District Council gold diggers...

[firecracker]

If property values are on the decrease then why are my rates increasing??

Would it not be an ideal context for government to make a difference at grass roots level?

Reducing rates to reflect the current market place while putting a wee bit more moolah for the boojah in our pockets to spread around?

I need some enlightenment:shake:

[Stirts]

If property values are on the decrease then why are my rates increasing??

Would it not be an ideal context for government to make a difference at grass roots level?

Reducing rates to reflect the current market place while putting a wee bit more moolah for the boojah in our pockets to spread around?

I need some enlightenment:shake:

Silly Sausage....that would mean they possess a little attribute called common sense.

[Skyryder]

If property values are on the decrease then why are my rates increasing??

Because Rodney Hide the Minister of Local Government believes that the user should pay. And I am not taking the piss here. Local councils can now basicly go for commercial charge outs knowing that Hide has no credibility to try and reign them in.


Skyryder

[Nasty]

Go to the council website and find out the process to have yhour property reviewed and revalued for your rates to be reviewed ... although this is two edged ... as when the market turns you will want it back where it is.

[Mom]

If property values are on the decrease then why are my rates increasing??

Would it not be an ideal context for government to make a difference at grass roots level?

Reducing rates to reflect the current market place while putting a wee bit more moolah for the boojah in our pockets to spread around?

I need some enlightenment:shake:

Rates are struck on the last available official valuation, very little you can do about this current financial years rates. You can challenge the current valuation at the time it is done. I am not sure any council is going to agree to reduce your rates until the next round of valuations are done. Go to http://www.qv.co.nz/ and check out what is happening with values officially.

Let us know if you do manage to convince council to reduce rates.

[Swoop]

The local councils are still having to pay for all of the idiotic laws that the Looney Labour Party forced upon them over the last 9-year "ice age" of government.

[trustme]

Their income is plummeting due to the collapse of the building industry, They have to replace that income from somewhere & you are it sucker.
Does it occur to them to cut costs, Yeah Right

I remember when Phil Goff suggested streamlining the the building permit process to reduce costs which was a bloody good idea. The councils snivelled that they would have to increase rates to to maintain income. It nevers occurs to them that they are a service not a business, time to get rid of a few pen pushers in my opinion

[MadDuck]

Their income is plummeting due to the collapse of the building industry

I may be wrong here (I often am) but their income related to the building industry hasnt gone down just yet. It just means that the builders are getting consents within 3 weeks instead of 6 months.

I also understand that RDCC have made some staff cuts.

[Hitcher]

Sigh...

Property values, as determined by Quotable Value, are variously applied by different local authorities as a basis of allocating council costs against property owners. It's worth making the point here that there is no such thing as a Government Valuation. Those haven't existed for nigh on 30 years. Property values are (or should be) known as Rateable Values (RV).

Councils total the rateable value (either land value or capital value, depending on a council's preference) of all of the properties in their area and then divide their general rate cost by that. They then multiply that quotient by the property/capital value of each rateable property and bill the property owner for the figure that accrues.

Just because the RV of a property rises or falls doesn't mean that the rates owed by its owner will rise or fall, as the value of the property is only one side of the equation, as noted above.

In addition to the general rate, property owners may also pay targeted rates (for such things as flood protection, water supply, waste water, kerbside recycling) and pay for specific services (like volumetric pricing for water), again depending on where they live.

It costs a lot of money for councils to provide the various services that they do. How they recover the costs of those services is subject to a high degree of local politics, as all of the nonsense in and around the Wellington region around "water meters" currently attests. Commonsense is usually the first victim of political compromise.

[MadDuck]

Understand what you are saying Hitcher.

BUT here we are on tank water - no cost for water services. We pay for our rubbish bags - no collection fees. We have NEVER had an inorganic collection - pay to go to the dump.

So they collect more and more money based on increased rateable values for no increase in service.

Sigh

[Hitcher]

I forgot to mention that under the provisions of the Local Government Act, no council can rate for services that have not been fully consulted with affected communities.

