[Brighton] B&H council tax up by 5.1%

[BenGarfield]

this is of course all utter nonsense. if government didnt have to borrow they wouldnt, yet every one from UK, Germany, Japan, China, US, to Argentina does so.

Its not nonsense. Its a fact. Selling government bonds is not "borrowing" in the same sense in which a person borrows iusing a credit card. The goverment cant borrow the money it itself created - nor does it need to. In all countries youve quoted government so called " borrowing" is just an asset swap at their central banks between bank reserve accounts and a higher interest account used for bond sales - equivalent to the difference between a current and deposit account for you or me. The main purpose of this "borrowing" is for monetary policy. Its not required for government spending purposes.

 

[beorhthelm]

Its not nonsense. Its a fact. Selling government bonds is not "borrowing" in the same sense in which a person borrows iusing a credit card. The goverment cant borrow the money it itself created - nor does it need to. In all countries youve quoted government so called " borrowing" is just an asset swap at their central banks between bank reserve accounts and a higher interest account used for bond sales - equivalent to the difference between a current and deposit account for you or me. The main purpose of this "borrowing" is for monetary policy. Its not required for government spending purposes.

so why do they all borrow if they have no need to? and why apply taxes to the masses when there is no inflation requiring money taken out of system?

your way of looking at economy doesnt stand up to basic observation, its based on a desire for economy to work like that giving a blank cheque for government spending. in reality the central bank provides base money and the economy creates money, value, expanding the money supply, while the government taxes to take some of that for their spending.

 

[wellquickwoody]

The principle of shifting the tax burden from income to wealth/assets and unnecessary/damaging consumption ought to be widely accepted. There are interested players challenging this principle, and doing so effectively.

Is it not somewhat unfair that once income has been earned and taxed, and then invested or used to buy a home, that it is subject to taxation once more? If invested in bricks and mortar it is not liquid and therefore any taxation needs to be paid out of current income anyway. Investments may well be used to pay for things that those who have not saved will be claiming for from the state. Later on all assets may be subject to inheritance tax anyway.

Always seems inherently wrong to me that those who are frugal end up paying for many who are profligate.

 

[BenGarfield]

so why do they all borrow if they have no need to? and why apply taxes to the masses when there is no inflation requiring money taken out of system?

your way of looking at economy doesnt stand up to basic observation, its based on a desire for economy to work like that giving a blank cheque for government spending. in reality the central bank provides base money and the economy creates money, value, expanding the money supply, while the government taxes to take some of that for their spending.

No its the reverse. Its not my way of looking at the economy its a description of how it works now. Only the government can authorise the creation of money, not us. Money is a creature of the state. Its rather your desire to adhere to this conventional wisdom. In reality all uk government money is created by computer keystrokes from the consolidated fund. The Banks role is to conduct monetary policy, regulate finance services and the bank settlement system, and the exchequer. It doesnt create base money. Money is created when Parliament authorises payments from the consolidated fund, and this doesnt depend on money inflowing from tax and national insurance accounts. .As Ive explained, one of the roles of taxation is a way of recycing and destroying money. The difference between what the government issues and taxes back is erroneously referred to as the deficit. This `deficit` is actually what we all need to spend on living and saving. If the government tries to reduce this so called deficit in times of low output as is the situation now because of the corona measures, then this is a recipe for disaster

 

[clapham_gull]

Live in a London Borough and the GLC element went up 9.1%. I was astonished. Bloody Ponzi scheme.

Yes saw that, but seeing as I've still got one of the lowest in the country (let alone London) I'm not going to complain.

 

[Westdene Seagull]

The age old argument against that with council tax, is that an elderly couple might live in a large £2m house, use few council resources and just happen to live in a house which has grown 10x in value not through design. That they are asset rich, cash poor.

I’ve known and still do, many folk in Sussex who live in incredibly valuable homes. They’re not cash poor. For starters, having the ability to spend huge sums each year in maintaining their homes and sometimes estates.

I don’t go as far as a Marxist spite tax route, imho the increased taxes need to be reasonable, not a means by the back door of pushing wealthy people out of their home. The main winners from that would just be the next wave of rich including Chinese and Russian investors.

The way round the asset rich cash poor issue is to have a local income tax rather than tax on the value of a property. Also, stamp duty should go to the LA not central government.

 

[Chicken Run]

A household where all the occupants are full time students don’t pay council tax yet are welcome to use our city’s resources, is that fair?

 

[Chicken Run]

Apparently circ 14,000 students will require private accommodation 21/22, say 4 get together and take a house that’s 3,500 houses, my tax is £1,900 so that’s a potential of circa 6.5 million being lost [emoji15] and there won’t be just groups of four together.

Does the student landlord get taxed at a local level ?

 

[Westdene Seagull]

A household where all the occupants are full time students don’t pay council tax yet are welcome to use our city’s resources, is that fair?

