Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement


Owners of second homes accused of exploiting loophole to beat council tax rise

Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 09 May 2008
MONEY for affordable housing in the Highlands is being lost as second homeowners reclassify properties to avoid the council tax, it has been claimed.
Council tax on holiday homes in the region has been raised to 90 per cent. This has raised an extra £2.4 million a year, which the council reinvests in affordable accommodation. But it has been claimed some second homeowners are reclassifying
them as self-catering units, exempting them from the charge.

In 2004 there were 1,906 self-catering units in the Highlands, but by the following year, when the council tax change came, in the figure jumped to 2,230 and there are now 2,578.

The council says there is no evidence of a "general stampede" from council tax to non-domestic rates.

But councillor Dr Michael Foxley, said: "We need to minimise the concealment and need more information about where funding has gone. With the possible change in future to a local income tax, we need to make sure we maximise our income from holiday homes which are a real blight in some areas."

He said over 50 per cent of housing in west Arndamurchan is now holiday homes: "We need to ensure they provide income, to provide affordable housing for local people."

The council says over 40 affordable housing projects or feasibility studies have been funded since 2005.





Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 08 May 2008 10:10 PM
  • Source: The Scotsman
  • Location: Edinburgh
 
1

r chee bold,

09/05/2008 07:03:48
The money is for affordable housing, 2.4 million a year, 3 years, 7.2 million, around 40 units, must be really affordable..
2

Grumpy,

09/05/2008 07:35:15
Why not simply class "self catering" as business premises and then charge them that way?
3

Alternative (High Octane) Fuel Head,

Edinburgh 09/05/2008 10:30:47
So tax loopholes should never be exploited then?

How rediculous. In this day and age you'd have to be stark raving mad not to exploit as many ways of avoiding tax as possible.
4

,

09/05/2008 11:26:44
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
5

John Blackley,

Florida 09/05/2008 14:38:25
How very socialist, dog-in-the-manger government this is. If I have a home in one part of the country and can afford to buy a property in another part of the country - for my own use for only a part of the year - what business is it of some McStalin to punish me for doing so?

I've heard the 'affordable housing' argument - that my willingness to pay more for a vacant property means that a local, earning poor wages, won't be able to buy it. Yes? And? Is that not the law of the property market everywhere?

If the local government feels obliged to provide 'affordable housing' for those who can't earn enough to compete in the property market then do so - but don't use 'second homes' as the excuse to punish those who have been more successful.
6

Paula,

09/05/2008 17:29:57
If they can afford second homes then they can afford to pay properly for them. As said, if they say they are self-catering then that is a business they are running and therefore proper taxes should be paid.

Why do the councils never follow these things up?

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
  

 
 


Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.