Why is the UK against a Canada style property tax?
Posted by 27106_4life@reddit | AskUK | View on Reddit | 154 comments
In Canada, all property owners pay an annual tax on their property, between 0.5% and 2.5% of the property value. That seems far more fair than the current council tax system where a £40,000,000 house may only pay a couple thousand pounds more than a £400,000 house. Why don't we adopt such a system
DreamySkincaregal@reddit
We can't do this until property falls and inequality falls otherwise you could harm people who aren't wealthy but live in expensive places.
27106_4life@reddit (OP)
Those people are kinda by definition wealthy.
If you have a lot of assets, i.e. an expensive home, you are wealthy
web3monk@reddit
instead of this just tax wealth over £Xm including property
27106_4life@reddit (OP)
Do you think it would cut down on runaway housing inflation
web3monk@reddit
building more houses with the massive influx of taxes
Zealousideal-Ad-2728@reddit
But that doesn’t free up land. The ultra wealthy will still own that land but won’t develop it.
web3monk@reddit
Councils own significant amounts of land or could acquire them cheaply and then change use to allow houses to be built.
suiluhthrown78@reddit
The taxes arent gonna do anything, you either
- build significantly more houses per year
- reduce population growth by curbing immigration (births dont matter because 1 year olds dont need separate houses)
- make it harder for people to get mortgages so they cant buy houses - high interest rates are a great tool, this is the situation of the last two years which caused prices to freeze for the first time in a long time
Mr-Incy@reddit
Where would that tax money be spent?
Our current council tax is supposedly spent on keeping local services up to a good standard, but they aren't kept up to a good standard, we all see the state of the roads for example.
Then you have people living in rural areas where house prices tend to be higher but with less local services provided by the local councils.
Ojohnnydee222@reddit
Well, it isn't the issue. Lets say CT raised £10bn pa across the UK. It does that by putting properties into one of 8 bands.
If there was a proportionate tax on property value, the same amount could be raised - but obvs those in cheaper housing would pay less.
Mr-Incy@reddit
How does any of that answer where the money will be spent?
Ojohnnydee222@reddit
The OP didn't mention that. But anyway, how a tax is raised isn't tied to how it's spent.
Mr-Incy@reddit
You are right, they didn't, but my response did and you replied to my response.
suiluhthrown78@reddit
Thats how the tax changes and new taxes are always advertised, then in practice the trend is everyone pays more right across the board thanks to stealth increases, ministers have no interest in taking the heat from being upfront about raising the taxes that generate serious revenue like income and vat etc to pay for some new spending program.
Fred776@reddit
How are the percentages set? 2.5% could be an awful lot of money on what is in reality a fairly modest home in the south. That would be over £1000 a month on a £500K house that the owner has lived in for 20 years and would not be rich enough to buy at its current value.
superioso@reddit
Other countries have property value taxes like this and it works fine. Take Denmark as a country closer to home, they have an annual charge of 0.92% up to ~£300k and 3% on the value above £300k.
It also prevents speculative price rises.
27106_4life@reddit (OP)
Well. Yes. But then that house is worth a lot of money, so they idea is if you can't afford the taxes, you can sell it and buy a less expensive house. In the end what it works to do is limit runaway housing inflation (to a point. To be clear, COVID blew that out)
Candid_Associate9169@reddit
Are you insane? No way will that ever fly with me.
darth_edam@reddit
So you're saying your house is worth £876000 and you plead poverty?
budapest_budapest@reddit
You do realise that renters pay council tax as well? Paying council tax on a £876k property does not mean you own it, or that you’re wealthy.
darth_edam@reddit
I think that if the question "what house can I afford to live in?" is answered by a house valued at 25x the median household income then you don't get to plead poverty. Are you necessarily super wealthy and devoid of all financial worries? No, but you're in a fortunate position.
You can totally say that a property value tax of x% per year is too much (and the absurdity of house prices in the south east would be a good point in your favour) but you don't get to plead poverty.
Candid_Associate9169@reddit
It’s not my house and not for sale and renting it out is infeasible. My individual wealth is next to nothing. If the house was mine you would have a point but it’s not. It’s not a hard concept to grasp is it? . You have your view and I have mine.
