Poorest may have to pay council tax
9:10am Monday 3rd September 2012 in Latest News
THOUSANDS of the poorest people in Swindon could soon have to pay some council tax for the first time as part of a council bid to fill a £2million benefits gap.
The amount of money the Government gives Swindon Council to help needy people cover the charge will fall from £13m to £11m, when council tax benefit is replaced with council tax support from April.
Council tax benefit is administered locally according to national rules, but council tax support will see each council draw up and administer its own scheme for who gets what and how much, with the first challenge being to deal with the funding gap.
An estimated 6,100 of Swindon’s 18,500 claimants currently receive 100 per cent cover, but Swindon Council proposes to slash the maximum support anyone can receive to 80 per cent, leaving the householders to pick up the remaining 20 per cent.
The Conservative administration says the overall draft scheme, which is out to public consultation until November 9, is balanced but claimants and other critics say it further punishes some of the poorest people in society, pulling more people out of work.
Other changes include treating child benefit as a source of income in the support calculation, withdrawing the second adult rebate, and increasing the expected contribution from non-dependent household members by £5 per week.
However, the Government has decreed that pensioner claim-ants must not see any changes, protecting about 7,000 people in Swindon, and the council proposes to afford the same protection to 2,500 claimants in households with disabilities.
The council estimates the draft scheme would save around £1,150,000, after allowing for the £500,000 cost for protecting disabled households, which if added to an expected increase in council tax due to planned changes to empty home discounts, would cover £1,750,000 of the £2m gap.
The remaining £250,000 would come from savings elsewhere in the overall budget.
Coun Mark Edwards , cabinet member for finance, said: “I don’t believe we should pass the cost of this to all Swindon residents, either by reducing the levels of service we provide to them or increasing their tax, and it would also defeat the object of the changes.
“I also think it is right that everyone makes a contribution to council tax, even if that’s only 20 per cent of the full amount. Instead, the council is proposing to reduce the benefit payments themselves for people in certain circumstances, although we will fully protect pensioners and people with disabilities.”
Martin Wicks, the secretary of the Swindon Tenants’ Campaign Group, said: “We’re opposed to anybody having their council tax benefit cut.
“That’s why the message to the council is don’t just do the Government’s dirty work, press them to re-instate the cut so that the working poor and other people that are going to get caught by this aren’t under more pressure.”
Coun Des Moffatt , the Labour group’s finance lead, said: “There will be a huge element of can’t-pay-won’t-pay attitude at these small amounts that are demanded of them. In consequence, there will be more court orders against the poorest in our society.”
To take part in the consultation, visit www.swindon.gov.uk
Comments(37)
Davey Gravey
says...
10:18am Mon 3 Sep 12
1 2 Could B
says...
10:25am Mon 3 Sep 12
LordAshOfTheBrake
says...
11:27am Mon 3 Sep 12
What about owners of small businesses who play the tax system by employing family in non jobs (stay at home mothers) at the tax free threshold, who pay themselves well below industry salaries (IT consultants on20k a year.. HA HA HA) so they pay less income tax and take the money out of the business in other ways..... Legal or illegal?
At what level do you call someone rich?
There will always be cases of both the rich and the poor fleecing the system.
Personally I'd happily pay more council tax, if I had a better say on how it was spent and if the councillors (and other elected officials) who don't hold their election promises were open to prosecution.
I appreciate that there will be people in society who for one reason or another will need help. However I also know that there are a great many who chose a lifestyle to get benefits of one form or another.
Oh, and most of my tax is all done at source (PAYE) so I can't avoid paying in case anyone was wondering!
Davey Gravey
says...
11:57am Mon 3 Sep 12
LordAshOfTheBrake wrote:Tax loopholes, offshore accounts, the well publicised cuts granted by the government, big businesses getting off scot free(vodafone for instance). Yet those with the least may have to pay more. Sorry but that isn't fair in my humble opinion.
@Davey, Your evidence of rich people in Swindon paying little to no tax is what exactly? Can you prove that any measures taken to minimise a tax bill is illegal (tax evasion) as opposed to legal (tax avoidance). Remember even things like ISA's are legal ways to avoid paying tax! Do you know anyone who pays in cash for stuff in order to keep the transaction below the tax mans radar? Did you report them?
What about owners of small businesses who play the tax system by employing family in non jobs (stay at home mothers) at the tax free threshold, who pay themselves well below industry salaries (IT consultants on20k a year.. HA HA HA) so they pay less income tax and take the money out of the business in other ways..... Legal or illegal?
At what level do you call someone rich?
There will always be cases of both the rich and the poor fleecing the system.