Every local and regional authority in New Zealand is currently at the start of its next Long-Term Council Community Plan (LTCCP) or 10-Year Plan cycle. From about mid-March (Taupo did theirs about Christmas time), local councils will be calling for public submissions on their proposed 10-Year Plans. That is the time that ratepayers should sit on their arses, read and digest the information that their councils will send them, then get off their arses and make submissions if there are things in those proposed plans that the disagree with. In addition to making a written submission, you can also ask to have your submission heard. Verbal submissions (unfortunately) carry more weight with councillors than do written ones, so if you have a strongly held opinion or grievance, you're probably well advised to take a verbal approach.

That's the great thing about a democracy. If you take the time to figure out how it works, you can make in work in your interests.

[Mom]

Understand what you are saying Hitcher.

BUT here we are on tank water - no cost for water services. We pay for our rubbish bags - no collection fees. We have NEVER had an inorganic collection - pay to go to the dump.

So they collect more and more money based on increased rateable values for no increase in service.

Sigh

I specially love paying a levy for public transport :yes: We have none!

A few years a ago I used to pay for a bridge that I never even knew existed, when I found it, I never would have ever travelled over it...LOL

[Finn]

If property values are on the decrease then why are my rates increasing??

Would it not be an ideal context for government to make a difference at grass roots level?

Reducing rates to reflect the current market place while putting a wee bit more moolah for the boojah in our pockets to spread around?

I need some enlightenment:shake:

Are you sure you're a woman? You seem to speak logic and common sense which are male traits...

[Ocean1]

It costs a lot of money for councils to provide the various services that they do. How they recover the costs of those services is subject to a high degree of local politics...

Pity it's not also subject to some form of commercial constraint.

And while we're on the water thing; Councils are an effective hydraulic despotism. Such have, throughout history been the most enduring and destructive forms of monopoly.

Here's an idea... how about allowing neighbouring councils to tender for the ratepayers at their boundaries. Can't think of any other way to moderate what's otherwise a classic, entrenched cost plus philosophy.

[Finn]

Because Rodney Hide the Minister of Local Government believes that the user should pay. And I am not taking the piss here. Local councils can now basicly go for commercial charge outs knowing that Hide has no credibility to try and reign them in.


Skyryder

The councils were fucked long before National were elected you dumb old cow.

[MadDuck]

I specially love paying a levy for public transport :yes: We have none!

Damn thats one I forgot. We get levied for public transport in the form of rail. Buggered if I have ever seen a train hooning down the Peninsula! Might go looking for some tracks one night when I am bored or drunk.

OK thats ARC as opposed to RDC...but cummon.

[Winston001]

If property values are on the decrease then why are my rates increasing??

Would it not be an ideal context for government to make a difference at grass roots level?

Reducing rates to reflect the current market place while putting a wee bit more moolah for the boojah in our pockets to spread around?

I need some enlightenment:shake:

Nice idea but what you are asking is for me (or your neighbour) to pay higher rates to make up for your drop. :devil2: Bit like lowering your tax, the rest of us have to pay increased tax to make up for it.

The only way it could possibly work would be for the costs of street works, sewers and waterlines, electricity, buses, council workers wages, basically everything Council pays for - to drop in price. Yeah right! :rolleyes:

[Winston001]

Rates: this is one of my hobby-horses but I'll never get anywhere with it.

Council rates are a tax placed on land-owners. The money is used to pay for running the council for a year. If it costs $1 million and there are 1000 sections of land, the rate on each will be $1000 - if they are valued the same.

There are three ways to calculate rates - unimproved value, capital value, and rental value. Capital is most popular.

The rating system is a crude sledge-hammer instrument. An old lady in a good suburb will pay $3000. Her dead-beat nephew in a poor suburb with 5 kids and their hangers-on will pay $1000. Who uses the sewers, roads, water, buses etc more....?

[firecracker]

Are you sure you're a woman? You seem to speak logic and common sense which are male traits...

Oh, I'm super sure my dear:niceone:

[Winston001]

Ok. My answer. A POLL TAX.