27106_4life@reddit (OP)
In Canada you don't pay council tax as a renter, though obviously it's built into rent
Candid_Associate9169@reddit
Many houses in London are worth that amount. It’s been in my family since it was built and I’m the third generation to live here. My house could be worth £5 million but I could still be in a shitty financial situation. Your house worth is an asset and not income. I have no wealth from this house and no income. I’m privileged to live here and have not inherited it yet. I still plead poverty, yes.
Timely_Egg_6827@reddit
And if there aren't less expensive houses? Most of London is pretty hollowed out as it is - you have social and council housing and private rental accommodation. Then you have families who bought in the 70/80s and couldn't afford to purchase now. And then you have the genuinely rich who don't care.
Council and social housing would probably come under special rules so what you get is a move of people from the centre to suburbs and Home Counties for affordable housing, The rich and corporates continue to property speculate in London and prices rise in accessible commutes as people forced out. Housing in the UK is a lot more restricted than in Canada as a rule.
You might describe London and SE as an abnormality but it is 13% and 26% of the UK population (SE including London). West Midlands would have similar issue due to Birmingham. Average value of a house in London is £531k and those in Birmingham £234k, In Jaywick, often described as the poorest council in UK, £169k. All houses in UK are expensive - moving out tends to mean you get more for the money rather than a cheaper base price.
CrossCityLine@reddit
All the will do is litter the county with medium sized houses that people can’t afford to live in and nobody wants to buy.
ThrwAwayAdvicePlease@reddit
Errr house prices will go down though surely
CrossCityLine@reddit
A taxation method which reduces house prices will not be brought in.
ThrwAwayAdvicePlease@reddit
Sadly, I agree.
Zealousideal-Ad-2728@reddit
r/georgism go on over
No_Sugar8791@reddit
It's hard to imagine a system less likely to be implemented. Impressive.
PeterG92@reddit
I have a £240k flat. Under this I would have to pay £6,000 a year. I don't have that, that's nearly 20% of my salary
ThrwAwayAdvicePlease@reddit
How much is your council tax per year?
Trifusi0n@reddit
The problem with this in the UK is selling and buying a new property is expensive because of the stamp duty you have to pay. This is a tax on purchasing property.
JameSdEke@reddit
With the rate property prices are increasing that could send me and my family out on our arses within a few years into a worse area despite our hard work to get where we are.
Sounds like a bad scheme (live in south).
RelativeMatter3@reddit
At 2.5% you would throw the housing market into chaos and cause a significant number of defaults for those stuck with a house they can’t afford and stuck in negative equity.
A 0.25% would be more realistic.
nithanielgarro@reddit
It hasn't worked in Canada to limit house price inflation though.
In your system everyone will pay more but the more expensive houses will pay even more.
HankHippopopolous@reddit
That doesn’t make sense to me. Where should those people move to?
Their current house is probably near their job, near their family and friends, near their kids schools etc. They’ve built a whole life in that area and should be forced to move because the value of the area has gone up faster than their salaries and they can’t afford the tax on an already paid for house.
I’m all for people paying their fair share of taxes but this doesn’t seem like the right way to go about it to me.
Espi0nage-Ninja@reddit
So you want poor people to sell their homes and live in poor houses??
Trifusi0n@reddit
I imagine it would only go that high on very expensive properties, maybe £5m+
1% on that £500k property would seem pretty reasonable. Even 1.5% wouldn’t be crazy, that would be fairly in line with council tax up north in a lot of places.
No_Sugar8791@reddit
1% of 500k is 5k. That's huge.
Trifusi0n@reddit
That’s what you pay in band H at the moment, so it’s not completely insane.
https://www.rutland.gov.uk/sites/default/files/2024-03/Council%20Tax%20Notes%202024-25.pdf
budapest_budapest@reddit
My council tax (“up North”) is currently 0.48% of my property’s value. Doubling or tripling it does not sound very reasonable to me.
BppnfvbanyOnxre@reddit
My east London council tax works out right now at 0.35% and that's bloody painful enough.
27106_4life@reddit (OP)
Sure. But let's tax everyone at 0.48% so a multimillion house would also pay 0.48% instead of 0.0009%
SentientWickerBasket@reddit
People with high-value properties are not guaranteed to have cash on hand. If you're a pensioner who bought a house in London 40 years ago, you could easily be a millionaire on paper and only on paper.
