Archive for The Motor Forum "We are mature men in the highest cadres of our careers"
 


       The Motor Forum Forum Index -> General
JohnC

Council Tax

How much do you pay? We currently pay £2,600 for a house in the top band but it is worth perhaps £350K. When we moved in, the house was in the 2nd top band but because the previous owners had added an extension, it was put up a band after ownership changed.

It isn't going to affect anyone south of the border but the Scottish Government have started their project on social engineering. Announced yesterday, the top band of council tax is going up by approximately £600 when you include the 3% annual increase which puts me in exactly the same position as those in the £1m houses just up the road. Basically anything with 3 bedrooms in our area is in the top band, so every family house.

The Scottish Government also froze the level at which people pay higher rate tax at £43,000 instead of increasing it as in England and Wales to £50,000, meaning that someone in Scotland with a £300K house earning £50K a year will be £600 worse off than they were and £2K worse off than a colleague in England. This is the thin edge of the wedge and due to the failure to increase the higher rate tax band in line with earnings and inflation, it is now targeting far too many people you would consider to be in the middle earner bracket! Had the higher rate tax band been increased in line with inflation, it would now be somewhere in excess of £75,000.

I remember when I started work that I aspired to be a higher rate taxpayer but that bubble is now well and truly burst.
Martin

Ours is £2,300 a year and is in Band F, which according to the Nationwide Calculator is correct, as that covers houses in our area with a current value of just under £500k
Humphrey The Pug

£1486 pa Band C, house is 2 bed and worth approx £280,000.
Frank Bullitt

We pay £1350 a year for a house in Band D which we had valued last night (here we go again...) at just over £300k, it seems perfectly reasonable to me.
Giant

Band B for me which equates to £101/month after the single occupancy discount.
gonnabuildabuggy

Martin wrote:
Ours is £2,300 a year and is in Band F, which according to the Nationwide Calculator is correct, as that covers houses in our area with a current value of just under £500k
.

That's interesting. Ours is £1840, which is Band E though I'd reckon our house is worth presently £450-475K. We have had a loft conversion which is under their radar (no idea how they pick these things up but it's not massively obvious and Google Street view doesn't pick up house fully).

That said, if our house was in Band F, which for our area has got to be £500K plus properties it's only £2174.

Our 2 bed flat in Northampton is worth say £125K and is Band C and that's £1400 per year which seems massively unfair.

Therefore I'd say that in theory we need to lower the cost for smaller properties and raise it for large.

This would have the benefit of encouraging those occupying large homes but with less residents to downsize and perhaps help with the house price issues and housing problems.

The problem though is politics and demographics. Too many elderly people carry on living in large homes on their own but they are a key Conservative voter demographic so the likelihood of council tax rising on large homes is limited.

In Canada my brother pays a massive % of his property value as rates/council tax and they all seem to accept that it's a fair system.

Until elderly care is moved out of council budgets they need every penny they can get.
Michael

We're band F as well which is at £2197, the last agent we had around reckons the house is worth just over £500k.
Twelfth Monkey

About £1,800.  Seems like a bargain compared with some of the figures mentioned thus far.
gooner

Our last house was band C but this one, being new and so worth more despite being similar size is band D. I think it's about £1600/yr.
Giant

Band B for me which equates to £101/month after the single occupancy discount.
TreVoR

Our last house was band D.  This one is band F and I am paying about £2,400 per annum.  I'm not sure how much the house is worth - probably £400-450k, but it is certainly worth a good deal more than we paid for it.
Chip Butty

Band G = £2607 I think.
Nice Guy Eddie

Band E and I think its around £2,100 PA. Its value has risen to around £650k but is only about 1300sq ft.

I assume its not worked out on the house price but the sq ft?

We're about to carry out a large extension, around 750sq ft, so would my property then get re-banded after completion of works?
Roadsterstu

The 2 bed I am selling is in band B and I was paying just under £90 per month with the single person discount. Where I am now the monthly payment is about £140 (with no SPD).  It's a 3 bed and is in band C. The house value is around the 175k mark.
JohnC

Nice Guy Eddie wrote:
We're about to carry out a large extension, around 750sq ft, so would my property then get re-banded after completion of works?


A house on which work has been carried out which requires a building warrant or planning permission will get re-banded after it is sold - you get to enjoy the current banding and the new buyer gets a sharp shock some time later!
TreVoR

Nice Guy Eddie wrote:
Band E and I think its around £2,100 PA. Its value has risen to around £650k but is only about 1300sq ft.

I assume its not worked out on the house price but the sq ft?

We're about to carry out a large extension, around 750sq ft, so would my property then get re-banded after completion of works?


The council tax band is worked out on its value in 1991 for Scotland and England.
Nice Guy Eddie

JohnC wrote:
Nice Guy Eddie wrote:
We're about to carry out a large extension, around 750sq ft, so would my property then get re-banded after completion of works?


A house on which work has been carried out which requires a building warrant or planning permission will get re-banded after it is sold - you get to enjoy the current banding and the new buyer gets a sharp shock some time later!


BOOM!

