Council Tax

[Sheik Yir Erse]

Before library books and street lights, Beachcomber had a sensible statement on the whole situation, i.e. the Poll Tax was fundamentally fair, just appallingly poorly implemented. Equally there were probably too many exceptions, which gave rise to the likes of Thomas Sheridan Esq.

There is no 'entirely' fair method of taxation, just one which is the least unfair. It is easy to concentrate on extremes of unfairness and focus your argument there, however this does not account for the 99% of cases where it applies consistently.

Vis-à-vis a Local Income Tax; again reasonably fair, until you consider the multi-millionaire who lives off tax-free investment income, in the big fancy house. This person pays nothing under Local Income Tax, much more under Council Tax, but less under Poll Tax. However, this individual is NOT representative of 99% of society therefore why bother concentrating on it. The opposite end of the spectrum is Maw, Paw and the 3 'weans' over the age of 18 living in the council house in Govan. Again reasonably unrepresentative but an example can be made of this for both sides of the argument.

Similar arguments exist for organisations that earn a fortune in UK, but pay no Corporation Tax. Very valid, but they tend to neglect some of these organisations pay millions, or billions, in wages which are taxed therefore contribute handsomely to The Exchequer.

As the argument went before - you should not be able to choose rebates based upon what you do and don't use. Similarly you can't claim back your percentage of the £66bn Armed Forces budget if you are a pacifist. Councils should rarely guarantee services, only that they will be available 99% of the time you need them (e.g. street lights, library books, education, etc.)

One of the last things I'll say on the matter is - this type of discussion is entirely beneficial to the Forum, and has been sadly lacking in recent months. I feel this type of 'healthy' debate is what should be encouraged as opposed to insert 1....5 words of random pash, or something that rhymes with an earlier post.

Welcome back some real discussion

Viva Le Forum


N.B Posted after 2 bottles of wine, therefore hoping it makes as much sense in the morning!

[Malky]

There is no 'entirely' fair method of taxation, just one which is the least unfair. It is easy to concentrate on extremes of unfairness and focus your argument there, however this does not account for the 99% of cases where it applies consistently.

I fully agree. You will never get a "one size fits all" when it comes to taxation - you just have to find the fairest but that will always be subject to debate

N.B Posted after 2 bottles of wine, therefore hoping it makes as much sense in the morning!

You're more eloquent after 2 bottles of wine than the majority on here (including myself), are sober.

Malky

[Sweltered]

Not a case of couldn't, just not rising to the bait

Well arent i the lucky one, after 6 posts on the subject im glad you didnt, i was shaking in my boots if you hadnt even got started yet

PS if you're going to use big words at least use them properly. I think you should go back to the safety of your one syllable words

Quite happy that the use of the word is correct thank you very much. Try using the library, it'll expand yout vocabulary.

Anyway, the council tax. Has it's many flaws, but is still fairer that the rates system. I saw mention that the commercial rates have not changed in a while. I'm guessing this is to protect small business. But, if no one has the money to spend with these businesses, the level of commercial rates is irrelevant. I doubt that raising the commercial rate a little and reducing the council tax a little would make a huge difference to the economy, but it would perhaps give the council tax payers in places like campbeltown some piece of mind, given that the town is always the red headed step-child of the county.

[ionnsaigh]

The only fair system of taxation - is one based on the principal - that people pay an equal amount. Thereby
receiving an equal amount of service. Problem. Equal amounts are difficult destinations to reach - in that they use blanket sums . A thousand pounds to a poor man- represents considerably more - in terms of percentage of the overall individuals income. In other words the price of a loaf - differs greatly as to the cost of the individual concerned.
Take for example a work place scenario. Everybody contributes the same amount ( £10 ) to the gift.
This is immediately followed by the antithesis of fairness - when everyone in terms of percentage - pay differing amounts.
The cleaners £10 has to be earned in two hours - when the managers amount is considerably lower. Both buy a loaf out of Asda - the cleaner pays more. The rich in these terms -live an almost cost free existence.
If a thousand pounds to me represents X per cent of my income then in fairness - the same said amount should be applied to everyone. Chiefly X per cent = Fairness.

[smokynuk]

Poll Tax was fundamentally fair, just appallingly poorly implemented.

Agreed, i think if it was taylored more to the individual (e.g. maybe base it somehow more accurately on wealth) it would have worked. But it was more or less a once size fits all tax so was grossly unfair.

On top of that, as it was a "per person" tax, then tens of communities especially up here in the more rural areas of Scotland would be devastated as you would get all the rich southerners getting their holiday homes here and contributing nothing to the local economy in terms of money.

One of the last things I'll say on the matter is - this type of discussion is entirely beneficial to the Forum, and has been sadly lacking in recent months. I feel this type of 'healthy' debate is what should be encouraged as opposed to insert 1....5 words of random pash, or something that rhymes with an earlier post.

100% agreed on every single word

Quite happy that the use of the word is correct thank you very much. Try using the library, it'll expand yout vocabulary.

Quite happy with my use of the library thank you very much. And for YOU telling me proper use of vocabulary.

I saw mention that the commercial rates have not changed in a while. I'm guessing this is to protect small business. But, if no one has the money to spend with these businesses, the level of commercial rates is irrelevant. I doubt that raising the commercial rate a little and reducing the council tax a little would make a huge difference to the economy.