Minute_Recording_372@reddit
The way I see it, we are doing absolutely 0 to stop our economy creating an increasing inequality between the asset rich and the poor. Rich on paper people are rich. They can realise their gains pretty easily in the grand scheme of things. We need to slow the growth on private asset prices relative to income and infrastructure. We also desperately need to turn around our productivity story and massive asset inflation further depresses it. I'd call it the biggest problem this country currently faces. It's going to be a harsh transition and it's going to make a lot of people very fucking angry, but I really do believe if we don't take action we're going to end up resembling a gulf state politically.
No_Sugar8791@reddit
What you're suggesting would mean people who bought 20+ years ago would need to borrow against their home to pay tax, after paying off their mortgage (or close to it). Or sell their home. To whom are they supposed to sell to? If they can't afford the tax, neither can anyone else except the super wealthy.
Minute_Recording_372@reddit
Exactly. So house prices would deflate and after a reshuffle, each would live in the home that suits their means. A widower on state pension having to sell their million pound home is a sad state of affairs but I don't really have the sympathy for that tale over the tales of the young workers and strivers who will shed blood and tears to own a home like no generation before them, and frequently come up short.
BaBaFiCo@reddit
This is the same argument farmers are making. They didn't cause the land price increase, it was wealthy bastards using it as a tax loophole.
That said, council tax banding really needs looking at.
oudcedar@reddit
No farmer will pay any tax on their land with the new proposals while they are alive. Their children might pay some tax when the family business is passed to them so it’s not at all the same as paying a property tax every year while alive.
at_triestogolf@reddit
If a farmer is due to pay IHT on say £700k after exemptions, at the reduced rate 20% of this would be £140K. So take out life insurance to cover this (not so expensive). If farmer gifts the farm and survives more than 7 years after then no IHT anyway. Very few will pay anything after they have had financial advice. The bigger and more profitable farms will just take care of it via normal tax planning. The whole fuss in the news is to get poor people on the side of the asset classes who pay a lesser rate of tax than them and convince them that it should remain so. By and large it works as critical thinking isn't a thing in the UK.
SentientWickerBasket@reddit
Yeah, the farm thing really does come across as a case of the few completely fucking it up for the many.
I have mentioned this in other threads, but as much as I like Clarkson's work, the farmers really should be angry at him. It is a bit of a piss-take that people who will be genuinely affected by this are being led by a man who is using their livelihood as a tax loophole.
KonkeyDongPrime@reddit
Council tax is based on property values that are 45 years out of date
Ojohnnydee222@reddit
That's true, but whats worse is that CT is in about 8 separate categories, and the maximum is only twice the median. It is not proportionate.
KonkeyDongPrime@reddit
Yeah it’s a joke. But also a difficult circle to square
Ojohnnydee222@reddit
It is. If we could migrate towards a lane value tax it would improve things.
KonkeyDongPrime@reddit
I agree but it’s hard to pick a metric to tax by, that’s fair. Land value vs occupancy seems like the most progressive; only then will you tax the large properties with few occupants fairly ie all of those mansions in London with only rich people living there.
c0tch@reddit
Why should I pay more tax for my 1 bedroom flat than a 6 bedroom house in Middlesbrough pays because I happen to be born somewhere house prices are mental in comparison?
Does my one person rubbish cost more to remove?
suiluhthrown78@reddit
House prices are mental in your area because a very large number of people want to live there, its not just a flat its a flat in a special location unlike middlesborough which is severely lacking in whatever your area has an abundance of
LittleSadRufus@reddit
But that doesn't explain why they should pay more council tax. If anything they should pay less, as greater density of housing means more people are paying for the same lampposts and parks etc. While other services - like rubbish collection - are unaffected by density or house prices
c0tch@reddit
Yep I live in Portsmouth the most densely populated city outside of London. Maybe Luton beats it but I can’t remember if that’s considered London or not.
The band system we currently have seems fair albeit mines higher than 3 over the road, but it is what it is.
I’m a civil servant so not like I’m minted because I live in an expensive area if anything means I have less disposable income.
c0tch@reddit
Mate Portsmouth ain’t special. It’s the most highly dense city in the uk I believe outside of London.