They're a funny bunch the government when it come to tax take. Odd that there's this untapped source of additional income. I'm not looking to move for the next 20 years hopefully and therefore the council are missing out on potentially 20k from me alone in that time.
Big Blue

Band F. Went up as previous extensions were assessed when we moved in. It's £215 per month over 10 months so £2150. It's assessed sale value is ridiculous considering it's just a normal family home in a dormitory suburb. Not that I'm complaining.
simonp

Martin wrote:
Ours is £2,300 a year and is in Band F, which according to the Nationwide Calculator is correct, as that covers houses in our area with a current value of just under £500k


About the same as this, but our house is "worth" nearer £400K than 500...
Blarno

No idea what band I'm in, ours is about £90 a month on a house worth £115k.
TreVoR

From the looks of this, Durham is expensive for council tax.  
Nice Guy Eddie

I guess its due to the number of properties in the area. We're cheaper down here because the density for housing.

Anyone who lives in London, I understand pay very little and the services they receive are second to none.
Grampa

£1200 ish for a 3 bedroom semi-detached in a nice location with sea views.
Andy C

Band B , can't remember how much it is -£100 odd quid a month I think

House is a 3 bed semi worth about 170
Scouse

£1600 on a band D worth around 350.
Big Blue

TreVoR wrote:
From the looks of this, Durham is expensive for council tax.  


From the OP I'd suggest our Scots friends are being poked up the arse with a large spike.

Yes if you look at the density of housing where I live then work out the average band D tax there's a lot of money there to collect our bins. I have to pay extra for the garden bins (we have a fair sized garden and two of the things is barely enough sometimes). In fairness we do have well swept streets, manicured verges, husbanded trees, an inordinate number of parks and recreational spaces so my joke about the bins is pretty unfounded. It's a great place to live and raise kids if I'm honest: close enough to London for it to not be an event to go there (my oldest daughter goes to language school in Fitzrovia every Saturday); green enough to enjoy playing outside; schools are good and if they're clever there's still grammars in our borough and of course (as seen in another thread) not too distant from LGW or LHR.
TreVoR

Big Blue wrote:
TreVoR wrote:
From the looks of this, Durham is expensive for council tax.  


From the OP I'd suggest our Scots friends are being poked up the arse with a large spike.

Yes if you look at the density of housing where I live then work out the average band D tax there's a lot of money there to collect our bins. I have to pay extra for the garden bins (we have a fair sized garden and two of the things is barely enough sometimes). In fairness we do have well swept streets, manicured verges, husbanded trees, an inordinate number of parks and recreational spaces so my joke about the bins is pretty unfounded. It's a great place to live and raise kids if I'm honest: close enough to London for it to not be an event to go there (my oldest daughter goes to language school in Fitzrovia every Saturday); green enough to enjoy playing outside; schools are good and if they're clever there's still grammars in our borough and of course (as seen in another thread) not too distant from LGW or LHR.


The top band in Durham pays £3.3k per annum. John C pays £200 more than me for two bands higher!
Bob Sacamano

We pay £1960 a year, I think it's Band D, Newcastle suburb on a property valued £375k.

We moved in 11 years ago and I think the tax was about £1750 then, so it's not really gone up much over the years. The way councils are funded has changed and Newcastle has been hit disproportionately hard compared to down south and it's really starting to show now in the street cleaning and general upkeep of green spaces.
Roadrunner

Band E, about £440,000 and we pay £2,036.
Big Blue

I was considering the size of the bill vs the value of the asset.
Tim

We're paying just over £2400 a year for a property worth approx. £235k.

Our roads are shit, not sure what the money's getting spent on.
TreVoR

Big Blue wrote:
I was considering the size of the bill vs the value of the asset.


Ah.  If you look at it that way, it is expensive.
gonnabuildabuggy

Grampa wrote:
£1200 ish for a 3 bedroom semi-detached in a nice location with sea views.


I'm not sure on the premium on Sea views? Not a problem where I live but might be worth erecting a massive fence in front of your house before the council come round re-banding to ensure you're not taxed on them.
Clunes

Currently Band D - £1537 per year

If we sold it would be rebanded at E due to our extension

Current value around £750,000
Nice Guy Eddie

Best value so far.
Chris M Wanted a V-10

Roadrunner wrote:
Band E, about £440,000 and we pay £2,036.

Very similar in Surrey Heath, band E, recently valued at around £460,000 (we paid around £105k 20 years ago) and £2075 council tax
canadian bacon

Bought ours in 2012 for about 750,000c$, tax was 4200c$ a year, the agency that values houses sent me a questionaire asking what our plans for the house were (basically a fishing trip, to see if they could charge us more tax), I ignored it, so they gave us an inflationary raise anyway. Fast forward to this year, the tax is now 5300c$ the house is now worth 1.2m, but our salaries has not gone up by commensurate amounts, so not sure how this is sustainable.

I dread to think how people on fixed incomes can cope.
Chris M Wanted a V-10

canadian bacon wrote:
I dread to think how people on fixed incomes can cope.

You get into more and more debt each year (and/or cut your standard of living to the bone, eg no holidays, cheap brands of food and clothing) until you are fortunate enough to win or inherit some money.  It's grim and I dread to think how the really poor manage.  Politicians are just so far out of touch with reality that it's untrue.