Agreed ( and I'm about to have two full time students at Uni 'in' my household ). A reduced council tax should be levied on students living in Uni accommodation as their rubbish is dealt with privately by the Uni. Landlords of private student accommodation should be responsible for the CT on their own properties ( and yes, I know, it will result in higher rents ).

 

[beorhthelm]

No its the reverse. Its not my way of looking at the economy its a description of how it works now. Only the government can authorise the creation of money, not us. Money is a creature of the state. Its rather your desire to adhere to this conventional wisdom. In reality all uk government money is created by computer keystrokes from the consolidated fund. The Banks role is to conduct monetary policy, regulate finance services and the bank settlement system, and the exchequer. It doesnt create base money. Money is created when Parliament authorises payments from the consolidated fund, and this doesnt depend on money inflowing from tax and national insurance accounts. .As Ive explained, one of the roles of taxation is a way of recycing and destroying money. The difference between what the government issues and taxes back is erroneously referred to as the deficit. This `deficit` is actually what we all need to spend on living and saving. If the government tries to reduce this so called deficit in times of low output as is the situation now because of the corona measures, then this is a recipe for disaster

yes, the conventional wisdom followed by all governments, banks and economists, bar a few followers of MMT. thats the economic equivalent of flat earth theory. pray tell how Euro exists, which government authorises its creation, and what happened to the supposed non-debt of member states when they changed from sovereign currency to Euro 20 years ago - did it all become real debt overnight?

 

[Gwylan]

Apparently circ 14,000 students will require private accommodation 21/22, say 4 get together and take a house that’s 3,500 houses, my tax is £1,900 so that’s a potential of circa 6.5 million being lost [emoji15] and there won’t be just groups of four together.

It's not lost: central government compensate LAs for loss of income due to student council tax through a formula grant.

 

[Westdene Seagull]

It's not lost: central government compensate LAs for loss of income due to student council tax through a formula grant.

Not to the full value though.

 

[Chicken Run]

It's not lost: central government compensate LAs for loss of income due to student council tax through a formula grant.

Ok [emoji106]

 

[Machiavelli]

lower income tax, rising VAT?

Not quite, more layers of income tax, and progressive ones too. The VAT one needs to square two issues:
-- it's a regressive tax, it was 5% 40 years ago, now 20%, so the low paid or those with no/few assets are clobbered hardest
-- it is being used selectively currently (eg, none on food, children's clothes, books/newspapers, etc), but this should be extended to (especially) environmentally damaging consumption, eg the second flight p.a. Here, there is a link with duties, which tends to be directed towards unhealthy activities (snouts and booze)

 

[Machiavelli]

Is it not somewhat unfair that once income has been earned and taxed, and then invested or used to buy a home, that it is subject to taxation once more? If invested in bricks and mortar it is not liquid and therefore any taxation needs to be paid out of current income anyway. Investments may well be used to pay for things that those who have not saved will be claiming for from the state. Later on all assets may be subject to inheritance tax anyway.

Always seems inherently wrong to me that those who are frugal end up paying for many who are profligate.

Although you're obviously not alone in this , you are under the delusion that those that have bought assets have solely done so from their earned income.

 

[-gully-]

It will go on more cycle lanes and new road layouts.

 

[blue-shifted]

Although you're obviously not alone in this , you are under the delusion that those that have bought assets have solely done so from their earned income.

To me, this is the point.

Average property prices have trebled in the last 20 years. Huge amounts of property wealth are untaxed and given we have to tax somewhere, this to me seems like the least unfair way of doing it.

 

[blue-shifted]

It will go on more cycle lanes and new road layouts.

I certainly hope some of it does

 

[Tom Hark Preston Park]

It will go on more cycle lanes and new road layouts.

To be fair to B&H council, they're pretty good at stating their case to central government and grabbing their share of funds that are made available for infrastructure improvements

 

[Hugo Rune]

Ok [emoji106]

In addition, you simply can’t take Students’ non-payment of council tax in isolation.

Students contribute over £1bn to the economy of Brighton & Hove, I believe that’s about a third.

http://www.sussex.ac.uk/broadcast/read/44319

https://www.brighton.ac.uk/about-us/news-and-events/news/2014/08-18_700m-boost-to-economy.aspx

What’s of significant interest is that over the coming year and previous year or so, circa 5,000 new student rooms in both private and University accommodation will become available. This is not due to any new demand as Student numbers have dropped by a few thousand at Brighton University although there is expansion at Sussex to counteract this.

The affect is going to be a reversal of the studentification of areas such as Hanover. The council is likely to come down very hard on HMO’s with slum Student landlords facing unprecedented losses as they’ll have their HMO status removed from their poorly maintained houses forcing them to rent to families or sell up. This might go some way to remedying the horrific drop in numbers in the city’s primary schools.

Students are a good thing for a city.