I already pay more council tax than many regions, taxing everyone who lives in more expensive area who have to already pay more for local businesses because their rent and tax costs are higher is just a taxation that makes zero sense.
Thinking that system is a good system is moronic.
dbxp@reddit
Same reason someone who earns more pays a higher rate of tax
c0tch@reddit
Really not the same though is it? What if I don’t earn more, why should I pay more when I already do pay more council tax than most regions.
27106_4life@reddit (OP)
Because you can move to the less expensive area.
Also, these taxes in Canada pay for schools as well
wildOldcheesecake@reddit
Listen to yourself. You’re delusional.
Ghille_Dhu@reddit
So all the lower paid people such as nurses, social workers, teachers, TAs, shop assistants have to move to the cheaper areas?
Zealousideal-Ad-2728@reddit
A Land Value Tax would stop the ultra-wealthy from treating land in London like a gold mine. Instead of making money just by sitting on land and waiting for prices to rise, they’ll have to use it productively or sell it to someone who will. This frees up land for housing, businesses, and public services, helping key workers stay in the city and making London a more affordable and livable place for everyone
PassiveTheme@reddit
So people should move their entire life across the country because house prices in their area happen to have gone through the roof?
c0tch@reddit
Oh yes let me just move 8 hours away from my roots and family. I thought life was for living in moments not living in solitude with no friends or family because of taxes.
It’s a moronic system. If they want to raise taxes why not follow canadas weed approach
thecraftybee1981@reddit
That encourages more density in areas of high demand, meaning more homes where they’re needed and regulating prices better.
DEGRAYER@reddit
What a stupid post lol
greatdrams23@reddit
Council tax is between 0.1% and 0.5% if the property's value is £450,000 council tax might be £2000.
And 450,000 is the cost of a small house (2 up 2 down) in South England.
You are talking about 0.5 to 2.5%, that's more like £5000 - for a small house.
suiluhthrown78@reddit
Or just dont tax property in any way
Why are you assuming that everyone wants more taxes and higher taxes endlessly?
Dull-Wrangler-5154@reddit
How would it work? Have you got an example of how much it would cost?
suiluhthrown78@reddit
You dont tax it at all, thats it
Dull-Wrangler-5154@reddit
Sorry dude. I replied to the wrong comment. That wasn’t aimed at you. You must have thought I was thick :)
g0ldcd@reddit
I don't want to pay taxes, but accept I need to.
I think the focus on taxing rent income and the rocketing of house prices, has created unfairness in the current system (exacerbated by smaller things like tuition fees).
The idea that the owner of the largest house in town should pay the most tax, irrespective of whether they bought it, were given it, won it at poker etc, doesn't seem like the worst idea. If you want the big house you pay tax and if you don't want to pay tax, sell the house. We seen give with this concept for taxing cars.
Larger house already has larger liabilities - more to insure, more to fix the roof, more to heat etc. So the whole "maybe the owner is asset rich and cash poor?" argument doesn't really stand up.
Trifusi0n@reddit
I would rather we taxed wealth like property and stopped taxing income. You can raise tax on one place in order to lower it in another.
suiluhthrown78@reddit
To tax rich people you just tax them directly, VAT, they cant escape it
Trifusi0n@reddit
Yeah I agree with raising VAT on luxury goods too.
Taxing property seems like a pretty direct form of tax though, pretty hard to escape that. You can’t move your 10 bed apartment in Kensington to the British Virgin Islands.
Civil_opinion24@reddit
I'm going to preface this by pointing out that I'm not a defender of millionaires etc.
That said. Council tax is collected to pay for council services - schools/roads/waste collection/police/social care etc.
The richer you are, the less likely you are to require any of those services, particularly the more expensive/intensive ones like social care/education.
The rich already paid more in tax for their house, out of their incomes etc etc.
Making them pay more for services they are unlikely to need on top of that just seems a bit shitty to me.
James730730@reddit
And how did those people earn that money? Through use of those services, or people making money for them that use those services.
People needing benefits when having a full-time job is the rich using those services. They're getting the government to pay their employees.
The care for a parent, child, or partner, of an employee being paid for by the state is using taxes.