Personally I'd happily pay more council tax, if I had a better say on how it was spent and if the councillors (and other elected officials) who don't hold their election promises were open to prosecution.
I appreciate that there will be people in society who for one reason or another will need help. However I also know that there are a great many who chose a lifestyle to get benefits of one form or another.
Oh, and most of my tax is all done at source (PAYE) so I can't avoid paying in case anyone was wondering!
LordAshOfTheBrake
says...
12:14pm Mon 3 Sep 12
What are YOU doing about it then?
Tax loop holes are not illegal. They are loop holes and they are open to everyone.
"well publicised cuts granted by the government"; assuming you mean tax cuts which ones?
I have to admit I don't know much about off shore accounts and their use for minimising tax.
Big businesses; fully agree with you.
What do you mean by those with the least have the most to pay? I suspect in real terms there are very few with the least who pay more.
Presumably your someone who thinks those who make good their life and save and make investment choices to get bigger returns should pay higher percentage rates than those that rack up debt and spend everything leaving nothing for a rainy day.......!
Percentages mean that if you gain more, you may more. Having a larger percentage rate means you penalise those gaining more.There comes a breaking point when people actively look to exploit the system than simply pay up.
Always Grumpy
says...
12:25pm Mon 3 Sep 12
Are there any schemes whereby 'rich' people can avoid paying their council tax in Swindon?
beach1e
says...
12:39pm Mon 3 Sep 12
Davey Gravey
says...
12:53pm Mon 3 Sep 12
LordAshOfTheBrake wrote:I'm doing nothing about it. I'm the typical working man who has his tax taken from his employer and just gets on with it. You've misqouted my there too but that's my fault for not being clearer. I am not saying they have the most to pay,but I am saying they are seeing an increase in what they have to pay when others are seeing reductions. Those seeing reductions are the wealthy,those seeing the rises are the poor. @Always Grumpy, It's all linked isn't it?
@Davey,
What are YOU doing about it then?
Tax loop holes are not illegal. They are loop holes and they are open to everyone.
"well publicised cuts granted by the government"; assuming you mean tax cuts which ones?
I have to admit I don't know much about off shore accounts and their use for minimising tax.
Big businesses; fully agree with you.
What do you mean by those with the least have the most to pay? I suspect in real terms there are very few with the least who pay more.
Presumably your someone who thinks those who make good their life and save and make investment choices to get bigger returns should pay higher percentage rates than those that rack up debt and spend everything leaving nothing for a rainy day.......!
Percentages mean that if you gain more, you may more. Having a larger percentage rate means you penalise those gaining more.There comes a breaking point when people actively look to exploit the system than simply pay up.
Oliver_Donachie
says...
1:44pm Mon 3 Sep 12
http://www.thisismon
ey.co.uk/money/news/
article-2107031/UK-B
udget-2012-Top-1-ear
ners-contribute-inco
me-tax.html
But yea, burn them with a pitchfork for propping up UK Plc with such staggering numbers...
Oliver_Donachie
says...
1:45pm Mon 3 Sep 12
http://www.thisismon
ey.co.uk/money/news/
article-2107031/UK-B
udget-2012-Top-1-ear
ners-contribute-inco
me-tax.html
But yea, burn them with a pitchfork for propping up UK Plc with such staggering numbers...
Ringer
says...
2:09pm Mon 3 Sep 12
People always whinge about how 'little' those who exist on benefits receive, but in many cases nobody even mentions the £1000+ a year they save by having everyone else cover the costs of their council tax for them.
It's time the socialists realised and accepted that there is NO MONEY LEFT. Ironically,that's Labour's fault. Although the Tories are no better as they're borrowing even more than Labour did in order to pretend they can sustain our completely unsustainable welfare state.
timt1964
says...
3:55pm Mon 3 Sep 12
Ringer
says...
4:18pm Mon 3 Sep 12
timt1964 wrote:Still think money grows on trees?
swindon borough council dont give a hoot about the "poor".as a previous comment said they waste money on rubbish and laugh in the faces of people with genuine need.
What would you think would demonstrate the council gives a 'hoot' for the poor? Free rent, free money to spend, free council tax, free education, free healthcare, money for as money children as they feel like having... what, exactly, more do you want the 'poor' to be given?
Let's not forget that many of the 'poor' end up with more money in their pocket at the end of the week than plenty of people who actually work five days a week.
Skint
says...
4:32pm Mon 3 Sep 12
RichardR1
says...
6:39pm Mon 3 Sep 12
Simply because if they are on PAYE they do, it's a percentage based system.
As for Council Tax, as has been suggested the cost of actually administering it would likely exceed any benefit derived.