Yes I thought so, lost youse guys immediately. Tim Shadbolt and his Councillors didn't like it either when I made a submission. :argh:

A poll tax is a tax on individual residents. So if 7 of you live in a house, you pay accordingly. Only one of you, not much to pay. Its based on the rational idea that humans use council facilities and thus benefit from them. Makes complete sense yet I don't know of anywhere it has been successfully implemented. Even Maggie Thatcher backed down. :crybaby:

PS - Japan has a nightmarish rates system including a poll tax for non-residents. Calling Brian-de-Marge........ :D

[firecracker]

Nice idea but what you are asking is for me (or your neighbour) to pay higher rates to make up for your drop. :devil2: Bit like lowering your tax, the rest of us have to pay increased tax to make up for it.

The only way it could possibly work would be for the costs of street works, sewers and waterlines, electricity, buses, council workers wages, basically everything Council pays for - to drop in price. Yeah right! :rolleyes:

I'm hearing what you're saying mate.

My point is that in the current climate, everybody's property values are on the decline. My understanding is that rates are based upon property values albeit on a fickle basis. Times by that, divide by this, average out by shit knows what.

Then the bastards whack us with environmental tax as well. WTF? Was'nt that already covered in the rates under a different heading?

Bottom line is that based on this model, it would be logical and fair if rates were a reflection as opposed to fickle projections of the marketplace.

It seems that we're keeping the fat cat's whiskey decanter full whilst they indulge in deligating and scratching their balls.:spanking:

[Skyryder]

The councils were fucked long before National were elected you dumb old cow.

MMMoooooooooooo or is BBBaaaaaaaaaa Nope its BBBBlleeeeaaaattt.

Skyryder

[MadDuck]

MMMoooooooooooo or is BBBaaaaaaaaaa Nope its BBBBlleeeeaaaattt.

Skyryder

Gosh that was a reasoned and well rounded contribution towards the debate or discussion.

[BMWST?]

even funnier is that the weely council has deemed we will now go ona a three year valuation cycle.....
Poll tax...you pay indirectly through your landlord if you not a ratepayer...

[Winston001]

My point is that in the current climate, everybody's property values are on the decline. My understanding is that rates are based upon property values albeit on a fickle basis. Times by that, divide by this, average out by shit knows what.

Bottom line is that based on this model, it would be logical and fair if rates were a reflection as opposed to fickle projections of the marketplace.


I know but it doesn't work like that. The value of your property - high or low - has nothing to do with the amount of money required to run the council. You house could be worth literally $1. If every other house was valued at $1, each owner would still have to pay your $1000 rates bill.

And the council can't do much about a lot of its bills. Council projects and loans are often spread over 10 - 20 years and paid for yearly through rates. Just like a mortgage.

Here is a real life example. In the late 1980s the town of Nightcaps in Southland installed a new sewage system - had been on septic tanks, children getting sick etc. Cost $1 million. About $6000 each household payable over 10 years, on top of normal rates. So individual properties paid about $1,200pa in 1988.

At the same time NZ entered a pretty serious recession and houses in Nightcaps sold for $1. Yes $1. I dealt with quite a few of them. The rates however remained the same. Which made sense because the sewage system loan still had to be paid.

[Skyryder]

Gosh that was a reasoned and well rounded contribution towards the debate or discussion.

So what is the discussion. :beer: The councils are gold diggers or the councils are fucked.:weird: I'd tend to say both to that here in Chch. The last council voted for a new council building two or three days before going into councill elections. F**k all consultation. :argh: Bob Parker seems to spend more time spending our money than doing anything worthwhile.:tugger: Like bailing out devolpers with our money. Raising the rent then getting mud on his face for not following procedures:angry2: Ya got Hide as the Minister of Local Government. :finger: Like what's he done so far?? :whistle:F all.

Finn actually said something that I agreed with.:2thumbsup.........but hell I'm not telling him that on principle. :mad: So all in all the Bleat thing was an appropiate response one way or the other. :ar15:


Skyryder

[MadDuck]

But Mr Parker brought you the Ellerslie flower show :innocent:

[McJim]

I think the point that has been missed is that the rates are charged using a proxy that is politically palatable to the majority.