Timely_Egg_6827@reddit
Council tax is paid within fairly small areas. A lot of those areas are pretty poor - there are already transfer from areas like Kensington to Jaywick to accomodate. So the very rich - the business owners, the financiers, the mandarins aren't likely to be impacted much. They live fairly clustered in areas which are wealthy so they probably won't see much of an increase.
What you will capture is middle-management. I don't see how they differ morally from any other employee in a business in that you should be expecting them to subsidise their living expenses. They don't have employees, they are employees just like you.
James730730@reddit
I wouldn't agree with this type of property tax. I was just disagreeing with the other poster saying that the rich don't use services that tax pays for. I agree it wouldn't actually make the rich pay more, but would hit everybody else when most are already struggling.
Gone_For_Lunch@reddit
That would be wildly unpopular and cripple people more than the current interest issues are. Average house price in the UK £282,000 in January. At 2.5% that would be a tax of £7,050 a year or £587.50 a month. You’d be increasing monthly expenses by up to £400 or £500 in some cases.
27106_4life@reddit (OP)
Why not then 0.2% then
colin_staples@reddit
Because when a house goes up in value (and houses tend to always go up in value, unless there's a huge property crash) you would have to pay more in tax, but you don't have any more money to pay that tax with.
You only see that money if / when you actually sell.
How is that fair?
Zealousideal-Ad-2728@reddit
Perhaps we shouldn’t be speculating land?
CharringtonCross@reddit
Somebody buying a house to live in isn’t “speculating land”.
Fantastic_Picture384@reddit
Isn't that what the farmers are saying ?
CharringtonCross@reddit
Er….
Tim-Sanchez@reddit
It wouldn't be much different to the council tax system in practice, council tax goes up regularly and you don't necessarily have more money to pay it with. That's just the nature of inflation.
AlmightyRobert@reddit
Council tax might be £1-2,000 a year (and people still get in real trouble for being unable to pay). A 1% tax on a basic London home could easily be another £10k, which would equate to £16-19k of gross income.
27106_4life@reddit (OP)
The big difference would be property tax on multi million properties. Or businesses
FenTigger@reddit
If only wages went up at the same rate as everything else.
Calculonx@reddit
But the reported value doesn't moved right away and usually it's less than the actual market value.
Ie. In Toronto if a house has a market value of $1.5M, it's listed value might be $500,000. If it's sold for $1.5M, MCAP (the surveyor) will reevaluate to maybe $700,000. I had a house for 10 years during the market boom and the tax never changed.
AlmightyRobert@reddit
But that’s basing a tax system on everything being valued wrongly. I don’t think HMRC would do that.
redbullcat@reddit
Would a solution to this be you pay tax on the price you bought the property for, with it increasing by a certain amount each decade, plus increases every year at the rate of inflation?
Not an economist nut so not sure - genuinely asking.
Prestigious_Risk7610@reddit
My understanding is that how it works in many US states. The positive is it's simple, a known fixed cost and provides no ongoing valuation guestimation problems. The downside is it disincentivise mobility and downsizing. You have people in properties bought 20 years ago that are well oversized for their current needs and they'd happily downsize if not for the fact they'd see their property tax rebate and quadruple in cost.
I don't have a perfect solution, but there are issues with either approach
27106_4life@reddit (OP)
In many US states, the local administration values the house at what they believe it should be worth, not necessarily what the realtors believe it's worth, and tax proportionally
gpt6@reddit
I had a house years ago in ontario, 2 months after I bought it they rated my house well over 100k more and it was a nitemare to sort as they kept on rejecting my valuation even though that was the price I paid.
WiseBelt8935@reddit
so you would never move?
redbullcat@reddit
Hmm true... back to the drawing board...
Maybe the best solution is council tax but with new bandings...
Trifusi0n@reddit
Check out this guy, acting like his council tax has never gone up.
DarwinPaddled@reddit
Jesus christ, some people are begging to be taxed more as if they get off on being a serf.
Timely_Egg_6827@reddit
Normally you find that they are suggesting that other people get taxed more.
Zealousideal-Ad-2728@reddit
This is a break down of how they do it in Singapore
Corporations: The corporate tax rate is a flat 17%. Singapore operates a one-tier corporate tax system, meaning that dividends paid by Singapore-resident companies are exempt from further taxation in the hands of shareholders.