I've kept a list somewhere of how much our council tax has increased over the past 20 years (same house) and when I next dig it out I'll try to remember to post the info here. Basically almosy every year it has risen far greater than the rate of inflation, and far greater than any annual wage rise that I've had - there have been many years when I got no rise yet all the bills went up.
JohnC

canadian bacon wrote:

I dread to think how people on fixed incomes can cope.


When you consider that the State Pension is going to be c£150/week, it would appear that most pensioners will be expected to build a cardboard house in a field somewhere.
Big Blue

If it's the family home you raised your kids in because the schools and your commute were good you downsize and let the next generation of taxpayers move in.

As Chris said: most of us on here have no idea how the poor manage. Sone of the poor where my ma lives make homes cut into the rocks. That's in France, a first world country (allegedly).
gonnabuildabuggy

Big Blue wrote:
If it's the family home you raised your kids in because the schools and your commute were good you downsize and let the next generation of taxpayers move in.


This.

Things change, if you aren't smart enough (or more likely are too reluctant to accept your changing circumstances and are too busy clinging onto memories) then you'll end up poorer for hanging on to a big house.

We've pondered a bigger house for a while, but with two kids leaving within 3 yrs the idea of buying something bigger seems daft, we'd end up rattling round a larger house with the unused bedrooms and extra en-suites, spend more time dusting empty rooms and then have more maintenance and council tax bills for something that's 50% utilised.

That would be madness surely?

My Parents in Law and Mother are both looking to downsize (Parents in law done it once already to clear mortgage 15 yrs ago) in the next 2 yrs.

I've seen other friends parents cling onto their home to the point they were unable to move then suddenly the bills really rack up as they needed live in carers etc.

EDIT - downsizing also usually releases cash to help with living costs. Frankly if you live in a house you can't afford to keep and it's too big for you then you are a fool.
franki68

Manchester actually bury council ...just under £4K/year

Cotswolds £2600 .  Both houses same value and bury only empty bins once every 3 weeks.
Martin

Agree that you shouldn't live in a house you can't afford, but downsizing isn't always the right answer.  My parents still live in the house they had built nearly 30 years ago and rattle around in it a bit, but they love being able to accommodate their children and all the grand children, even if it is only for a few nights a year.
gooner

The idea of older generations downsizing and passing family homes on to younger families is all very well but often the cost to move outweighs any benefit. E.g. My parents live alone in a four bed house but having looked at three beds that have comparable or, ideally, better living space, there's not a lot of difference so once legal fees and stamp duty are factored in it'll cost them more than they can afford. Likewise my wife's grandmother who is now widowed and lives alone in a three bed house. She could now do with having a bungalow but such is the demand that even 2 bed bungalows cost more than her 3 bed house, so she's stuck. Extrapolate this sort of situation across the country and you can see why so many young families end up squeezing into smaller properties whilst empty nesters rattle around large 3 or 4 bed houses they can barely afford to heat!
Bob Sacamano

gooner wrote:
The idea of older generations downsizing and passing family homes on to younger families is all very well but often the cost to move outweighs any benefit. E.g. My parents live alone in a four bed house but having looked at three beds that have comparable or, ideally, better living space, there's not a lot of difference so once legal fees and stamp duty are factored in it'll cost them more than they can afford. Likewise my wife's grandmother who is now widowed and lives alone in a three bed house. She could now do with having a bungalow but such is the demand that even 2 bed bungalows cost more than her 3 bed house, so she's stuck. Extrapolate this sort of situation across the country and you can see why so many young families end up squeezing into smaller properties whilst empty nesters rattle around large 3 or 4 bed houses they can barely afford to heat!


My mother is a widow and still lives in the large 4 bedroom family home we moved into in 1976. She has a downstairs bathroom and enough room to make her second lounge a bedroom so she planned on living solely downstairs and renting the upstairs to Kosovans. Of course Brexit has scuppered that plan.
gonnabuildabuggy

Martin wrote:
Agree that you shouldn't live in a house you can't afford, but downsizing isn't always the right answer.  My parents still live in the house they had built nearly 30 years ago and rattle around in it a bit, but they love being able to accommodate their children and all the grand children, even if it is only for a few nights a year.


As long as they can afford it then it's their prerogative what they do, but it's those that say they can't I have an issue with.

Oddly enough it's why I don't own a Ferrari. I could afford to buy one but the running costs are beyond my means.  And I sold the 93 Cab when it was just a driveway ornament costing me depreciation and not getting used. The wife encouraged me to keep it but having something sitting on the drive unused and depreciating seemed mad when we were tightening our belts.

The cost of moving is an issue so downsizing needs to be planned e.g. 4 bed house to 2 bed flat? Rather than one step at a time.
Bob Sacamano

Downsizing is an issue for us - but it's finding somewhere that has a good amount of downstairs living space, which we want, without extra bedrooms that we don't want or need.
Giant

Downsizing is only an option for those in larger houses to start with. Those nearer the bottom of the ladder have less option to do so and as gooner says, the cost to change is greater than the savings.
gooner

Giant wrote:
Downsizing is only an option for those in larger houses to start with. Those nearer the bottom of the ladder have less option to do so and as gooner says, the cost to change is greater than the savings.


