B@stards planning to rob you when you die.

#1
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4156334.stm

Elderly 'could defer council tax'

Pensioners could defer their council tax payments until they die under a plan being considered for England.
It is one of the options Sir Michael Lyons is looking at in his government-commissioned review of local taxation in England.

The idea is that those who own a home could defer payment until after they die and their home is sold.

The Conservatives called it a "sinister death tax". Lib Dems oppose "saddling grieving families with death taxes".

Vulnerable people face either forfeiting their children's inheritance or have the bailiff knocking on their door for non-payment of rising council taxes

A similar scheme has already been proposed for Northern Ireland, although it would be up to a future devolved assembly to implement it.

Labour MP Clive Betts, who sits on the Commons committee which supervises local government ministers, told BBC Radio 4's World at One, that he backed the idea for England.

"It won't be compulsory. People will be able to pay the tax as they go along. So it is an option that is available for people. I think creating another option is entirely right.

"I think it is very unlikely that even if people chose to defer all or some of their council tax that it is going to take up all the value of their property when they sell it.

"There is still going to be quite a lot left in most cases I am sure."

Conservative local government spokeswoman Caroline Spelman said the problem was that local authority charges had risen by up to 70% since Tony Blair came to power.

"I fear that the elderly, struggling with soaring council tax bills, will be pressured into signing away their homes to the taxman," said Mrs Spelman.

"Vulnerable people face either forfeiting their children's inheritance or have the bailiff knocking on their door for non-payment of rising council taxes.

"If the Government really wanted to help the elderly, it should look to cut their bills by introducing an automatic council tax discount for pensioner households."

An Office of Deputy Prime Minister spokesman said there was no reason to think such a scheme was going to be introduced.

But a spokesman for the Lyons inquiry, due to report in December, said: "Methods of deferral are within the remit of the inquiry and are just one in a range of ideas being considered."

The Conservatives say that deferring the average Band D bill of £1,214 for 20 years in a row could leave an accumulated bill of £75,986, at current levels of interest.

Liberal Democrat local government spokeswoman Sarah Teather said: "Pensioners get a raw deal... but saddling grieving families with massive death taxes is not the answer. "Tinkering with council tax is not enough. It must be scrapped and replaced with a fair system based on ability to pay."

Professor John Muelbauer, an Oxford University economist who has given evidence to the Lyons inquiry, said the idea was to relieve pressure on pensioners who may be living on very low incomes.

The payments would not necessarily be deferred until death, but may be once a person moved into a cheaper home or residential care, he told the World at One.

He said a similar system operated in Denmark.
I just hope that the council tax is extortionate in Connaught Square, so that when the First Couple die (champagne is on ice), the next generation of the squalid Bliar brood is hit with a large demand for the profligacies of their parents.

Other than that, I completely disagree with this pathetic attempt at asset-stripping and robbery by the state.
 
#2
trouble is no matter who is in at No10, the Gov will always be looking to get more from us, but now they are grave robbing as well!!!
 
#3
Council Tax was a load of b0ll0cks from the very beginning. It's still the case that someone in the highest band only pays a maximum of three times more that someone in the lowest band. That's blatantly wrong.
Why not drop the lower band and introduce a few (or a lot) more bands at the higher end to take into account Sir Cecil Dumbington-Dumbsby who's smiling all the way to the bank.
Another alternative would be to introduce an across-the-board tax based on the actual value of the property (say 0.7% p.a.). It could be re-assessed yearly, instead of giving people coronaries every ten years or so.

MsG
 
#5
Basing a tax on the value of a propery is totally iniquitous.

Why should an old couple living in a house on a modest pension that takes them just outside of any finacial help pay the same as a family of four who are all earning near the national average wage? The value of the house that you live in has no direct bearing on your income and ability to pay. I bought my house whilst serving. Years on I am living on my Army pension which is a fraction of my previous income but I am still expected to pay on the value of a house I bought when at the peak of my earning power.

The sooner this tax is replaced with a local tax based on income not house value the better.
 
#6
Im just wondering right, now myself and my wife (+1) live in lovely rural Lincolnshire, now our council tax is about £80 a month, my wife pays about £400 a month income tax, We pay two road tax's so that is about £240 p.a , Im self employed so pay as little as i can fcuckin get away with lol! which is kind of the point of this breakdown. I sum the annual taxation disculding mine, plus the massive levy on fuel alcohol and tabs to be at least £5920 pa I know some people may pay more but jesus that is just in taxation. So know they wanna fcuck my arse when Im gone! Dear dear......... top tip to anyone, go self employed!!!!! and get a good accountant!
 