1 2 Could B
says...
7:44pm Mon 3 Sep 12
Ollie' back
Russell Holland
says...
8:42pm Mon 3 Sep 12
I support the welfare state - many people on benefits work but are on low incomes and many more want to work but cannot because of health reasons and others struggle to find work. The debate on benefits should recognise this.
However, there are many people who are not benefits but who do not earn a lot who feel they they may be better off on benefits. The system needs reform.
The Council spends most of its money on adult social care - that is money spent on the vulnerable.
Under Labour the Council was rated one of the worst Councils in the entire country - so it was vulnerable people who suffered under Labour mismanagement.
Labour are in a state of denial about (a) helping to cause the deficit through excessive public spending (b) realising that there is a deficit and (c) having any realistic plan to tackle the deficit.
1 2 Could B
says...
8:53pm Mon 3 Sep 12
Smoke screen.
Russell Holland
says...
9:10pm Mon 3 Sep 12
1 2 Could B
says...
9:34pm Mon 3 Sep 12
Russell Holland
says...
10:24pm Mon 3 Sep 12
LordAshOfTheBrake
says...
11:20pm Mon 3 Sep 12
It may be a terrible administration, however Swindon has had much worse!
I fully agree that the vanity projects need to stop and Councillors need to be held accountable in law as well as by the electorate.
Politicians at all levels (local, national, European) need to learn to balance the books.
http://Www.Swindon.Org.UK
says...
1:25am Tue 4 Sep 12
Anyone on income based benefits usually isn't paid enough in regards to the minimum amount to live on.
So if they have to pay 20% council tax then this will have to be added to the calculations.
So in the end the council will pay it...
just as increased income support,
or income based unemployment benefit.
It's just more bravdo bollocktics.
Savings ==> 0.
Ringer
says...
9:18am Tue 4 Sep 12
http://Www.Swindon.OIndeed, the so-called 'cuts' we're all suffering haven't even happened... and yet Labour continually harp on about them.
rg.UK wrote:
If people get full council tax relief now, then council tax is not counted in the calculation for the minimum amount they need to live on. Anyone on income based benefits usually isn't paid enough in regards to the minimum amount to live on. So if they have to pay 20% council tax then this will have to be added to the calculations. So in the end the council will pay it... just as increased income support, or income based unemployment benefit. It's just more bravdo bollocktics. Savings ==> 0.
The money will run out soon. The UK's credit rating will be downgraded and then all of these discussions will be purely academic. The Tories are now doing what Labour did 5 years ago, simply running things into the ground because they know they'll lose the next election.
The problem for Labour, when they win the next general election, is that they won't be able to generate any additional tax revenue and nobody will continue to lend to Britain. It could well result in a Labour government having no choice but to oversee the end of the welfare state as we currently know it.
Interesting times ahead.
1 2 Could B
says...
10:01am Tue 4 Sep 12
Russel's "political" argument is void.
We need a better, honest, SBC admin.
Ringer
says...
12:19pm Tue 4 Sep 12
1 2 Could B wrote:The reason people don't bother to vote is because they know they'll not get a 'better, honest' admin, regardless of who they vote for.
That's why most don't bother to vote. Russel's "political" argument is void. We need a better, honest, SBC admin.
Kid yourself that Labour would be 'better' or more 'honest' if you like - the national government certainly weren't and the most recent local Labour administration were so farcical they're barely worth mentioning. Why on earth might you think they'd gotten any better?
Most of the local Labour 'top guns' (water pistols, more like) frequently contribute to the Talk Swindon forum and you only have to read what they submit to know they must never be allowed anywhere near the town's corridors of power.
1 2 Could B
says...
12:49pm Tue 4 Sep 12
Where did I write that Labour would be better?
Alqsys easier for politicians to blame the other party for their iwn incompetence
Two wrongs don't make a right.
The current administration is a disgrace and no amount of political allegiance to any party will alter the fact that it needs sorting out.
1 2 Could B
says...
12:51pm Tue 4 Sep 12
Oliver_Donachie
says...
2:14pm Tue 4 Sep 12
"The Audit Commission, an independent watchdog, released its Comprehensive Area Assessment (CAA) in 2009 the last round of review.
The council was given a performance rating of 3 out of 4, which means it is performing well, in its Organisational Assessment.
This is an improvement on last year’s Comprehensive Performance Assessment system when it achieved a rating of 2.
Swindon was only one of 12 local authorities out of 102 that had moved up a rating.
The assessment said the council was improving school and college results, keeping children, young people and vulnerable adults safe from harm and reducing teenage pregnancy.