Well indeed, and as Bob's highlighted, it's easy to find houses with less rooms but if you want more living space it'll cost you much more than your house with more bedrooms but less usable space is worth.

I'll also add that for my grandmother in law she'd also have to sort out 40 years worth of stuff in her late husbands woodworking shed and gardening sheds and that's before even thinking about the attic! She just doesn't have the energy any more to cope with that even if we were to help.
gonnabuildabuggy

gooner wrote:
I'll also add that for my grandmother in law she'd also have to sort out 40 years worth of stuff in her late husbands woodworking shed and gardening sheds and that's before even thinking about the attic! She just doesn't have the energy any more to cope with that even if we were to help.


What's the plan for the future then? Or sit tight and hope she doesn't get frail?

All that stuff will need sorting at some point.........
Bob Sacamano

gooner wrote:


I'll also add that for my grandmother in law she'd also have to sort out 40 years worth of stuff in her late husbands woodworking shed and gardening sheds and that's before even thinking about the attic! She just doesn't have the energy any more to cope with that even if we were to help.


We're going through this with my mother at the moment. At the age of 75 she's just ordered and had delivered her first skip. You would not believe how excited she is by this and phones me regularly on updates, fill level, neighbours putting stuff in, what's gone in, did I want such and such before it goes it etc.

It's always difficult to know what to get her for Xmas but honestly I'm thinking about just getting her another one for the end of December, she'll be made up.
Big Blue

I have this horror every time I go to my mum's. She is loathe to deal with anything from my late stepfather's era and I'm just too busy / in another country to do it. I have plans for the records, the trains are coming to mine, the library stays and the 70years of National Geographic needs to have the dozen or so specials dug out for collector sale and the rest incinerated on the basis no one will have enough time in their life to read them all.
gooner

gonnabuildabuggy wrote:
gooner wrote:
I'll also add that for my grandmother in law she'd also have to sort out 40 years worth of stuff in her late husbands woodworking shed and gardening sheds and that's before even thinking about the attic! She just doesn't have the energy any more to cope with that even if we were to help.


What's the plan for the future then? Or sit tight and hope she doesn't get frail?

All that stuff will need sorting at some point.........


Same plan as most of her generation, she'll cross that bridge when she comes to it! She's in her early 70's and in good health. My concern is not her but my own grandparents who are in their 90's now and as far as I can gather have made no allowances for the fact their 3 bed bungalow on Muddiford that's probably worth north of £400k is going to land my mum and aunt with a significant inheritance tax bill at some point in the next decade. My family have a really bad habit of playing-it-by-ear. Drives my wife nuts whenever they're planning family events!

My wife's uncle was planning to start going through a lot of the old tools etc, but then his wife had a three year battle with aggressive lung cancer to deal with (a battle she sadly lost a few weeks ago).
Big Blue

I don't agree with IHT but not sure being given an asset then being taxed on it is much of a headache unless it's a collection of large real estate properties that cumulatively are a pain in the arse to deal with before you can pay the bill.
gonnabuildabuggy

12th or John C see will be along in a minute to correct me/confirm but I think you get £365K allowance per person on property so anything under £730K wouldn't be subject to inheritance tax.

However I suspect they won't die together so some form of IHT planning is recommended.

My Mum has spent 5 yrs sorting her house in advance of finally downsizing when she is 80 (18 months time) at which point she will get a flat close to me so I can help her when needed and organise work men/carers, etc as needed, as well as take her out to ensure she maintains mobility etc.

All that's left now is just for a) Bob's Skip b) Her new place c) The Auction House.

I just hope nothing happens to her in that period. 3 neighbours have died in the last 12 months (they were in their early 80's).

Less sure about my Dad's plans but he will have to move when he gets frail as I'm not doing a 10 hr round trip to Devon to see him.

I see friendss trapped looking after elderly parents trapped in their own homes some distance away and wasting whole weekends having to go down to look after them because they refuse to move.
Frank Bullitt

Thankfully I am the child furthest away from my parents, long may that continue.

Big Blue wrote:
I don't agree with IHT but not sure being given an asset then being taxed on it is much of a headache unless it's a collection of large real estate properties that cumulatively are a pain in the arse to deal with before you can pay the bill.


I don't have an issue with IHT at all, it's unearned wealth on behalf of the individual benefiting.
JohnC

Everyone gets an IHT nil rate band of £325K. If you are married and one dies, leaving everything to the other, the unused proportion of the deceased's £325K gets transferred to the surviving spouse. Transfers between spouses on death don't have any tax charges.

The above reliefs cover all assets whatever they are.

There is an additional relief starting next year which gives additional IHT exemption if the family home is passed to the next generation. It will start at £100K for 2017/18 and increase annually to £175K by 2020/21.
gonnabuildabuggy

Frank Bullitt wrote:
I don't have an issue with IHT at all, it's unearned wealth on behalf of the individual benefiting.


Similar. Especially given most of it is generally Capital Gain via Property value increase so not actually earned income from the deceased either.
gonnabuildabuggy

JohnC wrote:
There is an additional relief starting next year which gives additional IHT exemption if the family home is passed to the next generation. It will start at £100K for 2017/18 and increase annually to £175K by 2020/21.