#7
Bugsy7 said:
Council Tax was a load of b0ll0cks from the very beginning. It's still the case that someone in the highest band only pays a maximum of three times more that someone in the lowest band. That's blatantly wrong.
Why not drop the lower band and introduce a few (or a lot) more bands at the higher end to take into account Sir Cecil Dumbington-Dumbsby who's smiling all the way to the bank.
Another alternative would be to introduce an across-the-board tax based on the actual value of the property (say 0.7% p.a.). It could be re-assessed yearly, instead of giving people coronaries every ten years or so.

MsG
My bold
Why is it blatantly wrong? Does the person in the higher band use more than three times the council services than someone in the lower band? I doubt it. That is blatantly using envy to justify punitive taxation.
Higher band householders are likely to use less local services because they are more likely to use private education, have decent pension provision and use less subsidised services like public transport. If the amount of rubbish left out round my way is anything to go by people in bigger houses even produce less rubbish (how the hell does a family of four living in a three bed semi fill two wheely bins? 8O ).
 
#8
Bugsy7 said:
Council Tax was a load of b0ll0cks from the very beginning. It's still the case that someone in the highest band only pays a maximum of three times more that someone in the lowest band. That's blatantly wrong.
Why not drop the lower band and introduce a few (or a lot) more bands at the higher end to take into account Sir Cecil Dumbington-Dumbsby who's smiling all the way to the bank.
Another alternative would be to introduce an across-the-board tax based on the actual value of the property (say 0.7% p.a.). It could be re-assessed yearly, instead of giving people coronaries every ten years or so.

MsG
What utter tosh. Yes, tosh. I live in a Band G house in the middle of nowhere. I get my bin collected once a fortnight. The council have to be called to come and lop THEIR trees when they endanger my property (so much for planned maintenance). I can't remember the last time I saw a policeman in the village. I have one street light of any relevance to me. So why do I pay "three times more than someone in the lowest band"? Complete nonsense.

The poll tax was fairer than council tax but because a few crusties, with no stake in the game or any intention of paying tax got out of shape about it, we ended up back on "rateable value" again. The local tax system in this country is as fcuked up as it could possibly be. If you want to tax someone because you fear they may be rich, then evidence suggests a big house is not usually a symptom of disposable income. If they sell it, then get them on capital gains by all means - ooh and stamp duty - but why should they pay more tax to live in a big house than they do to live in a one room yurt on a collective FFS!!?

Tax on the inferred value of an asset is something that human rights lawyers would be better off fiddling around with than 90% of the "good causes" they currently espouse. Right that's it...I'm proper ticked off now Bugsy.
 
#9
The poll tax was fairer than council tax
Couldn't agree more why should I pay more for local services just because I can afford it? I don't pay more for my bread and milk in Tesco's because I have a couple of quid more disposable income than some people, I along with I dare say a sizeable portion of the country are sick to death of the perception that the well off should subsidise the poor, I work damn hard for the couple of quid extra I get at the end of the month I don't want then to give it to some other idle sod, I already pay tax on my 'wealth' why should I then be taxed again if I decide to buy a larger house for my growing family.

Why the fcuk some people in this country think that they are entitled to something for nothing (the I don't/can't/can't be bothered to work) is beyond me its about time the population as a whole took some responsibility for their own lives and stopped whining about what they havn't got and what others have.

And with that and the danger of getting seriously of topic it I rant on I'll be off.

Zippy483
 
#10
Cuddles said:
What utter tosh. Yes, tosh.
Quite. I agree. I should've engaged my five backup brain cells before I wrote that, so scratch one crappy idea.
What I was basically after was some form of taxation that evens out the tax burden and makes it fairer.
So I'll have to go back to thinking about it again. Oh, I feel tired already. Just give me a few minutes, please.

MsG
 
#11
The Poll Tax should have worked and been made to work with a proviso for a more graduated scale according to income.
The problem was that too many members of the long haired rent a mob with a dog on a bit of string decided that they might have to contribute to the services they were getting for free so caused chaos. If the establishment had the moral courage to support their views it would have been a system preferable to the current one of being taxed on a non disposable asset.
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
BanjoBill The NAAFI Bar 43
filthyphil The NAAFI Bar 35
F The Intelligence Cell 7

Similar threads

Latest Threads

Top