It praised how they deal with elderly and disabled members of the community by helping them choose how they are cared for at home, providing opportunities for disabled people to take part in sports and to seek employment.
It stated the council was also helping people affected by the recession to keep their homes, improving the town centre environment and increasing recycling levels. "
Anyone want to respond to the INDEPENDENT and FACTUAL report rather than throwing around unprovable, unfounded and tedious cliche's?
1 2 Could B
says...
3:08pm Tue 4 Sep 12
Your wannabe politician attitude to those factors could be the reason you were not elected.
20 Eyes
Oliver_Donachie
says...
3:26pm Tue 4 Sep 12
Guess not 1 2.
*smokescreen* Yawn.
1 2 Could B
says...
4:36pm Tue 4 Sep 12
That's Swindon. Not Westminster.
SBC, not parliament.
The current SBC administration need to be brought to account.
Any politician attempting to smokescreen the shortcomings by blaming a distant administration or "the other party" just prove their own insincerity towards Swindon and the self centred attitude that we come to expect of politicians
Oliver_Donachie
says...
5:10pm Tue 4 Sep 12
You do understand that a Comprehensive Area Assessment is the equivalent to a council as an Ofsted report is to a school? I can assure you that many people very much care what these independent bodies report as they exist to protect our interests, hence independent.
The fact that this does not forward your own bias does not change the fact that this is the metric by which councils are held, and year on year Swindon has been improving since Labour was last in power, you may remember that its when we have 0 out of 5 stars as a national rating, council tax went up over 20% and our child care services went in to administration by central government because of gross misconduct failures.
SBC, its leaders are not saints, they have got it wrong and will do in the future, but they are an absolute bastion of sanity compared to when Labour last stomped Swindon in the ground.
I have no problem with anyone disliking SBC or its leaders, what I have a problem with is people who dismiss independent factual reports because it does not fit their agenda, it looks childish.
If you have any data or reports that conflicts with the independent findings of the Comprehensive Area Assessment I, unlike you, will be more than willing to read it and try to educate myself, in the interim the evidence continues to show that Swindon is improving year on year.
1 2 Could B
says...
11:01pm Tue 4 Sep 12
Easier to blame someone else as previously described.
You still fail to acknowledge that others do not have allegiance to any political party because they see the obvious faults with your mentors.
That's because it's easier to blame another group than admit the incompetence of your mentors.
Blinkered, sad, pathetic.
Wasting money is the fault of those who are currently wasting it. Not a previous administration long since gone.
The current SBC administration have been (falsely) giving themselves a pat on the back for so long, the must all have double jointed elbows
Oliver_Donachie
says...
8:31am Wed 5 Sep 12
Look 1 2 Could B, I get that because you hide behind a pseudonym and you think nobody knows who you are that it emboldens you to attack people personally because you have no ability to respond to the actual argument at hand.
I see nothing to be gained in taking part in your playground name calling, its a clear sign you have lost any debate to be had, so again I will repeat.
The 2009 independant Comprehensive Area Assessment states in clear terms that the SBC administration has been improving year on year since they took over from the Labour party, if you disagree or can prove otherwise maybe you should call them and explain they are "Blinkered, sad, pathetic." but do remember you might actually have to give your real name but that's easy for an internet warrior like yourself right?
1 2 Could B
says...
3:12pm Wed 5 Sep 12
Oliver_Donachie wrote:A very poor argument considering that you have also used a psuedonym.
An administration long since gone? The report was made at the end of 2009.
Look 1 2 Could B, I get that because you hide behind a pseudonym and you think nobody knows who you are that it emboldens you to attack people personally because you have no ability to respond to the actual argument at hand.
I see nothing to be gained in taking part in your playground name calling, its a clear sign you have lost any debate to be had, so again I will repeat.
The 2009 independant Comprehensive Area Assessment states in clear terms that the SBC administration has been improving year on year since they took over from the Labour party, if you disagree or can prove otherwise maybe you should call them and explain they are "Blinkered, sad, pathetic." but do remember you might actually have to give your real name but that's easy for an internet warrior like yourself right?
Most people choose to remain anonymous for obvious reason.
You have chosen to use your name in some kind of attempt to give yourself credibility.
Maybe you feel that will embolden your next attempt to be elected.
Defending the SBC administration, with intention to become part of it does not alter the fact that much has been wasted on the factors I have mentioned.
Much money has been wasted by the current administration.
That wastage continues.
It is not a good excuse to blame current wastage on past administrations or other parties when the current administration are continuing in the same process.
The Fibbing Bar Tender says...
9:54am Mon 3 Sep 12