Protecting small businesses is probably the excuse you will hear if asked why commercial rates hasnt been raised for such a long time. However you have to understand that NDR(non-domestic rates) is collected differently.

Council Tax basically STAYS within the council, NDR is basically put in a big pot within the Scottish Executive, then gets dished out at the end/beginning of every financial year to each council. Therefore, raising the level of NDR would make little difference here.
Dont forget, the level of NDR is means tested depending on the business size, gross income, asset value etc. so naturally businesses down here would be paying less anyway. On top of tay they would get grants for opening up in such a rural area.
My point is, if NDR was raised across the board, it would hit the big businesses harder than the smaller ones, which would mean smaller businesses would probably benefit in the longrun.

[Ship called Dignity]

Dont forget, the level of NDR is means tested depending on the business size, gross income, asset value etc.

Is the correct now?

[smokynuk]

Dont forget, the level of NDR is means tested depending on the business size, gross income, asset value etc.

Is the correct now?

As far as i know, yes, unless you can expand on this and correct me where im wrong..?

[Ship called Dignity]

Dont forget, the level of NDR is means tested depending on the business size, gross income, asset value etc.

Is the correct now?

As far as i know, yes, unless you can expand on this and correct me where im wrong..?

Okay, you are wrong. Your intention is correct but the likes of business size has no bearing on how the rates are set. Income only applies to certain subjects (eg. pubs). Not so sure about asset value either.

I'll let someone with more knowledge than me answer it but I don't want to get shot down by the Thread Police for going off thread. Shall we open one called Non Domestic Rates?

[smokynuk]

Okay, you are wrong. Your intention is correct but the likes of business size has no bearing on how the rates are set. Income only applies to certain subjects (eg. pubs). Not so sure about asset value either.

I'll let someone with more knowledge than me answer it but I don't want to get shot down by the Thread Police for going off thread. Shall we open one called Non Domestic Rates?

Cool Glad we can get the facts straight before i get lynched. As you can tell my NDR knowledge is sketchy at best. But im sure a little talk about NDR cant harm this thread as it has direct implications on Council Tax. As mentioned before, if NDR collection would be increased it would ease the burden on domestic tax payers without loss in quality of services.

[Dunc R]

Hi Posters,

Have had a look at NDR's and it looks like they would not effect the amount of Counil Tax we pay unless we work from home. Below is a very rough calculation of the NDR, it has been said in previous posts the Commercaial properties would fal under "reliefs"

Rateable values are a key factor in the calculation of business rates but they are not the rates bill. Local authorities are responsible for calculating actual rates bills and for collecting rates and will use the rateable value in working out how much you have to pay. The local authority will apply the multiplier, (a rate in the pound) to the rateable value and then deduct any relief’s that are applicable. In Scotland the Scottish Ministers set the multiplier. . In simple terms your rates bill is worked out as follows: (rateable value x multiplier) less any reliefs = rates bill.
The business multiplier for 2007/2008 is:

The Scottish Ministers set the uniform poundage rate to be levied throughout Scotland for each financial year (i.e. 1 April to 31 March). The poundage rate for Scotland in 2007-08 is 44.1 pence (in 2008-09 the rate poundage will be 45.8 pence). Larger businesses in 2007-08 (rateable value in excess of £29,000) pay a poundage supplement of 0.3 pence (in 2008-09 the poundage supplement will be 0.4 pence).
Small businesses Scotland * - 44.1p in the pound

(*For Scotland a small business = is one where the total rateable value is under £29,000 some businesses may be eligible for small business relief, which can affect the amount of rates that you pay.)
Example:
A property with a rateable value of £29,000 would be:
£29,000 x 0.444p = £12789 less any reliefs that are applicable
l

[Sweltered]

thread police AND Typing police.
your a busy man.

Aye it's a long time since I did my YTS stint in the rates department

[general jack o'niell]

another of those career opportunities you let slip past you, from your jacuzzi in florida, tell us allan, apart from the sun, the fact you look slimmer than everyone else you meet, the cheaper cost of a good steak and the wall to wall TV sports coverage, where did it all go so horribly wrong?

[Sweltered]

HAHAHAHA

[general jack o'niell]

at least you haven't your oldests brothers poor mooth, nevermind lawrence tynes affording his own county, we should start our own country, independent amongst all others in these septic isles, a tax haven for the wealthy or as one person quoted to someone the other day "its nice to be a big fish in the small pond that is scotland"

you'll be following sir sean home won't you? once the dollar reaches the value of a dog license, thats 37.5p to all you non license owning dog lovers without a tesco bag on you when you "walk" your pooch up my way.

did those ratcatcher on st kilda have to pay council tax? i think we have a right to know!!!!

"walk"------to stand and watch the dog sh!t on the school playing field, then leave without removing said excrement.

[Kintyre Lad]

But if you ask me, what they need to do is put up the cost of rates on commercial properties, which has been frozen for umpteen years. But of course the council would never do that seeing as they need the businesses in this dying town.

Why would that improve the services in the town?

So you want to increase rates in an already "dying town"? How would increasing the rates improve or encourage any business to exist? It is hard enough running a business without more increases.

PS - "Dying town" - in whose eyes? Don't you think there is a dramatic improvement in the town over the last 5 years? Or have you been here long enough to know that!