Jump to content

Farmers and rates


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, gettafa said:

The poll tax is the fairest possible system and is straightforward to administer.

Actually this isn't true on either criterion.  Obviously it isn't fair unless you define 'fair' as everyone paying the same - which is simply recursive.  Without some link to ability to pay you not only end up criminalising those who can't afford,  you also make it difficult to get enough money to run services for everyone (and hence anyone).  The thing about the rich is that they have more money.

But property taxes are also fairly easy the administer compared to other options[1].  Because property stays fixed in one place, is rather difficult to hide and can't lie about where it has been in the previous year.  None of which are characteristics associated with human beings.

[1]  Even if you base it on really daft criteria such as what the rent would have been in 1971 or the floor area as measured by a drone.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 37
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Why are they exempt John? A well known farmer(to some anyway) in the east recently posted on Facebook that he didn't see why he should pay rates on the  barns on his farm as they don't use any ameniti

Here's an idea, scrap all the existing so-called local authorities, the little Hitlers that seem to run some of them, the hapless muppets that populate the numerous boards, and the antiquated ratings

It will not be less than what IOMG receives now. In fact, whatever system is introduced I'll guarantee you it will cost us more. 

15 hours ago, Non-Believer said:

It'll be a long time, if ever, before an actual usage tax will ever see the light of day. As previously posted, consider 35,000+ households currently paying a blanket "toilet tax" of £250pa.

Actually this isn't true.  The flat rate toilet tax was so unpopular when it was introduced in April 2014 that the Government back tracked and replaced it by a Sewerage Rate later the same year.  It was still a new tax replacing what was previously a Treasury subvention to cover sewage and it is still referred to in the media as the 'toilet tax', but it is now a rate similar to the water rate, not a 'blanket' charge.

Of course something based on the rateable value will still tend to favour people living in larger properties in rural areas in comparative terms (more than say income tax would) and recent changes have meant reduced charges for septic tanks.  Which ties in with this thread rather nicely.

(Worth remembering that in part this arises out of the MEA disaster and the merger of the two authorities so that more revenue could be raised from the water side to pay for it).

  • Thanks 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Derek Flint said:
17 hours ago, gettafa said:

A poll tax would be the simplest most effective way forward. And fairest?

Why hasn't this been explored, or has it?

Because it’s now a proven system that has had its foibles worked out over the last 25 years.

Actually this isn't true.  The poll tax was just as unpopular as the toilet tax and "was replaced by Council Tax in 1993, two years after its abolition was announced".  So far from having been tweaked for the last 25 years it hasn't even existed in that period.

It's replacement, Council Tax, is almost as as daft as the rates, being based on what the property was worth in 1991 and with all sort of other failings (again larger properties, especially in London, pay less than they should in value terms) and requires all sort of adjustments, but it's nothing like a poll tax. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is just an extra tax on local older people in old houses, if the garden or land isn’t considered in the new rate formula, then old cheaper town houses around the island will be hit harder than expensive houses with lots of land.  It will impact on a pensioner before it hits the higher income home owners. Rental investors will just pass on extra to tenants.   The money pots will have property owned by company and get every tax evasion in place. A rates system applied to adult resident or visitor would be fairest.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Roger Mexico said:

Actually this isn't true on either criterion.  Obviously it isn't fair unless you define 'fair' as everyone paying the same - which is simply recursive.  Without some link to ability to pay you not only end up criminalising those who can't afford,  you also make it difficult to get enough money to run services for everyone (and hence anyone).  The thing about the rich is that they have more money.

But property taxes are also fairly easy the administer compared to other options[1].  Because property stays fixed in one place, is rather difficult to hide and can't lie about where it has been in the previous year.  None of which are characteristics associated with human beings.

[1]  Even if you base it on really daft criteria such as what the rent would have been in 1971 or the floor area as measured by a drone.

 

4 hours ago, Roger Mexico said:

Actually this isn't true.  The flat rate toilet tax was so unpopular when it was introduced in April 2014 that the Government back tracked and replaced it by a Sewerage Rate later the same year.  It was still a new tax replacing what was previously a Treasury subvention to cover sewage and it is still referred to in the media as the 'toilet tax', but it is now a rate similar to the water rate, not a 'blanket' charge.

Of course something based on the rateable value will still tend to favour people living in larger properties in rural areas in comparative terms (more than say income tax would) and recent changes have meant reduced charges for septic tanks.  Which ties in with this thread rather nicely.

(Worth remembering that in part this arises out of the MEA disaster and the merger of the two authorities so that more revenue could be raised from the water side to pay for it).

 

4 hours ago, Roger Mexico said:

Actually this isn't true.  The poll tax was just as unpopular as the toilet tax and "was replaced by Council Tax in 1993, two years after its abolition was announced".  So far from having been tweaked for the last 25 years it hasn't even existed in that period.

It's replacement, Council Tax, is almost as as daft as the rates, being based on what the property was worth in 1991 and with all sort of other failings (again larger properties, especially in London, pay less than they should in value terms) and requires all sort of adjustments, but it's nothing like a poll tax. 

OK OK,we get it!   ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, gettafa said:

I disagree wholeheartedly.

The poll tax is the fairest possible system and is straightforward to administer.

Regarding the problems experienced in the UK (riots etc) the Tory Government at the time (aka Margaret Thatcher) thought it a good idea to test it out in Scotland first

How fucking dumb can someone be? The Swetties weren't having any of it and so the discontent emanated from there. Incidentally SNP had pitiful support in those days although there was a strong bubbling undercurrent after the 1979 devolution referendum. The selective imposition of the Poll Tax swayed opinion wide and deep.

The Isle of Man has no such factors to be concerned about.

Maybe someone brainy like Chris Thomas MHK (or a schoolkid with a simple calculator) could give an indication of how much a Poll Tax might be. (current rates income/number of adults) 

 

I was being ironic

 

#fail

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's an idea, scrap all the existing so-called local authorities, the little Hitlers that seem to run some of them, the hapless muppets that populate the numerous boards, and the antiquated ratings system. 

Provide services such as bin collections and street lighting by simply working out the cost of doing it all island and dividing it proportionately between every household on the Island. 

The current set up is utter bullshit - a case in point is the current situation of Douglas Borough Council driving up their extortionate rates year after year, but somehow still managing to find £150,000 of ratepayers cash to spunk on a statue of Manchester's finest - the Bee Gees. 

I honestly believe people just want a system where they pay for the services provided, with all the other bullshit cut out. 

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...