In message , Rod Speed
writes
hugh wrote
John Williamson wrote
hugh wrote
John Williamson

Council tax valuations

The revaluations should have been no more than five years apart.

Revaluation should only take place when a property is sold IMO.
That is the only point at which the value of the
property has any
relationship with your income.

Then you get the situation where, like my previous home, it doesn't
change hands for ten years, by which time it had almost quadrupled in
value. the one over the road changed hands four time while I was
there, and septupled in value over the same period, before dropping
back to five times it's 2001 value. Under the current system,
they're both in Band A, and both sold for about the
same price in 2001.

I know a number of people who have been in the same house for over
thirty years. Are you suggesting that their property taxes should be
based on a value from the 1970s?

Why not?

Essentially because what the property tax is spent on isnt any
different for those that have owned the place for over 30 years
than it is for those who have only owned it for a year or so.

The tax is mostly spent on social services and education, not services
directly related to properties
Their property value now is determined by what other people can
afford to pay for it, whereas they may well could not
now afford to buy it themselves.

Irrelevant to what property tax they should pay.

What is relevant?
The reality is the whole principle of a property tax is largely "unfair".

You can say that about any tax. They all have their downsides.

But first you must define what criteria for assessing "fairness".

And thats a hell of a lot easier said than done with tax.


Agreed, but until you do calling something fair or unfair is a bit
meaningless, but one of the first criteria to be mentioned is usually
ability to pay and council tax pays no regard to that.
--
hugh