How will this work then?

For sake of simple numbers, if my Mum's home was her only asset and worth £425K then would there be no inheritance tax due if I and my brother are the beneficiaries of her will?
JohnC

gonnabuildabuggy wrote:
JohnC wrote:
There is an additional relief starting next year which gives additional IHT exemption if the family home is passed to the next generation. It will start at £100K for 2017/18 and increase annually to £175K by 2020/21.


How will this work then?

For sake of simple numbers, if my Mum's home was her only asset and worth £425K then would there be no inheritance tax due if I and my brother are the beneficiaries of her will?


That's right, as long as it happens after 6/4/17. Before that £100K would be taxed at 40%
gonnabuildabuggy

JohnC wrote:
That's right, as long as it happens after 6/4/17. Before that £100K would be taxed at 40%


Why 40%? is all IHT at that rate?

I'm hoping my Mum lives well beyond 6/4/17

However if she loses her health then I'd hope it's a swift decline for her sake.
JohnC

gonnabuildabuggy wrote:

Why 40%? is all IHT at that rate?



Every penny taxed at 40% I'm afraid.
gonnabuildabuggy

JohnC wrote:
gonnabuildabuggy wrote:

Why 40%? is all IHT at that rate?



Every penny taxed at 40% I'm afraid.


I think (?) it lowers if a portion goes to charity?
JohnC

gonnabuildabuggy wrote:
JohnC wrote:
gonnabuildabuggy wrote:

Why 40%? is all IHT at that rate?



Every penny taxed at 40% I'm afraid.


I think (?) it lowers if a portion goes to charity?


Gifts to charity in a will are exempt from tax and if the will leaves more than 10% of the net estate to charity there is a lower rate of 36%. I have never seen this happen but you can read up on it here: https://www.gov.uk/inheritance-tax/overview
Chris M Wanted a V-10

gonnabuildabuggy wrote:
Frank Bullitt wrote:
I don't have an issue with IHT at all, it's unearned wealth on behalf of the individual benefiting.


Similar. Especially given most of it is generally Capital Gain via Property value increase so not actually earned income from the deceased either.

Yes but.....
In some (a majority?) of cases, tax was paid on the money when it was earned. If you chose to spend that money, on which you have already paid tax, to buy something that appreciates, the government taxes you yet again on the appreciated value which IMHO is wrong. After all, if the government invested wisely it could also ensure that its assets appreciate, however it appears to squander its money (our taxes) instead of using it wisely
gonnabuildabuggy

JohnC wrote:
I have never seen this happen


That is surprising, I thought people were more generous than that.
Chris M Wanted a V-10

Recent experience as an Executor led to this advice:
If you are going to leave money to charity, leave a prescribed amount and NOT a percentage. The charities have teams of lawyers lined up to haggle over what the "value of the estate" is, to push it up as high as possible so that they get the most cut, whereas if you leave a specified sum, eg £5000, it is so much easier to administer.
gonnabuildabuggy

Chris M Wanted a V-10 wrote:
Recent experience as an Executor led to this advice:
If you are going to leave money to charity, leave a prescribed amount and NOT a percentage. The charities have teams of lawyers lined up to haggle over what the "value of the estate" is, to push it up as high as possible so that they get the most cut, whereas if you leave a specified sum, eg £5000, it is so much easier to administer.


Thanks, good advise and I'd heard similar.

Problems with my Mum's will and many vagaries in it (for which I suspect we could have sued the solicitor to the point of bankruptcy for neglect) meant I had to get her to re-draw it earlier this year and it now features a fixed amount to avoid such issues.
Bob Sacamano

Chris M Wanted a V-10 wrote:
gonnabuildabuggy wrote:
Frank Bullitt wrote:
I don't have an issue with IHT at all, it's unearned wealth on behalf of the individual benefiting.


Similar. Especially given most of it is generally Capital Gain via Property value increase so not actually earned income from the deceased either.

Yes but.....
In some (a majority?) of cases, tax was paid on the money when it was earned. If you chose to spend that money, on which you have already paid tax, to buy something that appreciates, the government taxes you yet again on the appreciated value which IMHO is wrong. After all, if the government invested wisely it could also ensure that its assets appreciate, however it appears to squander its money (our taxes) instead of using it wisely


I have sympathy with this - it's double taxation. Similarly, if you take your taxed income and put in a bank account you're taxed again on the interest. They tax a gallon of petrol and then charge VAT on that tax.
Frank Bullitt

Chris M Wanted a V-10 wrote:
gonnabuildabuggy wrote:
Frank Bullitt wrote:
I don't have an issue with IHT at all, it's unearned wealth on behalf of the individual benefiting.


Similar. Especially given most of it is generally Capital Gain via Property value increase so not actually earned income from the deceased either.