Although it appears that you are being taxed on the value of your property they are looking for a benchmark through which to define how heavily you use local authority amenities (streets, streetlights, sewage, rubbish collection etc.)

If the local authority needs say $10,000,000 per year of general rates to operate and it has 100,000 rateable properties it takes the total capital value of the rateable properties, lets say $25,000,000,000 and divides the required amount by the total value of properties in it's territory..in this hypothetical case this means the local authority will charge each person $0.0004 per dollar of quotable value in their property.

Logically if ALL properties drop in value then the total amount required remains the same, the total number of households remains the same but the total value drops this means (if everyone were to experience the same %age drop in property value) that the apportionment of general rates would remain exactly the same...the reason it goes up is usually because the councillors decide to do more stuff...which costs money.

Winston makes a good point about poll tax - this was attempted in Britain and was the direct cause of the downfall of the Conservative Government. The Tory party have never recovered and probably never will - this ultra right methodology of local taxation handed a free reign of power to the left - ironic but it got the bastards out of Scotland so all good :2thumbsup:

I have another idea. A secondary income tax paid to local authorities. this has no bearing on how heavily you use the amenities but is very socialist in the same way as the poll tax is capitalist.

[Skyryder]

But Mr Parker brought you the Ellerslie flower show :innocent:

Yep 2 mill that cost. And look what one the best prize for the best exhibit.

A Fred Dag lookalike.:sick: Talk about style. That would never have happened in Auckland. Jeeeeaz the Garden City just won't be the same.


Skyyrder

[piston broke]

don't forget,one of my biggest fek offs.
gst on my rates.rates are a tax,so a tax on a tax:nono:

[MadDuck]

Yep 2 mill that cost. And look what one the best prize for the best exhibit.

A Fred Dag lookalike.:sick: Talk about style. That would never have happened in Auckland. Jeeeeaz the Garden City just won't be the same.

Hehehe...only in the Sarf Island :clap::clap:

[Winston001]

don't forget,one of my biggest fek offs.
gst on my rates.rates are a tax,so a tax on a tax:nono:

10 characters+ :done:

[MadDuck]

gst on my rates.rates are a tax,so a tax on a tax:nono:

Then there is GST on FBT <_<

[Winston001]

even funnier is that the weely council has deemed we will now go ona a three year valuation cycle.....
Poll tax...you pay indirectly through your landlord if you not a ratepayer...

?? Thought every council used a 3 year valuation cycle.

A poll tax, also called a Community Charge, is paid by individuals, not ratepayers. Under the existing system a landlord getting $250/wk for a family of 7 in a house, pays no more rates than if there are only 2 people in the house. But 7 people are going to impact on the sewers and streets a helluva lot more than 2.

[Swoop]

But Mr Parker brought you the Ellerslie flower show :innocent:
Best con-job Auckland ever did!:clap:

[Winston001]

Then there is GST on FBT <_<

Really? Can't see how that works - FBT isn't a good or service. Its a tax to make up for an employee getting a tax-free benefit like a company car.

Actually I think FBT sucks anyway.

[piston broke]

?? Thought every council used a 3 year valuation cycle.

A poll tax, also called a Community Charge, is paid by individuals, not ratepayers. Under the existing system a landlord getting $250/wk for a family of 7 in a house, pays no more rates than if there are only 2 people in the house. But 7 people are going to impact on the sewers and streets a helluva lot more than 2.

yep,my neighbours,8 in one house.
i pay the same sewerage as them,only 1 of me.
farks me off

[McJim]

3 year cycle gets mitigated by the supply of equalisation data by Land Registration or QV doesn't it? That way properties that haven't been valued for 2 years might get a 40%+ on their calc, a property that hasn't been valued for 1 year 20% and the properties that just got valued would get zero.

These are just examples for hypothesis, in reality I believe a lot more investigation goes into working out what housing markets in different areas are doing before an equalisation formula can be hammered out.

As I keep trying to say though - it's only a proxy and it's the only one that would work so we're stuck with it. If you don't want to pay your local authority it's easy - sell your house and move into a rental.