Goods and Services Tax (GST) GST is a consumption tax levied on the supply of goods and services and on the import of goods into Singapore. The standard GST rate is 8% as of 2024.
Property Tax Residential Properties: Owner-occupied residential properties are taxed at progressive rates ranging from 0% to 23%, depending on the Annual Value (AV) of the property. Non-owner-occupied residential properties are taxed at higher progressive rates, from 11% to 27%.
Non-Residential Properties: These are taxed at a flat rate of 10% of the AV.
Taxes are directly tied to high-quality healthcare, excellent public housing (over 80% of Singaporeans live in government-built flats), world-class infrastructure, and efficient public transportation.
We have a higher tax burden in the UK and less satisfaction. How does that work out?
gaydadoftwo@reddit
Surely the solution is that they just add more bands above the current system, so that there is a difference between £40m and £400k
dbxp@reddit
I support the general idea but it would need to be introduced really slowly not to leave people in negative equity. I think it should also be used to replace stamp duty to avoid the weird situation where you pay tax to downsize but not to stay in an oversized property.
Zealousideal-Ad-2728@reddit
This where the problem would lie transitioning over. I think most people in this thread are assuming all other taxes would stay the same they wouldn’t income and vat would have to be reduced to make it work. Stamp duty would have to be reduced or not applicable
davus_maximus@reddit
Because in the UK it's always going to be an additional tax, never retiring the old one. Muggins will ALWAYS end up paying more and muggins just hasn't got it.
AlmightyRobert@reddit
Exactly. I can’t think of any taxes that have come down since about 1981 (the 50% rate of income tax came down to 45% but that was only in place for 2-3 years).
Skiatio1a@reddit
The UK’s reluctance to switch to a Canadian-style property tax might stem from a variety of factors—political resistance, the logistical nightmare of reassessing all property values fairly, and perhaps a healthy dose of 'we've always done it this way' syndrome. Changing tax systems can feel as daunting as convincing a cat to enjoy a bath. Plus, council tax bands are deeply entrenched, and any changes that might increase bills for influential homeowners can be a hard sell. It's a classic case of needing reform but navigating it being as tricky as a hedge maze.
theabominablewonder@reddit
Because bringing in such a high tax burden on home owners would cause absolute mayhem.
Ojohnnydee222@reddit
It's about occupation, as opposed tto ownership. Renters pay council tax, as do owner-occupiers, and both will continue to do so in the future under a Land Value Tax. However, the Duke of Marlborough, who lives in Blenheim Palace 5 miles from me, only pays 2x what I do in CT for his gaff. I bet he generates a lot more rubbish for collection than I do in my 2 bed flat with no garden and no lift.
theabominablewonder@reddit
He may well create more waste (likely empty caviar jars and empty wine bottles), but most Council Tax money goes on Adult and Children's services, which I assume in this scenario he is not taking advantage of.
However.. even if this was a fairer way to tax, they could not overnight bring in a tax that costs people £1k a month, and not expect absolute chaos in the property markets, financial markets etc. So they would essentially need to start it around the same as now, and then taper it over time, whilst likely reducing other taxes to avoid any recessionary effects.
All in all it's probably not worth the hassle.
They could just introduce new bandings on council tax and then taper those in over time to get a bit more money out of richer folk.
tlrd91@reddit
Paying 2.5% of my property value would be like 4 times what we pay in council tax, so even 1% would be substantially more. Yeah, no thanks
27106_4life@reddit (OP)
Then maybe a lower tax band!
tlrd91@reddit
So either reduce your aspirations in life or pay more tax into the system when I already pay a ridiculous amount. Just checked and the highest possible income tax in Canada is 33% and at up to $100,000 dollars 20.5%, so perhaps that’s why they can afford a higher property tax. You can’t just slap that system on our income tax levels.
PainExtension3272@reddit
Canada can afford to have such low tax, they have more land than they'll ever need
Diega78@reddit
We don't do that simply because the MP's would be the ones that (allegedly) would be the worst hit. If history has taught us anything, it's that they don't do anything that will harm their own interests.
