The Great Rates Rort

Forums › Politics › The Great Rates Rort

tdgeek

13828 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2512

Trusted

Topic # 224323 13-Nov-2017 09:12

So, article says property prices up a lot the last few years, yeah, I heard that.

Rates will also hike, which is a rort. A house Rates Valuation increases, more or less in line with market values, by lets say 40%, why should rates rise 40%? Its a number, and it should be used to fairly spread the rating load across the population, but its used as an excuse to hike rates. It should be Rate Income / House population, then the percentage of property value compared to another property can charge more for higher value homes, and less for less. I don't recall inflation going up 40% or more in the last 3 years.

If house population grows, so does rate revenue. If house prices are stable, and there is inflation, rates can increase a small %. But, it's currently a rort

1 | 2 | 3 | 4

3504 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 985

Reply # 1900083 13-Nov-2017 10:56

2 people support this post

A house Rates Valuation increases, more or less in line with market values, by lets say 40%, why should rates rise 40%?

They Don't ,

rates for an individual are basically struck with the formula (Total council spending)/ Value of all property) * value of your property,

For arguments sake assume council spending is static (its no, but it make the explanation easier)

If house prices rise 40% then whether your rates go up is whether your house value went up more "than the average" ie 40%,

so if your house only sent up 30% then your rates fall (relative to everyone else), if your value went up 50% then you rates would rise

tdgeek

13828 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2512

Trusted

Reply # 1900110 13-Nov-2017 11:21

wellygary:

A house Rates Valuation increases, more or less in line with market values, by lets say 40%, why should rates rise 40%?

They Don't ,

rates for an individual are basically struck with the formula (Total council spending)/ Value of all property) * value of your property,

For arguments sake assume council spending is static (its no, but it make the explanation easier)

If house prices rise 40% then whether your rates go up is whether your house value went up more "than the average" ie 40%,

so if your house only sent up 30% then your rates fall (relative to everyone else), if your value went up 50% then you rates would rise

Two articles, one by Peter Williams, newsreader, talked about having to move due to rates increases on the back of property rises. And I'm sure they quoted similar rates increases to the GV increases

Pumpedd

1759 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 900

Reply # 1900115 13-Nov-2017 11:29

2 people support this post

Peter Williams is astute enough to realise that under LAbour everything will be going up and it will be the middle income earners who pay the burden of it.

tdgeek

13828 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2512

Trusted

Reply # 1900127 13-Nov-2017 11:45

Pumpedd:

Peter Williams is astute enough to realise that under LAbour everything will be going up and it will be the middle income earners who pay the burden of it.

LOL you got it bad. My query was about local body rates, and the housing prices affecting them. And why two articles have the people moving out due to what they said (and it appears wrong) that the rates are climbing along with their increased RV. Yes, he is astute, so it became a credible article to me. I dont recall him mentioning Labour or politics or who managed the housing crisis :-) , so yes, he is astute and credible!

Geektastic

12134 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3947

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

Reply # 1900368 13-Nov-2017 20:07

2 people support this post

Rates are a rort.

The value of your house has nothing to do with your ability to pay tax nor with the amount of services you use.

A per capita charge is far fairer.

Aredwood

3254 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1270

Subscriber

Reply # 1900438 14-Nov-2017 00:47

And when the Auckland council came into existence, they changed to calculating the rates based on capital value instead of land value. This meant big rates increases to apartments and pensioner housing. While everyone with vacant land, or properties big enough to subdivide got a rates cut. Land bankers were the biggest winners from this, as their holding costs are now far lower.

In saying that, Im conflicted. As the rating change caused my rates bill to go down by $500 per year changing to the Auckland council. Despite my house value going up more than average, and the council increasing their total rates take. All because the section that my house is on, is big enough to subdivide. All of my neighbours on slightly smaller sections got massive increases to their rates bills that year.

MikeB4

13563 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 6359

Trusted

Subscriber

Reply # 1900462 14-Nov-2017 07:50

3 people support this post

Geektastic: Rates are a rort.

The value of your house has nothing to do with your ability to pay tax nor with the amount of services you use.

A per capita charge is far fairer.

I would take that further and say the entire Local Government system in NewZealand is a rort and way past time for an entire shakeup. It’s an inefficient, money wasting self serving club or the benefit of councillors and their businesses.

Mike
Retired IT Manager.
The views stated in my posts are my personal views and not that of any other organisation.

Mac user, Windows curser, Chrome OS desired.

The great divide is the lies from both sides.

tdgeek

13828 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2512

Trusted

Reply # 1900466 14-Nov-2017 07:56

One person supports this post

MikeB4:
Geektastic: Rates are a rort.

The value of your house has nothing to do with your ability to pay tax nor with the amount of services you use.

A per capita charge is far fairer.

I would take that further and say the entire Local Government system in NewZealand is a rort and way past time for an entire shakeup. It’s an inefficient, money wasting self serving club or the benefit of councillors and their businesses.

Nice point. Perhaps Local Govt should be actually run by Central Govt as an offshoot or side topic so to speak, so that issues such as housing, transport can have a single focus. And it not being so much a political view, but run as a Govt dept. The main need is to collect revenue and run each town, as distinct from a Nation council or a Labour one. It means we can have one set of rules nationwide for town planning, consents, etc.