[MadDuck]

Best con-job Auckland ever did!:clap:

Not wrong. From Ellerslie to Sarf Orkland to Christchurch :cool: How the heck didnt they see that coming?


Really? Can't see how that works - FBT isn't a good or service. Its a tax to make up for an employee getting a tax-free benefit like a company car.

Actually I think FBT sucks anyway.

Yes GST is payable on Fringe Benefits. It gets a company mostly with vehicles available for private use. We are suggesting bicycles to our sales reps :lol:

[piston broke]

3 year cycle gets mitigated by the supply of equalisation data by Land Registration or QV doesn't it? That way properties that haven't been valued for 2 years might get a 40%+ on their calc, a property that hasn't been valued for 1 year 20% and the properties that just got valued would get zero.

These are just examples for hypothesis, in reality I believe a lot more investigation goes into working out what housing markets in different areas are doing before an equalisation formula can be hammered out.

As I keep trying to say though - it's only a proxy and it's the only one that would work so we're stuck with it. If you don't want to pay your local authority it's easy - sell your house and move into a rental.

i guess that's why my rates have gone up 60+% in 2 yrs,
damn sure my valuation hasn't gone up the same:doh:

[rwh]

Winston makes a good point about poll tax - this was attempted in Britain and was the direct cause of the downfall of the Conservative Government. The Tory party have never recovered and probably never will - this ultra right methodology of local taxation handed a free reign of power to the left - ironic but it got the bastards out of Scotland so all good :2thumbsup:


I've just been reading about this. Apparently one of the effects of the poll tax was that those least able to afford it - mostly Labour voters - in many cases avoided it, or attempted to, by dropping off the electoral roll. Unfortunately, this meant that they couldn't help vote the Conservatives out ...

Jim (or anyone else who knows) - did Labour get in next election after the poll tax, or did it take longer than that?

Richard

[McJim]

Jim (or anyone else who knows) - did Labour get in next election after the poll tax, or did it take longer than that?Richard

Long story (I don't know if I can be bothered writing it since no fucker sems to have bothered reading the full explanation I gave on page fuckin 2 of this thread :Pokey: bastards)

Tories (conservative party/blue team/neo nazis...call them what you will) decided that a rich man should pay no more for his local authority amenities than the poor man since they didn't pay different amounts for milk. They then passed law for "Community Charge" in Scotland alone (which contravened the Union of The Crowns agreement which stated that no government nor head of state could pass a tax into law in one part of UK without that same tax being simultaneously passed in all parts of the country).

Scotland, at this time, was still experiencing huge unemployment due to the Tories concentrating all wealth in the South East of the UK by bleeding or destroying pretty much everything north of the Watford Gap.

This meant many people received community charge (poll tax) bills that were a long way out of whack with what they could actually afford. Rebates were hard to get and were not backdatable. The country reacted the only way people with nothing could - they did nothing.

The next year the Tories deemed this a success and passed the same tax in England. this led to riots and some deaths in London in those riots.

The gubberment then said "oh shit" and did a U turn in England leaving the poor Scottish sods to languish under the yoke of this unfair and unpopular tax. They then withdrew it from Scotland, Maggie "Satan" Thatcher resigned, and they appointed John Major coz they wanted rid of him and thought they were gonna lose for sure but then the tories slipped in by a narrow margin.

The next general election saw the Tories goneburger for good though.

[Hitcher]

The rating system is a crude sledge-hammer instrument. An old lady in a good suburb will pay $3000. Her dead-beat nephew in a poor suburb with 5 kids and their hangers-on will pay $1000. Who uses the sewers, roads, water, buses etc more....?

There is truth in what you say. But start a campaign to change it and see what happens...

[Hitcher]

It seems that we're keeping the fat cat's whiskey decanter full whilst they indulge in deligating and scratching their balls.

And who, exactly are these "fat cats"? If you don't like your council's priority projects and the funding levels they want to allocate to service provision, make a submission setting out your arguments.

[McJim]

And who, exactly are these "fat cats"? If you don't like your council's priority projects and the funding levels they want to allocate to service provision, make a submission setting out your arguments.

Fuck yeah, Local Authorities are totally different to KB. Local Authorities actually have to listen to your submissions. KB is just a totalitarian dictatorship with 2 heads.