Yes but.....
In some (a majority?) of cases, tax was paid on the money when it was earned. If you chose to spend that money, on which you have already paid tax, to buy something that appreciates, the government taxes you yet again on the appreciated value which IMHO is wrong. After all, if the government invested wisely it could also ensure that its assets appreciate, however it appears to squander its money (our taxes) instead of using it wisely


That is undermined by one fundamental element - the person who earned the increase (and paid tax on the original income that paid for it) is not the party affected under IHT - it is the hangers on who want a free lunch without having to work for it, those who inherit.
Bob Sacamano

I always knew children were hangers on wanting a free lunch!  
Frank Bullitt

The key is supporting them throughout life

Got my council tax (well, Business Rates) through for 2017-18 - £762k
JohnC

Frank Bullitt wrote:
The key is supporting them throughout life



.......and then give them what you don't need at least 7 years before you keel over - no tax at all! (and "they" can't get at it to pay for your nursing home)
Scouse

Frank Bullitt wrote:
The key is supporting them throughout life

Got my council tax (well, Business Rates) through for 2017-18 - £762k


It may well be naive of me, but I don't for the life of me see the point of a public institution paying business rates. It just seems a make-work exercise. Government (Central) gives money to government institution (NHS) which gives money to government (Local Council)??????
Chris M Wanted a V-10

JohnC wrote:
Frank Bullitt wrote:
The key is supporting them throughout life



.......and then give them what you don't need at least 7 years before you keel over - no tax at all! (and "they" can't get at it to pay for your nursing home)

Ah.... my dad is all for giving everything away to avoid tax, my mum is the opposite and wants to keep everything for herself.  Sadly dad is now, we believe, very close to the end and mum shows no signs of altering her wishes.

Ref earlier point(s), my aim (like my father's) would be to ensure that I provided as much as I could for my children to enjoy in their middle and later ages.  There is an awful lot to be said for financial security; job losses in the past have meant that I have been in fear of losing our home and, quite possibly, everything else on at least 2 occasions.  Knowing that it is now mine is a huge relief.
scamper

HM Forces household, so no direct council tax!  

I have no idea why.
Big Blue

scamper wrote:
HM Forces household, so no direct council tax!  

I have no idea why.


You're supposed to be on a base so your council tax is paid on the basis you wouldn't pay any if you lived on the base. It's cheaper for the MoD to pay Council Tax than maintain roads, drains and public spaces to residential standards. Apparently.
scamper

Big Blue wrote:
scamper wrote:
HM Forces household, so no direct council tax!  

I have no idea why.


You're supposed to be on a base so your council tax is paid on the basis you wouldn't pay any if you lived on the base. It's cheaper for the MoD to pay Council Tax than maintain roads, drains and public spaces to residential standards. Apparently.


That sounds about right. Not like the MoD to skimp on maintenance of living quarters!
Boxer6

scamper wrote:
Big Blue wrote:
scamper wrote:
HM Forces household, so no direct council tax!  

I have no idea why.


You're supposed to be on a base so your council tax is paid on the basis you wouldn't pay any if you lived on the base. It's cheaper for the MoD to pay Council Tax than maintain roads, drains and public spaces to residential standards. Apparently.


That sounds about right. Not like the MoD to skimp on maintenance of living quarters!


If ever a 'sarcasm' smiley was needed . . .
Big Blue

Yep. Definitely required.
Chris M Wanted a V-10

OK, here we go ref something posted way back when...
2017-2018 council tax bill now received for £2163.15
2016-17 was £2074.47
2015-16 was £2003.81

2010-11 was £1843.01

2005-06 was £1509.20

2000-01 was £1021.62
and the earliest full financial year I can find,
1997-98 was £754.21
(we moved into the house in Feb 1996)

So in 20 years, the council tax has all but trebled; I wish my income had done the same !
Martin

Mine has gone up by a bit more (£150) to £2360.
JohnC

I got mine in at the weekend. It's up by about £400 and I am sure my house is worth considerably less than yours Martin.


Bob Sacamano

Chris M Wanted a V-10 wrote:
OK, here we go ref something posted way back when...
2017-2018 council tax bill now received for £2163.15
2016-17 was £2074.47
2015-16 was £2003.81

2010-11 was £1843.01

2005-06 was £1509.20

2000-01 was £1021.62
and the earliest full financial year I can find,
1997-98 was £754.21
(we moved into the house in Feb 1996)



So in 20 years, the council tax has all but trebled; I wish my income had done the same !


I bet you're not complaining that the value of your house has tripled in the same period though - and hasn't been re-banded?

For what it's worth I don't think the increases you show are too bad. We've lived in this house for 12 years and Council Tax has gone up from £1750 to £2056 for a Band E property in that time. It works out about 2% a year or something.

This year Newcastle City Council have added an extra £86 for adult social care which is seriously underfunded. I would be happy to pay double that to ensure this is funded properly - it would only work out an extra £7 a so a month - a Netflix subscription, basically.
Chris M Wanted a V-10

Bob Sacamano wrote:
I bet you're not complaining that the value of your house has tripled in the same period though - and hasn't been re-banded?

It was re-banded upwards, as were all houses in the road from what I gather, about 18 months ago, followed a few months later by re-banding again, that reversed the earlier increase. I wonder how much that cost the local authority???