Timely_Egg_6827@reddit
Because council tax is mainly based on cost of providing services - a flat with 4 people in it are not going to have much less rubbish than a house with 4 people in it but the value of the latter may be double of the former. Effectively, you'd be asking people with expensive houses to pay for the services of people with cheap houses as well as for those who are on housing benefit.
Trifusi0n@reddit
Well, we ask people with high salaries to pay more tax to pay for services of those on lower salaries. I don’t see how this is any different.
Timely_Egg_6827@reddit
There is only so many times you can go to the well before it gets poisoned. Get rid of the councils and have only income tax and I'd be in agreement. There are already transfers from high income to low income areas to compensate for the short-falls in council taxes.
But at moment, council tax services are funded by the people who make most use of them. They hopefully care about them. Top-end spenders don't necessarily use the schools. wouldn't be eligible for the council care homes, have gardens so the parks are irrelevant. If all they benefit from are the roads and the bins, then expect a lot of pushback on what it is reasonable for the state to provide. Also services people get for free tend to be abused - tragedy of the commons.
My doctor keeps raising the point that people with private health insurance shouldn't use the NHS as limits it for the more deserving. But if paying twicefold for a service while others get it for free, then people push back on what is provided.
Cultural_Tank_6947@reddit
Inherently because a family of 4 living in a £400k house use the same level of council services as a family of 4 living in a £4M house.
You still get your bins emptied at the same schedule. You likely still use the same roads and schools and police and whatnot (within reason).
Obviously there's some elements of property price banding which needs some reform but this still ensures that those who can afford bigger homes are paying more.
So yeah, I'm good with the current model. Although I would absolutely be in favour of re-baselining the bands. Using figures based on 1991 makes no sense.
turbotcharger@reddit
I don’t see how you could do this and maintain the current levels of stamp duty. Currently we have a huge tax penalty for moving house, so to add a huge tax penalty for staying still could leave a lot of people in an impossible situation. If you want to suddenly charge people monthly for having a big house (or one somewhere nice) at least give them a way out if they can’t afford it.
Fragile_reddit_mods@reddit
Fuck no. Most people would end up paying way more than they currently do. Plus Canada is one of the most expensive places to live on average.
Ojohnnydee222@reddit
Not necessarily true - it could be zero balanced, or whatever it's called. Raise the same amount over the same year, but the biggest proportion of 'losers' will be those in the biggest & most valuable properties. The average person will maybe see a drop, or an increase but the big benefit will go to the dwellers in less expensive housing. That's the reason it won't be introduced: politicians don't want it.
Supercharged_123@reddit
My house is a much higher tax band than it should be which does annoy me. But your idea sounds absolutely ludicrous, definitely not thank youuu.
Theodin_King@reddit
Cos it's a stupid system
Zealousideal-Wash904@reddit
Council tax is meant to pay for services and here in Scotland your water supply, why should someone pay a huge amount more just because they have a more expensive house but aren’t necessarily using much more of the services?
ferretchad@reddit
2.5%
Holy fuck, that's a £600pcm tax for the average UK property, £1,100pcm in London.
Yeah, I imagine people would be rather angry if you hit them with that.
Ojohnnydee222@reddit
It would not be set at that level tho. My ct is £181 pm. I live in a Housing Association flat. I dunno what the value is. It's rated as C band.
Dull-Wrangler-5154@reddit
Yeah but fuck em. What about me? I don’t own a property. I’m not rich. Fuck all these rich people that have been living in their family home for 30 years as property prices go mad around them. /s
Espi0nage-Ninja@reddit
r/FuckTheS
27106_4life@reddit (OP)
Yeah. So they might get hit with the .5%. or could make it lower! Just a proportional tax
JoeyJoeC@reddit
That's stupid. You're proposing I pay up to £8,125 per year on top of my mortgage. If that were a thing, I'd have been declined a mortgage on our house. Also you think renters won't have to pay this? Landlords sure will pass on these costs.
annoyedtenant123@reddit
Keep as is for majority
Properties worth £1m+ 0.5% tax 2-5m 1% 5m+ 2% 10m+ 3%
bl4h101bl4h@reddit
Trudeau's Canada is the last place to be taking inspiration from.