[Hitcher]

even funnier is that the weely council has deemed we will now go ona a three year valuation cycle.....
Poll tax...you pay indirectly through your landlord if you not a ratepayer...

The same thing applies to normal rates. Rentpayers and residents have the same voting rights as property owners. There's no feudalism involved.

[Hitcher]

KB is just a totalitarian dictatorship with 2 heads.

Please don't elaborate as to which is the big one and which is the little one. It's late, and I'm tired.

[Clockwork]

Poll Tax vs Rates.

Forget the politics, the practicalities are… the council knows what properties exist in its district and who owns them. If the owner wont or can't pay I understand the council can make an order to get its money from the proceeds next time the house is sold. Poll Taxes are a whole lot harder to track down and collect!!

I believe the UK gave up on Poll Tax for this reason only, a large number of people simply refused to register for it or pay it.

[Winston001]

Poll Tax vs Rates.

Forget the politics, the practicalities are… the council knows what properties exist in its district and who owns them. If the owner wont or can't pay I understand the council can make an order to get its money from the proceeds next time the house is sold. Poll Taxes are a whole lot harder to track down and collect!!

I believe the UK gave up on Poll Tax for this reason only, a large number of people simply refused to register for it or pay it.

Yes you are right, and that is why municipal local authority taxation world-wide, is based on land ownership. If you don't pay, a Rating Sale takes place. Council gets paid, plus gets a new ratepayer who is more likely to abide by the law.

It is still a grossly unfair system but as McJim has pointed out, a Poll Tax can be unenforceable which makes it useless.

[MisterD]

I believe the UK gave up on Poll Tax for this reason only, a large number of people simply refused to register for it or pay it.

There is now a compromise thing called the "Council Tax"...basically rates, but you get a discount (25% I think, it's 5 years since I left) if you're the only adult living in a property.

It would be a good start if we could just be honest and replace the word "rates" with the more honest "land-tax"...

[Winston001]

There is now a compromise thing called the "Council Tax"...basically rates, but you get a discount (25% I think, it's 5 years since I left) if you're the only adult living in a property.

It would be a good start if we could just be honest and replace the word "rates" with the more honest "land-tax"...

Yeah but unfortunately there is such a thing as Land Tax which IRD charge. Not common but it exists.

[jim.cox]

Local Authorities actually have to listen to your submissions.

'round here (Chch) they listen to the submissions - and then ignore them and do what they want anyway.

Examples? The Edgeware Rd swimmimng pool and the new rubbish collection system

[Skyryder]

Poll Tax vs Rates.

Forget the politics, the practicalities are… the council knows what properties exist in its district and who owns them. If the owner wont or can't pay I understand the council can make an order to get its money from the proceeds next time the house is sold. Poll Taxes are a whole lot harder to track down and collect!!

I believe the UK gave up on Poll Tax for this reason only, a large number of people simply refused to register for it or pay it.


Whenever the Brits have tried a poll tax it's bloody near created a revolution.

Googe Watt Tyler or the Peasents Revolt. Thatcher had a poll tax too if memory serves me right.


Skyryder

[imdying]

Please don't elaborate as to which is the big one and which is the little one. It's late, and I'm tired.Well that's obvious, we know who's really in control.

[Ocean1]

It would be a good start if we could just be honest and replace the word "rates" with the more honest "land-tax"...

Honest would be calling it a wealth tax.

Same as every other fucking tax, it's targeted where they've got some chance of getting it paid.

[popelli]

There is now a compromise thing called the "Council Tax"...basically rates, but you get a discount (25% I think, it's 5 years since I left) if you're the only adult living in a property.

It would be a good start if we could just be honest and replace the word "rates" with the more honest "land-tax"...

and when you see the size of your council tax bill you would not want it in NZ

Its around £1500 as year for an average property or $NZ4500 - and the councils will bankrupt people to collect these taxes

the problem with council tax / rates or what ever you want to call / label the tax as is that the above average increases each year are not to cover inflation, not for increased services but to fund the huge holes in their council funded pension schemes