As to value, I was a bit shocked last year to find out that its value has gone up approx 4-fold in the time we have lived there - this is of no particulaar worth until you come to move house and as other larger houses have gone up similarly percentage-wise, it means that there is a huge gulf in price to get a house with one more bedroom in our area, like about 40 to 50% more for one more room !  Madness
Bob Sacamano

Chris M Wanted a V-10 wrote:
Bob Sacamano wrote:
I bet you're not complaining that the value of your house has tripled in the same period though - and hasn't been re-banded?

It was re-banded upwards, as were all houses in the road from what I gather, about 18 months ago, followed a few months later by re-banding again, that reversed the earlier increase. I wonder how much that cost the local authority???

As to value, I was a bit shocked last year to find out that its value has gone up approx 4-fold in the time we have lived there - this is of no particulaar worth until you come to move house and as other larger houses have gone up similarly percentage-wise, it means that there is a huge gulf in price to get a house with one more bedroom in our area, like about 40 to 50% more for one more room !  Madness



Yeah but you don't need an extra bedroom, chances are you don't need as many as you have. Your house is paid for and you now have tremendous options as to what you can do or where you can live, in this country or worldwide. You have options denied to 98% of the population of this World. Wake up with a smile, mate.
gonnabuildabuggy

Bob Sacamano wrote:
Chris M Wanted a V-10 wrote:
Bob Sacamano wrote:
I bet you're not complaining that the value of your house has tripled in the same period though - and hasn't been re-banded?

It was re-banded upwards, as were all houses in the road from what I gather, about 18 months ago, followed a few months later by re-banding again, that reversed the earlier increase. I wonder how much that cost the local authority???

As to value, I was a bit shocked last year to find out that its value has gone up approx 4-fold in the time we have lived there - this is of no particulaar worth until you come to move house and as other larger houses have gone up similarly percentage-wise, it means that there is a huge gulf in price to get a house with one more bedroom in our area, like about 40 to 50% more for one more room !  Madness



Yeah but you don't need an extra bedroom, chances are you don't need as many as you have. Your house is paid for and you now have tremendous options as to what you can do or where you can live, in this country or worldwide. You have options denied to 98% of the population of this World. Wake up with a smile, mate.


This.

We have an ageing population so more demands on public services, so there needs to be an increase in taxation.

Yes, there are still plenty of efficiencies to be found but the speed of implementation is lower than the speed of increase so tax needs to go up somewhere.

Personally I'd scrap the single occupancy discount too. Too many people living in large houses they don't need and harder to provide local services too.

Frankly anyone who whinges about quality of life in this country needs to go and live in Rwanda for a week.

We are all extremely lucky just to live in this country.

The secret to happiness? Appreciate what you do have and don't think about what you don't.
Tim

gonnabuildabuggy wrote:
Personally I'd scrap the single occupancy discount too. Too many people living in large houses they don't need and harder to provide local services too.


I disagree.
Why should you pay for something based on the size of your house?

We pay the same council tax as our next door neighbours.
We have no kids, they have 2 of primary school age, our bins aren't as full as theirs, etc.

There should be a standard charge for things like street lighting, roads, etc and the rest should be based on number and age of people in the house.

Obviously I realise that's unachievable in the real world as local councils are shit at controlling anything.
Bob Sacamano

The Poll Tax was the fairest way of raising money for local services. For some reason people didn't like that.
Mike Amos

£1060 for  a one bed flat worth about 50p.
Chris M Wanted a V-10

Bob Sacamano wrote:

Yeah but you don't need an extra bedroom, chances are you don't need as many as you have.

We're family-oriented so both our daughter's bedrooms are left as theirs, with their beds and many of their possessions in them (d0n't ask about the leopards....). Oh that I could clear at least one out and turn it into a decent study ! Plus my wife would like her own study too.  Nah, we'll leave it just as it is, thank you.

Bob Sacamano wrote:
Wake up with a smile, mate.

I do  

I'm just very concerned about mum at the moment
gonnabuildabuggy

Chris M Wanted a V-10 wrote:
Bob Sacamano wrote:

Yeah but you don't need an extra bedroom, chances are you don't need as many as you have.

We're slushy and sentimental so both our daughter's bedrooms are left as theirs, with their beds and many of their possessions in them (d0n't ask about the leopards....). Oh that I could clear at least one out and turn it into a decent study ! Plus my wife would like her own study too.  Nah, we'll leave it just as it is, thank you.


FYP.

Tim - kids are investment in the future of the country. Good luck being cared for in your old age without someone else's children.

Given that we have fairly light wealth taxes in this country and assets largely escape taxation (e.g. inheritance tax thresholds are quite high) then a property tax is no bad thing.
Mike Amos

The really weird thing is that poll tax would have been reasonable if it had been thought about a bit more, I very much agree that large families should pay for their use of facilities.  Not so helpful for some of those families on reduced income though.  Perhaps there is a formula for that.
gonnabuildabuggy

Mike Amos wrote:
The really weird thing is that poll tax would have been reasonable if it had been thought about a bit more, I very much agree that large families should pay for their use of facilities.  Not so helpful for some of those families on reduced income though.  Perhaps there is a formula for that.


I agree with the principal but it's a tax that benefits the rich and penalises the poor in general. I'm not sure that's what we need right now.

