amount of council tax. What is important is that people living in the lowest value houses pay the least council tax, those in the most expensive pay the most. The cheapest houses in 1991 are likely to still be the cheapest now. The most expensive in 1991 are likely to still be the most expensive now. It is relative prices that matter, and they probably haven't changed much since 1991. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.