MFA_Nay@reddit
The current council tax bands haven't been touched since 1991 in England and 2003 in Wales. So 20-30 years.
The current set up as you mentioned is unfair. However most people assume they'll individually pay more. So therefore they're against change. It's one of those good for the individual, bad for society, but because it's bad for the individual they'll accept the status quo.
Nyx_Necrodragon101@reddit
It took me 38 years to get on the property ladder. I lived without holidays, luxuries even starving myself. That kind of a model would mean I have to pay £14,250 a year for my 3 bedroom terraced house: that's more than my mortgage. That is the way you make a serial killer.
Paulstan67@reddit
Most property taxes don't take into account the ability to pay.
Just because a property is worth a lot of money doesn't mean that the occupier/owner has lots of cash to pay the bill.
What is the fairest way to collect money for local services?
A flat rate , where every household pays the same amount?
A charge per occupant, Where a house with 4 occupants would pay 4 times as much as a house with only 1?
A charge based on the size of the property?
A charge based on the value of the property? How often is that value assessed?
What about a local income tax? Every resident pays a percentage of their income , say 1%, the more you earn the more you pay, and those on low or no incomes don't pay anything.
Should we charge extra for households with children? After all they use more services than child free households.(Schools etc)
Fantastic_Picture384@reddit
The same way they were against the Poll Tax..
TheDettiEskimo@reddit
I'm not maths Wiz but that would mean I pay more than I pay at the moment.
I pay £1500 roughly a year. Yet I would have to pay waaay more if it was 2.5%
Accurate_Prompt_8800@reddit
The backlash against this means that it’s political suicide for starters. Whichever govt implements this will alienate a key voter base, as the tax burden on owners of expensive properties will significantly increase. Such voters will be wealthy homeowners, who are often influential in politics / public discourse / business.
And a lot of other homeowners will suffer as well. Many UK homeowners have had their homes for decades, with property values having risen substantially over time. They will likely be cash-poor but asset-rich so a property tax could force some to sell their homes.
Accurate_Prompt_8800@reddit
What I do think though, is that council tax bands need to be tweaked. The current system disproportionately benefits owners of high value properties due to the outdated valuations and caps, and overall favours wealthier constituencies. They should look at increasing council tax bands or introducing supplementary taxes for such properties
Beanruz@reddit
Same reason why the 2000sqm 2 million home down the road house which is band E yet my 200squate 420k hous3 is band F.
Nothing changes which makes the rich old bastards of this country pay more.
WerewolfNo890@reddit
I support the general idea but rich people are quite happy with the current system of not paying that much more. Pretty sure the original system was a completely flat rate.
jiminthenorth@reddit
The UK hasn’t adopted a Canada-style property tax because it’s politically risky and hard to implement. Wealthy homeowners, especially in places like London, would face much higher taxes, which could cause backlash. Revaluing all properties (last done in 1991) would be expensive and complicated, and regional differences in property values mean some areas would be hit harder. Socially, it’s tricky too—many people in valuable homes, like retirees, don’t have the income to pay higher taxes, and taxing rising home values feels unfair to some. The current council tax system is stable and familiar, so governments stick to tweaking it instead of replacing it. In Canada, higher homeownership rates and cultural differences make property taxes easier to accept, but in the UK, resistance is strong. A fairer system could include phased changes and protections for low-income homeowners, but for now, the council tax remains.
BoopingBurrito@reddit
Because if you think the current uproar about farmers is a lot, then you'd be shocked at just how much "impoverished" pensioners living in multi million pound properties the Telegraph would find by the next print cycle after the announcement.
It would, again, be declared class warfare, an attack on the elderly, hurting people who've already paid their "fair" share, etc.
And if you put in an exemption or discount for all pensioners you'd have an outcry about how it's yet another example of younger, poorer people having to shoulder additional burden to support the wealthy elderly.
Alarmed-Syllabub8054@reddit
Because the government and media exist to protect the wealthy. A property tax would be the single best thing the country could do.
AutoModerator@reddit
Please help keep AskUK welcoming!
Top-level comments to the OP must contain genuine efforts to answer the question. No jokes, judgements, etc.
Don't be a dick to each other. If getting heated, just block and move on.
This is a strictly no-politics subreddit!
Please help us by reporting comments that break these rules.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.