Dingbatt

3571 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 679

Lifetime subscriber

Reply # 1900483 14-Nov-2017 08:40

Could go absolute user-pays? With an appropriate reduction in local body taxes.
Charge people the real cost of things including public transport. Road tolls, admission to parks, pools and beaches, water and sewerage, charge the real cost for all cultural activities (orchestras etc).

If you want the prolateriat to rise up, institute total user pays.

Areas of Geek interest: Home Theatre, HTPC, Android Tablets & Phones, iProducts.

Pumpedd

1759 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 900

Reply # 1900500 14-Nov-2017 09:27

tdgeek:

MikeB4:
Geektastic: Rates are a rort.

The value of your house has nothing to do with your ability to pay tax nor with the amount of services you use.

A per capita charge is far fairer.

I would take that further and say the entire Local Government system in NewZealand is a rort and way past time for an entire shakeup. It’s an inefficient, money wasting self serving club or the benefit of councillors and their businesses.

Nice point. Perhaps Local Govt should be actually run by Central Govt as an offshoot or side topic so to speak, so that issues such as housing, transport can have a single focus. And it not being so much a political view, but run as a Govt dept. The main need is to collect revenue and run each town, as distinct from a Nation council or a Labour one. It means we can have one set of rules nationwide for town planning, consents, etc.

Are you serious?

You think Central Government are better?

Pumpedd

1759 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 900

Reply # 1900502 14-Nov-2017 09:29

2 people support this post

Dingbatt: Could go absolute user-pays? With an appropriate reduction in local body taxes.
Charge people the real cost of things including public transport. Road tolls, admission to parks, pools and beaches, water and sewerage, charge the real cost for all cultural activities (orchestras etc).

If you want the prolateriat to rise up, institute total user pays.

Otherwise called poll tax.

Its stupid that only the owner of a property pays for roads, water cycleways etcetc, when everyone who lives in the community should pay. Also a single person in a dwelling on their own gets truly stiffed by Council.

tdgeek

13828 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2512

Trusted

Reply # 1900570 14-Nov-2017 11:24

One person supports this post

Pumpedd:

tdgeek:

MikeB4:
Geektastic: Rates are a rort.

The value of your house has nothing to do with your ability to pay tax nor with the amount of services you use.

A per capita charge is far fairer.

I would take that further and say the entire Local Government system in NewZealand is a rort and way past time for an entire shakeup. It’s an inefficient, money wasting self serving club or the benefit of councillors and their businesses.

Nice point. Perhaps Local Govt should be actually run by Central Govt as an offshoot or side topic so to speak, so that issues such as housing, transport can have a single focus. And it not being so much a political view, but run as a Govt dept. The main need is to collect revenue and run each town, as distinct from a Nation council or a Labour one. It means we can have one set of rules nationwide for town planning, consents, etc.

Are you serious?

You think Central Government are better?

I think one common source of managing towns and cities is better than what we have now. Im not talking MPs running them, but councils are all managed from one source. Or make a national city council to manage the others with one terms of reference

MikeB4

13563 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 6359

Trusted

Subscriber

Reply # 1900631 14-Nov-2017 13:08

One person supports this post

Pumpedd:
tdgeek:

MikeB4:
Geektastic: Rates are a rort.

The value of your house has nothing to do with your ability to pay tax nor with the amount of services you use.

A per capita charge is far fairer.

I would take that further and say the entire Local Government system in NewZealand is a rort and way past time for an entire shakeup. It’s an inefficient, money wasting self serving club or the benefit of councillors and their businesses.

Nice point. Perhaps Local Govt should be actually run by Central Govt as an offshoot or side topic so to speak, so that issues such as housing, transport can have a single focus. And it not being so much a political view, but run as a Govt dept. The main need is to collect revenue and run each town, as distinct from a Nation council or a Labour one. It means we can have one set of rules nationwide for town planning, consents, etc.

Are you serious?

You think Central Government are better?

In general yes

Mike
Retired IT Manager.
The views stated in my posts are my personal views and not that of any other organisation.

Mac user, Windows curser, Chrome OS desired.

The great divide is the lies from both sides.

1101

1594 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 369

Reply # 1900655 14-Nov-2017 13:34

Rates need to double, at least if not more.

Ak council is so far in debt (and getting worse) that we are all dreaming if we think our rates bill is the end of our commitment .
All that debt has to be paid back, eventually, by us.
Will Come a time when Ak council has trouble getting more loans at reasonable interest rate. What then.

"Auckland Council's debt is now $22,189 for every ratepayer "
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11908232

So rates need to increase to pay that off .
Too many wanting the councils to just keep on spending .

Pumpedd

1759 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 900

Reply # 1900713 14-Nov-2017 15:16

One person supports this post

1101:

Rates need to double, at least if not more.

Ak council is so far in debt (and getting worse) that we are all dreaming if we think our rates bill is the end of our commitment .
All that debt has to be paid back, eventually, by us.
Will Come a time when Ak council has trouble getting more loans at reasonable interest rate. What then.

"Auckland Council's debt is now $22,189 for every ratepayer "
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11908232

So rates need to increase to pay that off .
Too many wanting the councils to just keep on spending .

Don't be concerned, Labour will fix it at the taxpayers expense. No issue here.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4