The other factor is the location. The family of 3 living in 2 bed rental flat in Northampton pay virtually the same as I do with 4 people living in a 4 bed detached house 15 miles down the road. Hardly seems fair to me.

Personally I think we just need to bite the bullet and put taxes up, especially if Brexit causes wage inflation due to rising costs of living and reduction in the labour pool.
Tim

gonnabuildabuggy wrote:
Tim - kids are investment in the future of the country. Good luck being cared for in your old age without someone else's children. .


Fair point. It'd all end up being too complicated for the average council to deal with.


gonnabuildabuggy wrote:

Personally I think we just need to bite the bullet and put taxes up, especially if Brexit causes wage inflation due to rising costs of living and reduction in the labour pool.


Communist    
TreVoR

gonnabuildabuggy wrote:
Chris M Wanted a V-10 wrote:
Bob Sacamano wrote:

Yeah but you don't need an extra bedroom, chances are you don't need as many as you have.

We're slushy and sentimental so both our daughter's bedrooms are left as theirs, with their beds and many of their possessions in them (d0n't ask about the leopards....). Oh that I could clear at least one out and turn it into a decent study ! Plus my wife would like her own study too.  Nah, we'll leave it just as it is, thank you.


FYP.

Tim - kids are investment in the future of the country. Good luck being cared for in your old age without someone else's children.

Given that we have fairly light wealth taxes in this country and assets largely escape taxation (e.g. inheritance tax thresholds are quite high) then a property tax is no bad thing.


Marvellous idea - not. I already pay Corporation Tax on my profits and take a reasonable amount to live on which doesn't leave anything much left over. I pay tax on that too, of course. There wouldn't be anything left to pay a wealth tax on my company assets.  May as well sell the lot and sod off abroad.  I would have to put my rents up considerably to cover it which would cause hardship to the small businesses that I rent to.
JohnC

gonnabuildabuggy wrote:

Personally I think we just need to bite the bullet and put taxes up, especially if Brexit causes wage inflation due to rising costs of living and reduction in the labour pool.


I agree with that and would have much more respect for the Government if they had a proper tax overhaul. Tax and NI need to be amalgamated in some way or NI rates need to come down to a level where they are not worth avoiding (c5%?) and tax rates need to go up. One of the biggest problems in the tax system is the level of NI and in particular employer's NI at 13.8% which just distorts the behaviour of taxpayers and makes them incorporate when they would otherwise remain self employed. It also makes "employer's" engage agency staff or subcontractors to keep the NI cost down.

Falling Corporation Tax rates also lead to more desire to incorporate which again will costs the Treasury money although it perhaps makes us a more attractive option to large foreign companies.
gonnabuildabuggy

TreVoR wrote:
Marvellous idea - not. I already pay Corporation Tax on my profits and take a reasonable amount to live on which doesn't leave anything much left over. I pay tax on that too, of course. There wouldn't be anything left to pay a wealth tax on my company assets.  May as well sell the lot and sod off abroad.  I would have to put my rents up considerably to cover it which would cause hardship to the small businesses that I rent to.


My point was that council tax as it stands is a manageable wealth tax. I'm not suggesting that assets are taxed, that is a disenctive to invest.

Whilst inheritance tax thresholds are £325K/£650K then in the modern times the quickest way to be wealthy is to have wealthy parents. The rich are getting a lot, lot richer and those who start with nothing are having to work hard to match it.

My mum's own inherited wealth and my Dad's pensions are likely to give me something close to 25 yrs earnings on average wages (and that's after taxation) and I'd not class my parents as especially rich though canny with money.

The only downside is that this wealth comes when it's getting late to enjoy it and care home fees might eat into it a bit.

To paraphrase from the earlier comments of Bob and myself. I'm lucky to have been born in this country. For their many failings I'm even luckier to have been born to the parents I was.
TreVoR

Fair enough. I don't mind Council Tax as such, as it pays for local services. I do think a lot is wasted though.  I can't even remember why so many people objected to the poll tax - I was too young. It seemed a fairer system though on the face of it.

I object to taxing assets. They do in Spain. Council tax was very low though and was paid separately to the annual wealth tax on the value of the property we owned.

You also pay a wealth tax on bank balances over a certain amount which gave me a shock when it was taken out of my account!  It wasn't a lot but it made me ask the question.
Chris M Wanted a V-10

TreVoR wrote:
I can't even remember why so many people objected to the poll tax - I was too young.

1. Thatcher lied when she introduced it;
2. Many tenants of council/Local Authority-owned properties, notably in Scotland, did not pay "Rates" so they suddenly found themselves paying a new and very onerous tax

Ref (1) above, Thatcher said that (in England) no household that currently paid rates would end up paying more than £5 a week extra under the Poll Tax.... we did - I appealed based on Thatcher's statement but the council responded saying that "it was all lies" and we were not entitled to any transitional relief. This was at a time not long after we were married and money was quite tight, so the extra tax of around £300 per year that we were forced to pay under the Poll Tax was noticeably demanding on our finances at that time.

       The Motor Forum Forum Index -> General Page 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2
Create your own free forum | Buy a domain to use with your forum